Ng E-Jay
In the latest edition of Petir, the People’s Action Party’s bi-monthly party magazine, Law Minister K Shanmugam warned party members that younger voters could erode the PAP’s political dominance if they are not convinced that Singapore needs strong political leadership capable of making effective and speedy decisions.
On one hand, Mr Shanmugam is acknowledging that younger voters seem more ready to vote the opposition. On the other hand, he is also asserting that if one believes in having effective and efficient government, then the PAP must be the right choice. Implicit in his statement is the assumption that the opposition will not provide the strong political leadership that our country needs. This is an example of arrogant, presumptuous thinking that supporters of multi-party democracy must refute.
Mr Shanmugam also suggested that students be provided with greater political education, but that the “education should not trumpet the virtues of any particular system.”
It is hard to fathom exactly what the Law Minister means by “not trumpeting the virtues of any particular system”, when his message seems to lend support to the PAP idea that the western model of democracy should be rejected because Singapore, being different, requires its own system of government. He also mentioned that adopting the western model of democracy would result in a lower quality of life and more social tensions. Isn’t Mr Shanmugam trumpeting the virtues of the PAP system whilst denouncing that of western democracy?
In reality, western democracy is not a simplistic, narrow set of ideals that Mr Shanmugam makes it out to be but instead comprises an entire spectrum of ideas from which each political party in the western world adapts to suit their own needs and purposes. Fundamental to the western concept of democracy however is the notion that human rights are universal and inalienable, and that there should be effective separation of powers between the legistive body and the judiciary.
Left to its own devices, the education ministry here would most likely steer any political education programme toward glorifying the “achievements” of the PAP government, such as how far we have progressed as a nation and how the political system engineered by the PAP has enabled this progress to take place.
Educating students about politics can easily degenerate into educating students that only the PAP is qualified to govern Singapore. The classroom can easily be turned into an arena for political campaigning on behalf of the ruling party behind the veneer of providing an all-rounded curriculum.
As it stands, student organizations in our tertiary institutions have been gradually de-politicized over the years. Major policy issues are hardly debated in our universities except perhaps in political science classes, and the closest our universities come to organizing political events is inviting cabinet ministers to give a speech or host a dialogue session.
In fact, within the confines of campus life, censorship with regards to political expression takes place regularly. Examples were raised by Mr Lin Junjie, editor of the Nanyang Chronicle, an NTU student newsletter, in his article “It wasn’t just Chee Soon Juan”, which was published at the Enquirer.sg website in Oct 09. In his article, Mr Lin explains that articles written for the NTU newsletter are “edited or played down to avoid offending the powers that be, or in extremely rare cases such as the Chee saga, removed entirely”, and that “decisions to edit, downplay and censor potentially sensitive stories are made within the confines of the newsroom and the school, by the people who oversee the student editors”. Mr Lin also adds that these actions which take place behind the scenes and sometimes involve nothing more innocuous than removing a photograph “gave the illusion of a relatively free press”, but that “most of the time, the stories in the Chronicle are ultimately sanitised under the care of a teacher adviser”.
The NTU’s decision to censor a student report on a visit by Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary-General of the SDP, is not the only example in recent times of suppression of free speech by university authorities. Other examples include SMU’s banning of Dr Chee’s intended visit to the school campus, and Loo Zihan’s protest speech at his graduation ceremony of NTU’s disallowing a poster of a film he had made which contained political overtones. (See reports listed below.)
How does our Law Minister propose to promote greater political awareness in schools when there is active censorship and restriction of expression of political ideas?
How can any meaningful political education take place if there remains a general climate of fear about openly criticizing Government policies, especially in the civil service?
How can any meaningful political education take place if the mainstream media continues to provide overwhelming, one-sided coverage of the PAP’s ideology but only limited coverage of the hopes and aspiration of its detractors?
