Announcement:
Founder and Chief Editor of this website, Andrew Loh, has stepped down and will no longer be involved with the operations of The Online Citizen.
SDP responds to questions by Senior Report Zul Othman from TODAY. This is first published here.
The Singapore Democrats will be fielding a team of candidates of both new and familiar faces in the next general elections. The names and gender of the candidates will be announced at the appropriate juncture on this website.
(Left: SDP Rally during General Election 2006)
The number of candidates available to the opposition has always been a casualty of the climate of fear in Singapore. Given the autocratic nature of the political system Singaporeans have been fearful of joining the opposition.
So the question of the increased number of NCMP seats or single-seats is not as relevant as the fear factor inasfar as the ability of the opposition to attract candidates is concerned.
As to where and how many seats the SDP will be fielding, and whether in GRCs and/or SMCs, these questions will depend on the re-drawn boundaries and the number of GRCs and SMCs available in the next GE.
As such the SDP calls on the Government to release the electoral map without further delay. In the past the PAP has done this at the last minute. In one of the recent elections, the new boundaries were made known the day before elections was called.
This is a shameful practice which no confident ruling party would do and which no democratic system would accept. The PAP needs to stop all these shenanigans and reveal the boundaries immediately.
Chee Soon Juan
Secretary-General
Singapore Democratic Party
Questions from Mr Zul Othman:
1. PAP has identified potential candidates – what about the SDP?
2. Do you have fresh faces? How many?
3. Will they be contesting more seats than in the last GE, as PM said?
4. And if so, is it because of more potential candidates or, as PM suggested, the lure of more NCMP seats, single member wards and smaller GRCs?
5. Will the SDP be targeting more single member wards or the GRCs?
6. Any potential candidates you’d care to name? Would it be alright for us to contact them?
7. Will the SDP be fielding more women this time around?
8. How far down the recruitment chain are you?
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
One thing everybody must take note is that the Electoral Register was updated up to February 2009, which means that those whose age reaches 21 after February 2009 and become eligible to vote, will not be reflected in the Electoral Register, and therefore will likely be deprived of their voting right.
We must insist that the Electoral Register for Voters be updated to the date of General Election, whichever it may be, taking into account of all eligible voters with effect from the actual voting date, and not with effect from the date the Electoral Register for Voters is closed.
@50) Toolang on November 5th, 2009 5.50 pm
You are entitled to your views, you are right. But let me just say that with PAP government, you are not entitled to your own views but with opposition, you have entitlement to your own views.
This speaks much for which side we need to support already.
Last laugh? The last laugh will be from our neighbouring countries as Singapore sink into oblivion if we continue to vote for PAP, and our best and brightest flee this sinking country.
40) Toolang
Before calling others defeatist, let me return the favor…
now, who is it that says that when you point a finger, 3 will point back at you? I did in the past, someone said it way back too….and you too….so let me see, your 3 fingers are pointing back at you
Now let me teach you another saying, that’s one man’s meat is another man’s poison…cabish?
47) Toolang
“Redrawing of electoral boundaries is as sure as the sun rises.”
Is that so…ahh…perhaps it is so in singapore…let me ask you for and advice, since you are a self-proclaimed strategist…so what will you do, when Cheng San GRC with tons of your supporters in that area, is break up and absorb into other heavyweight GRC?
however, If you are Carlo Ancelotti placed in charge of Clelsea, and they change the game rules to something that puts in you in a weak spot, do you think you still have the same chance of winning? or is it lowered? no matter how good a strategist you are, it is extremely hard for you to even the odds….
and here you go, pointing fingers at SDP *i am no supporter* and calling them defeatist, but why don’t you point a finger the other way, calling the other side of a coin autocratic/tyr..nical?
Hi smallvoice585,
/// SDP has not learnt its lessons from the past ///
Bro, i hope u are not a PAPy propagandist
Let me ask u a question, what has SDP done in the past that a legitimate polititical party in any part of the world has not done
Or are u trying to say what the PAPies has done in the past is more to your liking
U also talk about SDP lacking credibility
Hello are u for real
What about the PAPies credibililty???
Dear 56) Budamaxx1952,
If my memory doesn’t fail me, the SDP candidates got the lowest percentage of the valid votes during the last general election compared to all other opposition candidates.
Poor performance during an election is a sure sign of a lack of credibility.
btan and yamamoto,
I do not believe in supporting political parties. I would also not be so blinded to vote the oppositions for opposition sake. I need not say further as the posting as No. 57 is telling. I now understand why you have a bandwagon of excuses at your disposal even before the GE. Good luck to both of you if you prefer excuses and pointing fingers at others even before the contests instead of strategising to counter the odds, etc.
Dear The Online Citizen,
I am posting this comment here, as the post I had submitted to the SDP on Thursday afternoon has not appeared under the comments for its article “SDP censored again and again and again…” (http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/3022-sdp-censored-again-and-agan-and-again)
In my post, I had thanked the SDP for replying to my reporter, but just as he had explained to them when they asked him why their comments were not used, I had to point out that their email reply came at 1.16am – more than an hour after offstone (when the presses begin printing).
There was no censorship, but unfortunately, their reply was too late.
Regards,
Derrick A. Paulo
Deputy News Editor
MediaCorp
To smallvoice585 on November 6th, 2009 12.32 am:
Re: “If my memory doesn’t fail me, the SDP candidates got the lowest percentage of the valid votes during the last general election compared to all other opposition candidates….Poor performance during an election is a sure sign of a lack of credibility.”