Can the Government realistically provide good political education for students if it attempts to do so in an environment in which the media is tightly controlled, publications deemed undesirable are banned rather than openly discussed without fear or favour, and where the Government is often seen promulgating the idea that freedom of speech must be regulated rather than harnessing its power to the maximum?
At the end of the day, the Government must loosen its stranglehold on the media and allow greater freedom of expression before any meaningful political education can be provided to students.
—-
Read also:
The Enquirer – It wasn’t just Chee Soon Juan
The Online Citizen - NTU censors campus news coverage of Chee Soon Juan visit
The Online Citizen – NTU students protest at Speakers’ Corner
The Online Citizen – NTU student protests school’s censorship in graduation speech
The Online Citizen – Becoming a world-class university: NTU and campus media freedom
The Online Citizen - “If you want to do journalism, don’t do it in Singapore.”
The Online Citizen – The importance of editorial independence in the news process
The Online Citizen - Student activism – what’s next?
—–
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
The pig ministers were put in place to justify the unjustifiable so that whatever is black is told as white and get paid handsomely for lies to protect the ruling party (not the people). If our students are to believe in every word from Shamugan, Ng Eng Hen should be very worried about the level of our students’ intelligence which the current school systems have churned out.. Thus I will be worried that our future pillar of Singapore is nothing but the lower end of animal farm to be exploited, slaughter and eventually killed & silenced for being to trusting of the ruling pigs.
[i]younger voters could erode the PAP’s political dominance if they are not convinced that Singapore needs strong political leadership capable of making effective and speedy decisions.[/i]
and the prime minister decisions is?
maybe
perhaps
eer
ugmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
or wait for his father to delegate the USUAL tasks…
do you need a vote on the above statements?
or you want to poll the parliaments for a lifeline?
that is my FINAL answer
E-Jay: I’m curious as to why you used the term “western (sic) concept of democracy” in your argument.
Do you mean to say that democracy can only exist in the ‘West’?
Even at University level……shame on them…..C’mon boys and girls….of Sg Uni…stand up….
Having a drink and showing off to friends alone is not enough….
Standing up…knowing where you all are going to bring the country in the near future is just as important….(perhaps, not for Ms elite face)…but the rest should know….
I was in the student unioun as an elected member…we used to protest over fee increases and managed to get most things running for all students in every campus….we got togather with the other Uni’s as well to make our points…..we wanted a better future….even as an international student…
I am glad at least NTU is taking on the the fight for education….
Shanmugam is scared…he knows and is just trying his hand….
if he thinks that it is only the young he should be concerned about, he better think again! those of us who have lived in the turbulent era are also not happy with the way in which they shamelessly reward themselves without a hoot for the populace. the unfortunate part is they can get away with it because not only is the press reined in but the change in electoral constituencies (read GRC) has ensured a most uneven playing field. most elections we do not get a chance to exercise our vote because there is simply no election! the make-up in parliament would have been very different if it were all single constituencies. but we continue to live in this situation because there are not many who would take up the cudgels against the regime. so effective have their use of libel laws been!
3) mr.udders
In the context of the article, the use of the phrase ‘Western concept of democracy’ would be to further explain what Mr Shanmugan feel (“adopting the western model of democracy would result in a lower quality of life and more social tensions”). Importance of difference in second sentence:
>>> In reality, western democracy is not a simplistic, narrow set of ideals that Mr Shanmugam makes it out to be but instead comprises an entire spectrum of ideas from which each political party in the western world adapts to suit their own needs and purposes. Fundamental to the western concept of democracy however is the notion that human rights are universal and inalienable, and that there should be effective separation of powers between the legistive body and the judiciary.
If he is from pap and he say things not good to pap i think he will face the pap whip.
“Younger voters could erode the PAP’s political dominance if they are not convinced that Singapore needs strong political leadership capable of making effective and speedy decisions.”
I think it is not the younger voters that would erode the PAP’s dominance.
The erosion of the PAP’s dominance must by the natural process come to and end. It cannot and must not be taken for granted that it will continue to have the dominance forever and ever. All empires rose and so they also fell!
When absolute power corrupts absolutely, the emperor (including the imitating mini-emperors) simply cannot see that he has no clothes on.
When in-breeding, greed, arrogance and insolence become the norms of the day, the rule of law becomes the rule by law; and that is when third rate people are being picked to become “leaders” by default of authority enshrined into them, but in fact they are nothing but mere followers (the yes-men and yes-women) of orders and decrees from the emperor.
When people whose morality is questionable, are made to speak to the young to convince them of the moral of good leadership, that is when words become so hollow and meaningless.
Any political leadership capable of making effective and speedy decisions without moral standing is bankrupt of the very leadership that it is trying to impose upon the people. Even an average manager, civil servant or technocrat is able to do that with ease if given the authority and power to do so.
Leadership qualities include more than just making effective and speedy decisions. Leadership, like respect and gratitude, has to be earned over a long period of time through showing good personal examples.
Leaders who pay themselves by the $millions without blinking an eyelid yet doing their very best to freeze or reduce their followers’ wages are not leaders but scavengers and wolves in disguise.
What Singaporeans really need now are leaders who really care for the people, instead of caring for their own pays and bonuses, their own rice bowl, their own status and position, their own fame and integrity, their own political career, their own political party, and most of all, their own political dominance to prolong and enhance their greed for power and more power.
Words are hollow. All lawyers are well-trained to argue either way – foul is fair and fair is foul, white can be black and black can also be white.
Singaporeans should now wake up! We must not be lured or lulled into the complacency of taking the words of certain “leaders” to be the absolute truth again and again.
Leading by good personal examples is the only way to prove good leadership!
What political education is Shanmugam talking about ?
Surely most of the students can see for themselves the gerrymandering, conflict of interest with election dept under purview of PMO, backdoor entry of MPs through GRC system, msm propaganda for the incumbents, lawsuits to prevent political participation, pork barrel tactics, ISA intimidation……
…..therefore is Shanmugam referring to those students who have been brainwashed and thus not able to see what is all around them?
Surely it makes hell of a lot more sense that those braiwashed students are the ones in need of political education….
….and as a senoir citizen may I contribute to our students’ political education by telling them that it has been shere madness to give absolute power to the PAP for 44 years.
If I want political education for my children, the PAP will not be on my list.
Brainwashing is more likely to occur.
I don’t think they understand what is democracy, justice and equality, or universal suffrage.
They have already corrupted the minds of our young when the Pledge they have been reciting for years (hand on heart) suddenly became merely a set of “aspirations”.
Please, leave my kids alone. You have done enough damage.
Singaporeans are incapable of idealism. Why bother with political discourse when there’s no money to profit from? Singaporeans have no notions of morality, aesthetics and epistemology. Our state religion is money.
Perhaps this well paid minister should buy a proper mirror for reflection, not one that he could only admire at himself.
One party dominance is a PAP want, not necessarily the country’s need because it is perfectly possible for a collection of different political parties to form a strong government, and come to good decisions as quickly as compared to a one party dominated government.
What is really impossible is for a one party government to be stopped if it should choose to ride roughshod over its citizens.
Many a times citizens have bemoaned policies zipping through parliament without seeming to have taken the citizens’ feedback into much consideration.
Could the minister provide examples of grave and speedy decision-making the government had been forced into in recent years? Unlocking of the reserves? Writing into law public order acts? Redefinition of election boundaries? Jacking up ministerial remuneration? Introducing CPF Life? Installing new ERP gantries?
Maybe the PAP is not accustomed to having to share existential space with others. In a private sector executive, this would be considered a serious character flaw, if he had wanted to make all the decisions in the company, all the time, as if he were the owner of the enterprise. Is PAP the owner of Singapore and Singaporeans? If the PAP thinks so, please – let’s get incorporated already.
How can a person proclaim it is a fair and square contest where he boasts to be the fastest in a race when driving an expensive car while the rest have to either run or cycle? Isn’t it even more hypocritical when it is the same bragger who had drawn up the rules?