Like all SDP bashers, the ONLY arguments you can forward, are those initiated by the PAP; your comment I quoted above was a disingenous one first made in court last year by none other than the Great Manipulator of Feeble Minds – like yours – Lee Kuan Yew. (You feeble minded losers have a very easy job, don’t you? The only political analysis you need to make are the ones packaged to you by the PAP, no matter how stupid the analysis is. You just have to recycle that trash over and over.)
Exactly how does garnering the lowest votes equate to credibiliity?
I put it to you that the reason the SDP got the lowest votes had nothing to do with any credibility issues but EVERYTHING to do with the success of the Lee Kuan Yew’s kill-the-SDP-chicken-to frighten-the-other-opposition-voter-monkeys strategy. The previous chicken that needed killing was none other than JB Jeyaratnam until widespread sympathy and increased personal popularity made it unwise for the PAP to continue to target him. They needed to find a new chicken to kill, and the next most vocal – and true – opposition to the PAP is the logical choice.
You, among others here have not proven ANYTHING about the SDP’s credibility. But you have definitely proven that you are indeed the Frightened Monkey that has always been the true target in the PAP’s strategy.
Good. In case, you – or other Frightened Monkeys support some other opposition parties, the collateral damage that the PAP intends also spills over to the opposition parties; the feeble minded also get frightened off by the oppostion in general affecting ALL their vote share negatively.
With the other corner of your mouth, you will also probably call for opposition unity showing that all such calls have been insincere in the first place.
You have also just shown that it is YOU and not the SDP who lacks credibility with your shallow analysis.
To Derrick A. Paulo on November 6th, 2009 3.04 am:
How do you explain ALL other censorship of the SDP in particular by the media?
To Derrick A. Paulo (again):
I know for a fact that it is a practise in the media, or perhaps it is only dependent on the level of professionalism by any one media employee, that respondents – the SDP in this case – to questions posed by the media are told about the deadline they have to meet if they wish their answers to be considered for publication.
You mentioned that the SDP’s reply was more than hour after copy was put to bed for the day. I would now like to ask you if Zul Othman had informed the SDP of the deadline.
To Toolang on November 6th, 2009 1.27 am btan and yamamoto,
Re: “I would also not be so blinded to vote the oppositions for opposition sake.”
I don’t think that are many people who vote the opposition for its own sake; the largest majority, in my own estimation, do so because they desire something that has been severly lacking in the political landscape: balance in every aspect of politics.
Your description of people voting parties for its own sake is more apt for many PAP voters; the PAP is the only party that can depend on the party name – as opposed to the quality of its candidates – to win seats. That only shows that that they can field a donkey, and the donkey can get voted into Parliament. Actually, many donkeys have already won seats in Parliament under the PAP banner. You can easily spot them: they doze off when Parliament is in session (their work in their directorships, and the other true perks of being a PAP MP and not serving the people, must make it difficult for them to stay awake while all that droning is going on in the House); they don’t ask questions, they ask the most inane questions, or they give the most inane replies. In short, they are not being the MPs that they were voted in as.
@49) smallvoice585 on November 5th, 2009 4.54 pm
[[I’m sorry if what I said wasn’t too clear. I’m not saying that the SDP has not written out its programme.
What I take issue with is that the SDP has not learnt its lessons from the past. It continues to speak loudly on changes to the Electoral Map, organize protest marches, accuse PAP members openly of corruption; not because these actions are urgent and warranted, but to GAIN ATTENTION.]]
Firstly, when was the last time SDP organised a protest march? Hmm? Are you refering to the event where they casually walked along PAVEMENTs wearing t-shirts with messages in which they were ACQUITTED?
When was the last time they accuse PAP of corruption? And were they wrong? Isn’t taking multi million dollar as salary a form of moral corruption?
And the irony you said of “gaining attention”. How else do they get votes (the ultimate aim of a political party) if they were not trying to gain attention? You mean you will vote for a candidate that does not try to gain attention from you and ignores you?
If anything else, I would say SDP is doing their JOB as opposition, i.e., bringing issues up to the people so the people can see for themselves the act of our “beloved” PAP.
[[The trouble is – such actions do little to boost its credibility in the eyes of the public. ]]
Honestly, anything the opposition do, after going through the pro-PAP tinted glass of the MSM, is not going to be “credible”. The word “credible” itself is no longer credible.
“Credible opposition” is just another smoke bomb thrown by PAP and another strawman argument. After all, “credible opposition” as defined by PAP means one that it approves, and since it never approves any opposition, then no opposition will ever be credible.
If you want a credible opposition, first ask for a credible electoral system and a credible MSM first (which is currently ranked 133 out of 150+). Then we can talk credibility.
@59) Derrick A. Paulo on November 6th, 2009 3.04 am
[[There was no censorship, but unfortunately, their reply was too late.]]
Hi Derrick,
I am a regular reader of Today Online. I almost believe your explanation, except that when I check the website again at the time of this writing, there is no follow-up article or addendum on Othman’s article about SDP’s reply nor their activities.
So your “SDP-is-late” explanation seemed more like a smoke screen than real explanation of your censorship.
If Today Online does not practice censorship, do you dare prove it by giving fair coverage to candidates of all political parties? e.g.. offer to interview one new candidate from each of the political parties and to hear their views, with no heavy editting of their replies? Would Today Online do it to prove they do not perform political censorship?
Got to know Andrew Loh stepping down here in this thread. He deserves a break, go and rejuvenate yourself and come back stronger.
Me has been here loyally for few years and have much respect for the dedications and commitments that Andrew has put in for the wellbeings of Singaporeans.
I like to say Thank You for a temporary farewell.
patriot
@58) Toolang on November 6th, 2009 1.27 am
[[I do not believe in supporting political parties.]]
When you cast your vote to a particular party candidate, you have already supported that party, whether you “believe” or not. If you vote for PAP, you are supporting PAP. Unless you waste your vote, in which case, you are shirking your responsibility of a citizen.