Who knows, but perhaps one day, there are enough cyclists and runners to block the path of this flashy car.
self serving crap.
Our Law Minister telling our Education Minister to brainwash the youngster? Lately, we have heard lot of education’s comment from our Law Minister.
Hi guy, clear up your own toilet first, a lot of stupid pigs around the court.
“he is also asserting that if one believes in having effective and efficient government, then the PAP must be the right choice. … This is an example of arrogant, presumptuous thinking that supporters of multi-party democracy must refute”
Don’t all politicians assert that? Rarely you encounter organizations that firmly believe that they must be the wrong choice.
Lately he has been very noisy in the press. I believe he is trumpeting up his image and credibility for the impending election showdown as the anchor minister in Yishun GRC or as the designated political linchpin to pin down kj whereever he is going to stand.
Can we invoke the Competition Act aganist PAP or complaint to CASE to take action against them for sysmetically depriving other political parties fair competition by using the media to gorify their misdeeds, libel law to silence the opposition , GRCs to bring in inexperienced aristocates, PA, CC, CCC, RC to socially and culturally to promote PAP’s MPs agenda and subtlely create an atmosphere of discomfort among residents to be associated with the opposition’s members or anythings that is opposition , PAP Foundation to pictorially moded the innocent minds in kindergarten towards familiarity with the PAP logo, using this foundation charitable status to give advantage to the PAP to set up their branch offices all over Singapore HDB heartlands that the opposition can’t even smell but to hide their HQ in old private shophouses, unenvironmentally friendly use of festivities’ banners to promote their political image during no-election time even for their defeated candidates who by default can become advisors of CC in the constituency that they have lost.
If the law minister is altruistically serious in re-educating our youth politically so that they can response readily to the calls of their duties to lead our nation, then all these highly counter-productive political structures set up by the old man to gain political monopoly should be dismantled. If not I don’t think any talented man are willing to come forward to stand for office without much persuasion. In fact , most of them who join the PAP to stand for election are pure aristocrats who are cherry-picked, forcibly persuaded or unconsciously coerced. Our system here is actually aristocracy not democracy.
Sham’s saying “There’s only one way, and its the PAP(non-critical thinking, mission-oriented, money-centric, ideal-less, people-less) way”. And how dare he threatens/stakes the country’s well-being with the survivability of the PAP party.
Dear Mr.Shanmugam,here is a couple of reasons why many citizens and not just younger voters will change course by voting for the oppositions.
Firstly, you and your colleagues in white have voted yourselves a hefty pay
cheque as yearly income without asking permission from the citizens who incidentally, are your employers.Also,by rubbing more salt on the wounds,you tried to explained your way out why you deserve those million dollars salaries.U have a retired politician who does nothing for your caucus but pretending to be a soothsayer is getting yearly income of S$2,000,000 of citizens money.We have no qualms about him receiving honorariums by means of making speeches overseas and as a seating board member of some MNCs from which he deserves every penny given to him.
Secondly,we need some different voices in the parliament to ask tough questions.You have been telling us to trust the PAP government and yet
we find there is no transparency.Maybe a number of opp.MPs might shake some
sense out of those MIW.By the way,Mr.Shanmugam,stop wetting your pants,that soothsayer has already forecast that you and your party will win the next elections.
I take offense at this “Why bother with political discourse when there’s no money to profit from?” a quip from originalresonance.
Are you serious or are you just commenting for the sake of saying something ambiguous? Only in Singapore, this is something uniquely Singaporean. If you were living in France and Nicolas Sarkozy wanted a plane like air force 1, he would have to jump through some hoops.
For your sake, http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/12/09/pap-mp-and-mcys-perm-sec-bought-units-at-luxury-condo-marina-bay-suites/
Or try and google up the remunerations of politicians and contrast it with ours.