[[I would also not be so blinded to vote the oppositions for opposition sake.]]
This statement has been used ad nauseum that I don’t think you know what it means. People vote for the opposition for CHANGE. What the heck does for “opposition sake” means anyway? You mean people do not vote PAP for supporting sake?
[[I need not say further as the posting as No. 57 is telling. I now understand why you have a bandwagon of excuses at your disposal even before the GE. Good luck to both of you if you prefer excuses and pointing fingers at others even before the contests instead of strategising to counter the odds, etc. ]]
Yes, yes. You must be one of those educators or parents what when you see a child having scored less than 50% and conclude the child is stupid. Performance at the polls is not conclusive evidence that a party is losing credibility. The fact that they can get 20% despite the mountains of obstacles stacked at them (they were threatened with lawsuits on the eve of polling day) shows in fact how good they are. If a child is suffering from cancer, just got beaten a day before exams by his parents, have his entire exam question topics changed in the last day and still score slightly more than 50%, I would say that child is brilliant!
To you it is just excuses, shows that you really did not bother to understand the problems faced by others. I hope you are not a parent or a boss, because those under your care who try to explain to you their problems, you will dismiss them as excuses.
@ Robox
I really want to sit down and shoot the breeze with you sometime. You seem to have some views which I’d want to debate on. I don’t support any particular party but I definitely don’t support the status quo maintained by the PAP’s policies because it does not appear to be to the benefit of the Singaporean in general.
I’m also against any system that encourages incumbents to take it easy. No, that is not the kind of person we want in parliament. I want fighters. I want leaders. I don’t mind people who may be selfish and think about themselves sometimes but also have the macroeconomic perspective to understand that as long as the people are doing fine, they’ll be doing great too! Don’t just cut costs!! Increase the revenue!!! That’s the minimum standard person I want heading my country.
I most definitely do not want a family of leaders who keep telling me (through the compliant media) they know what’s best for Singapore. None of them have really been tested except for the old man. His trial by fire was a lesson for Singapore itself but he appears to have forgotten that. I don’t know about Young Lee. How much could he have learnt during his SAF when he could not be allowed to fail. Even after entering parliament, I’ve not actually seen him lead us in anything significant.
I have no comments about our CEO in training, Ho Ching. She’s still in training because she’s allowed all kinds of mistakes and still allowed to continue. If hers was an actual appointment with accountability and responsibility, she’d be tossed out the door faster than you can say nepotism.
The cult of personality we now have that is called the PAP has not allowed any other potential leaders to REALLY grow as tomorrow’s hope. Instead, what we have are ‘leaders’ who actually appear to be stewards maintaining the system till the next generation of Lees come up. Why else is Lee not able to let go, unless he wants to hand it over to his heir apparent. I don’t mind GCT but Old Lee keeps him in his place with his wooden comments.
Good luck to us all. Don’t let the current Oppo wards down. Keep the pressure on the other PAP wards…whichever they are. I wish the Elections Department of Singapore (ELD), which is a department under the Prime Minister’s Office, would make up their minds about the boundaries…
oh wait…they don’t make the boundaries!
See here:
http://www.elections.gov.sg/about.html
“…(The ELD provides) secretarial service to any appointed Committee responsible for recommending changes to electoral boundaries”
I wonder who is in these appointed Committees?
Anyone?
Perhaps that is the question SDP should ask?
btan,
Your postings clearly show that everybody must write and play to the rules and conditions according to your dicta without any consideration for others’ views, including the reporters and press. You display a dictatorial behaviour regardless of others’ views. I hope this is not the view of the political party you are advocating. Those who fail to agree with your views, you start pointing fingers or pull out one of the excuses from your bandwagon. Your bigoted support of a political party blindly does not mean that everybody will believe what you say. The more bigoted and ultra views you are advocating in supporting blindly a political party without any sense of reality many fence-sitters like me will be turned away come GE!
@70) Toolang on November 6th, 2009 11.54 am
[[Your postings clearly show that everybody must write and play to the rules and conditions according to your dicta without any consideration for others’ views, including the reporters and press. You display a dictatorial behaviour regardless of others’ views. I hope this is not the view of the political party you are advocating. Those who fail to agree with your views, you start pointing fingers or pull out one of the excuses from your bandwagon. Your bigoted support of a political party blindly does not mean that everybody will believe what you say. The more bigoted and ultra views you are advocating in supporting blindly a political party without any sense of reality many fence-sitters like me will be turned away come GE! ]]
Wow, thanks for calling me a dictator. Don’t I have to have a country to dictate to first to become one?
If I am a dictator of Singapore, the first thing I will do is to dismantle all the machinery of the government to de-coupled it from PAP’s tentacles, then set up a robust system that will ensure two- or multi-party system in our parliament, then I will resign my post as a dictator.
Unfortunately, I am not, and the real dictator is still holding on to the various rules and mechanism so that he and his family can be in power. At the mean time slowly running Singapore to ground.
Want to bet the 4th or 5th PM will be a Lee too?
Why don’t you open your eyes and look around. People are disgusted with the current regime and clamouring for change. They have seen through the usual tricks of PAP and all the spins by MSMs are slowly being dissected by free and fair news sites like TOC and TR.
Maybe you are the one who is still not waken to reality yet?
Please continue to sit on your fence, and then watch all the illusions of peace and prosperity crumbles around you one day.
Doing nothing is as bad as supporting the PAP regime.
Hey Too lan, I mean toolang…
When you are accusing others for doing finger pointing and lock in their own world etc, take a loot at yourself…you are lock in your own world, considering other’s views as nothing more then bandwagon of excuses etc etc and blah blah blah…
this way, without having to say much, you have lost the war before you even fight it, as it is evident that you do not know those who oppose you, neither do you know yourself well…if you want so speak of strategy, look at Sun Tzu’s art of war…you have failed in a major aspect…
and too be truthful, if you have use tact instead of popping in here for the first “few” times and start using such crude words to accuse people, outright accusing people of things that they are not doing, doing finger pointing, you will just be the same as the likes of GMR….instead, take a look at the past, perhaps you can use Apek as an example.
To Online Shmonline on November 6th, 2009 10.56 am:
Re: “I really want to sit down and shoot the breeze with you sometime. You seem to have some views which I’d want to debate on. I don’t support any particular party but I definitely don’t support the status quo maintained by the PAP’s policies because it does not appear to be to the benefit of the Singaporean in general.”
Email me at rowbox@rocketmail.co. We’ll talk.
Everything that you raised in your post is exactly about the PAP’s extremism which has only ever been practised in other extremist regimes; no centrist regime has conducted itself like it.
But like I suggested, Singaporeans have accumulated a huge amount of “dumb” – and I might add, “stubborn” – karma which keeps themselves prone to being abused. But they don’t even know that they are being abused because abuse is the political, economic, and social norm in Singapore. And that’s why they will not even be able to recognize that a political party like the SDP can lift them out of all that abuse even when it stares them in their face.
That’s how politically dumb – or politically dumbed down which has a lot of implications for how psychologically smart and how high their EQ are – that Singaporeans are
70) Toolang
and there you go, again, pointing fingers at others…without realising that what you are saying is like slapping yourself, or pointing a gun at yourself…
if you are talking about “You display a dictatorial behaviour regardless of others’ views.” Hey, this is singapore….it is like what you say, something along that “changing of electoral boundaries is as sure as blah blah”
and
58) Toolang
Neither do i believe in voting in the opposition, just for the sake of it. I only believe in voting in those with the heart to serve our people. Period. And i believe no matter what views you have, even though it differs, it is the same. voting in those who will want to help the people…however, of course, a though could be perverse until you think that living in an ivory tower is doing good for the people
Good luck to you toolang, if all you have is a bandwagon of whining and also finger pointing….before you accuse others, look into the mirror at yourself…finger pointing is human’s no.1 favorite movement.
74) Robox
This will be like someone who enjoys self-inflicted suffering…lol
Singapore is said to be not even a country?
Is that correct?
If so, its only a very tiny place the size of a City and there is not even a 2nd city.
The election is won base on this population size only.
However, due to the GRC system, many Walkovers resulted in MANY citizens not able to vote in the last many elections.
So, all these years, who are the ones who actually Voted for them?
So, who are this group of citizens who Gave them the Mandate to run the Entire Singapore for ALL Citizens, including the MANY who were denied the chance to vote due to Walkovers?
Should mandate be given like this?
For how long should this way of giving mandate remain?
Because it is such a small tiny country (may be inappropriate terminology),
I ASK THAT THE ENTIRE CITIZENRY GET TO VOTE REGARDLESS OF WALKOVERS.
CHANGE THE VOTING SYSTEM NOW!
Wow Toolang your wisdom is astounding. Truly you must be a modern sage. I could just read your comments all day and grow tremendously in insight.
To the losers (Yamamoto, Robox, Utopia and especially btan):
The axiom Toolang spouted earlier holds true. “In a real world, do you expect your opponents to arm you to the teeth to fight and defeat them? Be realistic!”
Haha do you mean you want/expect a fair and above board election? What a highfaluting idea! Toolang has shown you all to be the naive losers you are.
The only way is to follow the God of Strategy’s – Toolang – method. Stop the whining and prepare for all eventualities.
For example, if it were decided that all 84 seats were to be won by the party that could cut a slice of meat most professionally and the PAP were given the latest state of the art ginsu knives and the opposition would only be able to use their own fecal matter who would win? The PAP of course is the logical reply. But why did the PAP win? Toolang has shown that this is because the opposition did not prepare for such an eventuality. It’s entirely their fault.
Preparation is key. Another example i hear losers whining about is that the PAP is trigger happy with defamation lawsuits. So? Is the whining going to continue or can a strategy be used to defeat this? Of couse it’s the strategic option. Do you expect fairness? HAHAHA!
In this case, the strategy could be ….erm….. that the opposition not speak at all. Yes selective mutism would frustrate the PAP and no one would get sued. 2 birds with one stone.
As i have shown + the insight from the Sage of Strategy – Toolang – can you now honesty disagree?
I’d have to agree with Toolang on only one matter: that many Singaporeans might be voting for the opposition party just because they are the opposition (post #58). BUT there is no right/wrong to it, individuals have the right to have their own opinion however absurd we feel it might be, or even if it is just because they are generally disgruntled with the ruling party. All the parties need to prove their worth, and voting for PAP for the sake of not voting for the opposition is lame as well, sorry to say.
To btan (post #68): Is voting for a PAP candidate really equivalent to agreeing with the parties’ strategies, or is it (also/only) supporting said PAP candidate in the job he/she does within the government? My area is decent (well, PAP) but on top of that, in my opinion, I really appreciate what the MP in my area has done in his years of service to the government. There lacks an unbiased compilation of works each MP has done, so this might be a tinted view. But I don’t want to vote him out of office because he has done well, and the next person in the line of succession, should he be as luckless as to head out, is not a desirable in the scheme of things. (my MP: Teo Chee Hean actually; decent fellow, would like to know more about any shadiness if any. If it were the Home Affairs dude I won’t think twice)
Politics has never been easy and candidates need to play their cards right. Voters should also not be too overly outraged over the lack of balance in political parties without first assessing the opposition candidates. I’ll have to see what each candidate has to say regarding some issues I have when the time comes around.
To note, the distinction between Town Councils and MPs is disjointing. How can we make a difference to changes in the Town Councils (I’m not fond of this organisation in my area)? Inefficient and overbloated. Ugh.
Ryvyan on November 6th, 2009 1.32 pm:
Re: “…individuals have the right to have their own opinion however absurd we feel it might be…”
How are those ‘opinions’ formed? You speak as if they are formed in a vacuum without any input form sources other than the individuals who form those opinions. Sources like the state controlled media that only dictate the fascist PAP’s views to the exclusion of all else.
Re: “My area is decent (well, PAP) but on top of that, in my opinion, I really appreciate what the MP in my area has done in his years of service to the government…the distinction between Town Councils and MPs is disjointing. How can we make a difference to changes in the Town Councils (I’m not fond of this organisation in my area)? ”
All this tells me is that you are concerned only with municipal issues and not national ones.
Politics is also about national issues and I think that is the major preoccupation in this discussion; not municipal issues that are not only the ‘safe’ issues to discuss in Singapore but have had a tremendous amount of air time.
Re: “Voters should also not be too overly outraged over the lack of balance in political parties without first assessing the opposition candidates.”
I have assessed the candidates. And I am outraged over the lack of balance, and why shouldn’t I be? Do you really believe that a 100% conservative-to-fascist Parliament serves the needs of liberal and social democratic Singaporeans?
If so, prove it in any of the policies and legislation that the PAP government has formulated.
Thanks Robox.
I can see you’re very active today.
Definitely good reading! :)
Cheers!
Online Shmonline(69) /// @Robox I really want to sit down and shoot the breeze with you sometime ///
Wow !! I couldnt agree more with you, bro Online Shmonline, that the various posts on this thread, especially (64) by Robox are truly astounding, and personally i think it must be one of the best blogs i have ever read in my life.
Now i certainly breath the air more freely, when i open the window of my Bukit Batok flat, and the sunshine sends a thrill down my spine, knowing that there are true intellectuals like Robox and Online Shmonline, who with the twin-powers of compassion and wisdom in them, bring great hope for the future of all Singaporeans. Keep up the good work brothers.
“The axiom Toolang spouted earlier holds true. “In a real world, do you expect your opponents to arm you to the teeth to fight and defeat them? Be realistic!”
Are you so Too-Lan over your own nonsense that now you have to use other nick to sing your own wisdom and praise ? Trying to be LKY using own highfalutin nonsense and machinery to self-praise himself into nirvana ?
Haha, one word to describe you just like rest of Pappies. PATHETIC.
“The axiom Toolang spouted earlier holds true. “In a real world, do you expect your opponents to arm you to the teeth to fight and defeat them? Be realistic!”
Using many nicks to represent a nonsensical being show how great a loser you are !
PAP stooges are skirting the main issue – reads “Calls for the Government to release Electoral Map” don’t push around the bushes, pls stay with the topic. You get no votes in fingerpointng others (in this case SDP and not pointing directly to PAP to release the electoral map. Fair?
Dear 60) Robox on November 6th, 2009 3.12 am
“Exactly how does garnering the lowest votes equate to credibility?” you asked.
I hope you understand the word “credibility”. It means believable or worthy of acceptance. It is really quite simple. If SDP’s previous performance in the GE was poor, their credentials as a feasible political alternative are definitely not boosted by it. It is conceivable to deduce that if less people vote for them, they are deemed to be less worthy of acceptance – and therefore less credible.
One word of advice to you – you have a tendency to throw wild accusations at those who do not share your opinions. If brevity is the soul of wit, your verbose postings are not a good advertisement for the cogency of your arguments.
exactly Sam, perhaps people are looking for excuses for their own fears, or maybe they are jealous opposition members posting those themselves?
Dear 65) btan on November 6th, 2009 10.22 am
I’m sure you’ll agree that if the SDP concentrates on creating attention-grabbing stunts to boost its profile, it can only be self-defeating.
@89) smallvoice585 on November 6th, 2009 5.42 pm
[[Dear 65) btan on November 6th, 2009 10.22 am
I’m sure you’ll agree that if the SDP concentrates on creating attention-grabbing stunts to boost its profile, it can only be self-defeating. ]]
If what you said is true, then I agree with you 100%.
However, it seemed you have not kept up with the activities of SDP, because it is not true. No, no need to attend their open house or join their party. Why don’t you drop by their website, read everything they have to offer there (that should take about one week or so if you are a voracious reader) and then come back to tell me if your views of them have changed or not (that they are just a party that creates attention only)
How about that?
@79) Ryvyan on November 6th, 2009 1.32 pm
[[To btan (post #68): Is voting for a PAP candidate really equivalent to agreeing with the parties’ strategies, or is it (also/only) supporting said PAP candidate in the job he/she does within the government?]]
The answer to your question is twofold.
When you vote for a candidate of a party, you are in fact supporting that party, even if you curse-and-swear at the party. It’s really like consumerism. You can, say, insult microsoft but if you buy microsoft products, you are supporting it, causing it to earn money and continue to grow. Voting does this to parties in the political field.
The other issue you brought up is candidate versus party. I do not deny there are good people in PAP. I myself have healthy respect for people like Ong Teng Cheong, Tony Tan and some of the first generation leaders. Even the current generation of PAP MPs, I am sure there are some genuinely good guys.
Unfortunately, the moment they join PAP, they have no choice but to subject themselves to the party whip. Take the casino debate for example. Even though some PAP MPs are 100% against it, they have no choice but to toe the party line when it comes to the crucial voting. This is something all voters must be aware.
Anyone can talk in parliament (i.e. MPs, NMPs or NCMPs) but only MPs can vote (another reason why I agree with WP to abolish the NMP and NCMP scheme). If there is no party whip, then, yes, we can consider to vote along individual line.
Besides, the GRC system basically demolished the concept of voting for individuals. If you are in a GRC, can you really say you are voting for a particular MP? So what you say can only apply if you happened to be staying in an SMC, a luxury not every Singaporean has.
Lastly, you have pointed out a flaw in our electoral system in that the managing of a town council is coupled with parliamentary duties of an MP. If our MP can truly be just parliamentarian and our town council be managed by some other means, then things will be simpler.
As in the case of any PAP policies, things are NOT simple. MPs also have to manage town councils, so they are judged not just by their parliamentary skills but also town council management skills. Unfortunately, not everyone can possess managerial skills and presentation or argumentative skills at the same time. (e.g. people like LTK are great town managers but may not perform well in parliament, while someone like CSJ may be a great parliamentarian, he may not be experienced in managing a town council)
So while you are voting for someone because he is a good town manager, don’t forget the repercussion that you are also supporting his party and giving one seat of parliament to that party.
And because of this, my focus is on the national flaw of only one party-system which has to be demolish and make way for 2 or multi party system. To me, this is the reason for voting opposition MPs in, and not the “voting for the sake of opposing”.
A 2 party-system is the real check and balance to prevent laws from being passed trivially like a rubberstamp.
And if your concern is really only municipal issues only, then you only need to look at how PP and Hougang is managed (you have to personally go there). You may even attend the meet-the-people’s session there and contrast that with your own MPs to tell the differences. While this is in no way the same experience as having the exact man as your MP, it does gives you a taste of what having an opposition MP is like and let you experience first hand once and for all are they really the inept incompetent fools that MSMs have led us to believe.
Dear All, is it just me, but I am taking that 78) Ohnani is been sarcastic…
btan and the likes think that Singaporeans will swallow their hooks, lines and sinkers for the party they represent. They cannot present their cases rationally to justify and convince us why we should support and vote their party and have to resort to vulgarities when challenged. Even the last GE results where the party candidates were trounced and discarded by Singaporean voters convincingly as stated at #87 by smallvoice585 were similarly abused. The Singaporean voters had spoken during the last GE and this time round more or less you can expect the same results, if btan and the likes continue with their erratic rantings and abuses.
Dear 90) btan on November 6th, 2009 6.36 pm
I have taken up your suggestion and have revisited the SDP website (I’d been there before). Strangely, it did not magically change my assessment of the SDP.
Of greater interest is their section on “Misconceptions on the Singapore Democrats” which they listed the following misconceptions:
Misconception No. 1: The SDP is not interested in parliamentary elections
Misconception No. 2: The SDP wants to effect change through “extra-legal” means
Misconception No. 3: The SDP is an extremist party that advocates breaking laws
Misconception No. 4: The SDP does not offer constructive alternative ideas
Misconception No. 5: The SDP is only interested in human rights and not bread-and-butter issues
As a mark of sincerity, let me state clearly that of the 5 misconceptions listed by SDP, I do not subscribe to any of them.
But I remain unconvinced of the SDP’s credentials as a viable political force in Singapore. Words are mere words. Its their actions that matter – but on that count I do not give them a passing mark.
a party’s name is not important.
A name is just that, a name.
Its Whether Talents join a party that matters.
If Talents join SDP, SDP will shine.
Its not about the past performance as leaders come and go, some gone to never never land.
What matters is the FUTURE . As long as Talents join a party, it will shine regardless of its past.
By this, a party that shined before, is no guarantee sustained performance.
As simple as that.
93) Toolang on November 6th, 2009 8.46 pm
Again you have cut through the bullshit and stated your case brilliantly.
[btan and the likes think that Singaporeans will swallow their hooks, lines and sinkers for the party they represent.]
Do they tihnk Singaporeans are fish? I take great offence that btan and the likes trhink that i ,along with other Singaporeans, are an aquatic vertebrate animal.
[Even the last GE results where the party candidates were trounced and discarded by Singaporean voters convincingly as stated at #87 by smallvoice585 were similarly abused.]
I am confused oh Sage of Wisdom as to the abuse you are refering to. Please enlighten me. Who was abused? The discarded party candidates or the Singaporean voter? I lack the grammatical skills to follow your great discourse. I am only a mere mortal only capable of grovelling at your feet.
[They cannot present their cases rationally to justify and convince us why we should support and vote their party and have to resort to vulgarities when challenged.] and [The Singaporean voters had spoken during the last GE and this time round more or less you can expect the same results, if btan and the likes continue with their erratic rantings and abuses. ]
Now this is the moneymaker. I assume, i hope correctly as i lack your wisdom, that you refer to the SDP but i think that all opposition parties too come under this.
You opposition whiners. Whining about how elections should be fair and free. Just because Democracy means that the people are free to grant power to the representatives they elect doesn’t mean that they are free to elect whoever they want.
Just because opposition politicians can expect to be demonized and shortchanged by the media, have electoral boundaries changed to disadvantage them and their voters, does this mean that the PAP who is responsible for all this is abusing their power and riding roughshod over the citizens and the constitution, doing what they like and paying themselves huge salaries in the process?
Of course not. We are not a nation remember? That much is clear. We have ‘Asian values’ and whatnots.
I now quote a great friend of Singapore and I think this is quite apt.
“Democracy cannot be imposed from the outside and a system suitable for Myanmar [Burma] can only be born out of Myanmar [Burmese] society,”
-Burmese Prime Minister Gen Thein Sein
Also, If btan and the likes keep thinking we voters are fish, Voters will continue to give the same results.
This i can guarantee.
Toolang please keep up the great fight. I am rooting for you.
@96 Ohnani
I’ve noticed late in your post you had said and here i quote “We are not a nation remember?”
I was wondering if earlier you had read the few articles in TOC that had also our law minister saying something along the lines that we are just a city (i paraphrased here).
So to be more effective and politically correct, the sentence should read, We are neither a nation nor a country, remember?
I can sense that this should be about a city election, so why is there a need to talk about a electoral map? Is there a demarcation within a city for elections?
I am so curious.
89) smallvoice585 on November 6th, 2009 5.42 pm
[Dear 65) btan on November 6th, 2009 10.22 am
I’m sure you’ll agree that if the SDP concentrates on creating attention-grabbing stunts to boost its profile, it can only be self-defeating. ]
Yes the stunts SDP pull are only to grab attention to boost it’s profile.
Be it tak bolen tahan, CSJ in court against the MM, One man assembly (Which is now illegal), the dangerous practice of standing with placards calling for transparency forcing a large police squadron armed to the teeth to respond to such threats, etc. It’s all so self serving.
Why can’t the SDP use the proper channels? Like writing a letter to the Straits Times forum and such. Try writing with the Caps lock on as it will show the ruling party you mean business. But please hire a lawyer to look through what you write as you may inadvertently defame the ruling party leaving them no choice but to sue you. If not, how would they keep their whiter than white reputations? The whole city ( not a nation ah) would topple and our women would be maids in foreign countries (bad) instead of maids here (good).
What is the point of Civil Disobedience? This is from Thoreau’s wikipedia entry –
Political philosophers have counseled caution about revolution because the upheaval of revolution typically causes a lot of expense and suffering. However, Thoreau says that such a cost/benefit analysis isn’t appropriate when the government is actively facilitating an injustice like slavery. Such a thing is fundamentally immoral and even if it would be difficult and expensive to stop it, it must be stopped because it is wrong. “This people must cease to hold slaves, and to make war on Mexico, though it cost them their existence as a people.”[9]
Thoreau tells his audience that they cannot blame this problem solely on pro-slavery Southern politicians, but must put the blame on those in, for instance, Massachusetts, “who are more interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity, and are not prepared to do justice to the slave and to Mexico, cost what it may.… There are thousands who are in opinion opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put an end to them.”[10] (See also: Thoreau#s Slavery in Massachusetts which also advances this argument.)
He exhorts people not to just wait passively for an opportunity to vote for justice, because voting for justice is as ineffective as wishing for justice; what you need to do is to actually be just. This is not to say that you have an obligation to devote your life to fighting for justice, but you do have an obligation not to commit injustice and not to give injustice your practical support.
also this part
In a constitutional republic like the United States, people often think that the proper response to an unjust law is to try to use the political process to change the law, but to obey and respect the law until it is changed. But if the law is itself clearly unjust, and the lawmaking process is not designed to quickly obliterate such unjust laws, then Thoreau says the law deserves no respect and it should be broken.
As you can see, it’s pure drivel. Used by such wastrels like Gandhi and Martin Luther King who could have used their time better to make money rather than the lives of the people better. What was the Salt March or the ‘I have a dream speech’ but attention grabbing stunts?
The reason Singaporeans do not like protesting for our rights is that we never had them in the first place. Who would miss something they never had?
In the case of the SDP, they want something that the Govt is unwilling to give. Inconsequential things like a free press, transparency and accountability, and rights given by the Singapore constitution.
If these are things the SIngaporean does not want, what is the use of fighting for it? Just because the SDP values such things does not mean the Singaporean values it.
So please. Protest in your name only. I hope you get what you want because you deserve it, because only you are willing to show how much you want it.
But the rest of us who are not out there in the front lines do not need or deserve such things.
Leave the Singaporeans out of it.
93) Toolang
Not everyone supports SDP just because of their bravado. So calm yourself down, and breathe in and out and relax.
Just like we cannot condemn all MIW because of some funny jokers like LSS, LHH and this and that. We cannot condemn all opposition party just because of one party too…some really did help the people, it is a fact. they have been there and done that and we know we can have faith in them.
but Toolang, maybe you think that you are a great strategist and normal singaporeans are stereotypical…simple, compared to you…but prior to last GE, how many fiasco happen? and how fiasco happen before the next GE? always account for variable change…
and really, sometimes murphy’s law is so nice and optimistic…
Dear 98) Ohnani on November 6th, 2009 11.28 pm
I know you are not taking my side of the argument, but I must admit that I enjoy reading your post at #98. Sometimes funny in irony, sometimes touching in your impassioned empathy for the SDP and often sober in stating political truisms; you are a breath of fresh air.
Actually, I’m not without empathy towards the SDP leaders as I believe that they are probably sincere in their political efforts.
The trouble with them is that they have absolutely no insight into their own predicament. In the public mind, the SDP name had been almost irretrievably sullied forever (it’s not important whether it’s their fault or not). The tactics that they borrow from abroad are highly inappropriate and predictably ineffectual in the face of our local culture; appearing to be mere publicity stunts to the average man-in-the-street.
By pointing these things out, I’m not necessarily being hostile. But, I also have no inclination to help the SDP now as I know that the political wounds they suffered years ago had been mortal ones. It is only the SDP and their supporters who have yet to realize this.
To smallvoice585 on November 6th, 2009 5.34 pm:
Re: “I hope you understand the word “credibility”. It means believable or worthy of acceptance.”
Good, you have consulted the dictionary and so we now have a basis for pursuing this matter further. Tell me exactly which of the SDP’s words, actions, or the policies it champions lacks credibility so much that it has such a high uptake, as topics for discussion at least, among many of the political parties including the PAP.
For example, most recently at the forum organized by the NUSPSS, Zaqy Mohamed stated that he supported Minimum Wage legislation; just a week earlier, it was the point of discussion in a speech by Lee Kuan Yew. This is an SDP-initiated idea that has been in place for ten years now. Tell me which part of this SDP policy you think lacks credibility.
Or you could pick any other satement, action, or policy of your liking. Just be VERY specific because your own credibility is at stake here.
And speaking of “credibility” do you think that my Theory of the Frightened Opposition-Voting Singaporean Monkey has any believalibility or worthiness, so much so that it is acceptable by those who know about it?
Not that any of these are unknowns, but I would like to draw attention to them anyway.
1. When the SDP, being a party that adheres strictly to the law, applies for a permit from the police to hold an assembly as permitted by law, the lawlessness of all PAP-controlled agencies such as the SPF conducts itself in such a way that the SDP is told only at the very last minute that its application is not approved.
2. At elections, it is only at the very last minute does the fraud organization called the Elections Department – housed at the Prime Minister’s Office, no less and in all likelihood, at his behest as well – announces a change in the boundaries of constituencies.
3. Only at the very last minute does Today’s fraud reporter Zul Othman email the SDP with a list of questions to be answered ASAP – what ASAP actually means must never be made clear in the practise of fascism.
Are we not more and more convinced that the fascist pigs actually operate from the same Instruction Manual and that the Manual is the same one issued by the ruling party?
Independent media my foot!
@94) smallvoice585 on November 6th, 2009 8.48 pm
I will give you brownie points for attempting to go to their sites to read. At least you did that much, which is more than I can say for some people who keep criticising opposition parties. However, you have to do more by absorbing what they are saying.
Firstly, let me address your main complains. Why do you think SDP is “attention grabbing”? Because of their civil disobedience activities?
Have you read their explanation of why they conduct civil disobedience and understood it?
Here, let me repost it.
=========================================================
**But what is nonviolent action?**
A government, no matter how dictatorial, is dependent on the cooperation of the people it rules. In other words, how powerful a government is depends on how much citizens are willing to obey it. When we withdraw our cooperation and refuse to submit to the Government’s oppressive ways, we change the power relationship between government and citizenry, and erode the regime’s hold over us.
Nonviolent action describes the act of refusing to obey unjust laws and the demands of a government without resorting to physical violence. A coordinated and concerted withdrawal of that compliance will render the State impotent with its repression. Refusing to cooperate with unjust laws, carried out in a systematic manner, can bring about change. Nonviolent action has been repeatedly used to overcome dictatorships all over the world, most notably in India during Gandhi’s movement for independence, South Africa during the years of apartheid rule, and Taiwan during the Kuomintang’s dictatorship.
Nonviolent action enables even those who are few in numbers or lacking in material resources to resist their oppressors with moral strength and dignity. Because of the nature of the movement, non-violent can be used by the old and young, men and women, the able-bodied and the infirm.
Nonviolent actions include letter writing, sit-ins, boycotts, marches, strikes, etc. The idea is to use peaceful means to wean governments away from their dependence on undemocratic practices.
**Won’t this lead to the PAP taking harsh action?**
Yes, it will. The Government can jail 10 persons; it can even jail 100 persons but it cannot jail 10,000 persons. A nonviolent action campaign needs to have the participation of the masses if it is going to succeed. But remember that mass movements always start with the leadership of the few who have the courage to make sacrifices and the vision to bring the people into the future. Many countries have faced similar circumstances as ours, some with situations much worse, but through the intelligent and persistent use of nonviolent action, they were all able to overcome the dictatorial regimes and establish democracy in their countries.
===========================================================
I happen to personally disagree with civil disobedience activities, not because SDP is wrong but because Singaporeans are not desperate enough yet. Sadly, no one will do extreme actions until they have nothing else to lose. But by then, it also will be too late. That said, I totally understand the angle that SDP is coming from, so while I disagree with what they do, I respect them for their beliefs.
My take is that they should focus more on garnering votes in a particular constituencies, in which they state they will do so, just not the only activity they will do. For that I am satisfied with their course of actions.
My own personal hope is they can bring the issue up to parliament as MPs rather than in the streets. However, if they are prevented to do so by the dirty tricks of PAP, then we cannot fault them for taking to the streets, for the original offender is PAP.
To say that SDP is attention grabbing but without also condemning the dirty tricks put up by PAP to mutate the electoral system to their advantage is not being fair to SDP.
This is my main grouse to people who said it is not the job of PAP to be fair to their opponents. I strongly disagree. It is not the job of the incumbent to mutate the system to make it such a high barrier-to-entry for opposition.
This will never happen in a commercial world with free competition. Take the example of microsoft who tried to play dirty tricks by coupling their IE to their OS. Looked all the anti-monopoly lawsuits slapped at them from USA to Europe.
Yet, such monopoly is happening to our country’s political system. It cannot be healthy. Already, we have suffered the consequences of such a monopoly, by the failed stop-at-two population control policy, such that now we are suffering for yet another failed policy of open-door immigration.
All these matters are interlinked. If you do not see the consequences that starts with redrawing boundaries, then you have to dig further.
@96) Ohnani on November 6th, 2009 10.36 pm
[[btan and the likes think that Singaporeans will swallow their hooks, lines and sinkers for the party they represent.]
Do they tihnk Singaporeans are fish? I take great offence that btan and the likes trhink that i ,along with other Singaporeans, are an aquatic vertebrate animal.]
No, I happen to think there are many intelligent Singaporeans but when it comes to voting, many (specifically the 66.6%) are more like mammals of the woolly kind.