I would understand if your views were “People are afraid of losing money therefore they do not wish to enter politics” but to claim that there’s no money to profit from? Aren’t those material incentives huge enough for people to act upon? Could this be the ‘stranglehold’ that has been exhibited ethereally?
Most probably, the reason we are hesitant to enter politics is that when the payout is that good, chances are if you fail to make the mark, the consequences are dire too. Notably, we drew lessons from the savvy investor, higher returns will inevitably bring with it higher risks.
Here I also wish to draw a distinction from the idealism that you may have equivocated to ideals. The former is a philosophical theory, the latter denotes a set of values.
Lastly, when you punctuate your statement with “State religion is money”, and taken together with “Why bother…. profit from” isn’t there a conflict? No money in politics then the state’s religion is money. Are you thinking what I am thinking?
To the PAP:
When you you have built your castle too high & large without paying any attention to the ground on which you built on.. chances are it WILL eventually call come crumbling down.
I won’t be surprised when you guys fail in future elections, you’d throw away your sheep-skin to reveal the real wolf in you by calling out your Army.
Democracy goes out the window.. at least the Democracy that the world knows.. not your kind.
E-Jay,
You started out well and make some good points here. Unfortunately, you veered off course and began ranting and making accusations. That spoils any power of your argument to convince the readers. If you want to convince them (us!), you would have to remain as objective as possible. When your anger shows through, people will begin to doubt you, no matter how convincing your arguments are.
And let me play the advocate here, although the last thing I really want to do is to defend any university administration! [I always find them pompous and horribly inefficient.] You mentioned an article that the university bureaucrats refuse to let publish. Now, I’ve not read that article yet, but have you considered the possibility that the article was so obviously a rant, so full of venom and anger, that more objective people don’t think it’s fit to publish?
I know that young people [yes, I was young once too, and I know what it's like] liked to take things personally and believed that everybody is out to oppress them, but I would urge whoever the writer of that article is to reconsider. Perhaps he should have had a better control of his emotions, and be more objective in his article? Not only will this give the bureaucrats less excuse to reject his articles, it will also make his arguments more palatable to those who need convincing, would it not?
Think back on all the great speeches made by great men. Remember Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address or Churchill’s famous three speeches in 1940? They’re not filled with anger. They’re filled with determination, reiteration of SHARED VALUES, of praise, of unity, etc.
Not anger.
Why do PAP Ministers and MPs all think and talk alike?
I thought at every GE when they introduce their candidates,
they would say they are all independent minded and can
think ‘out of the box’
Look at Vivian B and Raymond Lim. Once they have
been co- opted, its like they have gone through the factory line
to have their brain and thinking changed.
now why is the Law Minister not focusing on his job (the law), instead more concerned about PAP’s political dominance?
looks obvious who’s side the law is on doesn’t it? :P
Mr Shanmugan, who do you serve? PAP or the masses?
Is this nerd a Chinese-communist-party-member? Mind you, it seems to me he is an Indian by appearance!! Heehaheehaheeha………
Whatever this nerd proposed recently, all seems to be emulating the way prc-communists’ rule of china!!! Enforce political learning to its citizens since young-age with relentless propagandas from the ruling party to achieve the ruler’s rhetorical purposes!!
Since, this is the path that the ruling party is following in Singapore’s political agendas; I believe strongly that the opposition especially, the wp’s ltk (Chinese-educated) should mimic India to counterbalance this nerd!!!
What a joy? Just to achieve the strong grip of power to maximize selfish political(total control of citizens) and financial(million-dollar salary) gains, an Indian claims to be a Chinese, a Chinese claims to be an Indian. Oh, my “god or dog”, so confuse!!!!
Oops.. Shanmugam contradicted himself. “OOps, I DID IT AGAIN.”
amisingaporen @26
Its the money that make them talk like that! And too bad, tax payers money, not even PAP’s money. Now do people understand why must pay them top money? Otherwise PAP won’t have anybody join them talk like that liao!
Well, why do commentators here – well many anyway – say the same thing and sound alike too? Before calling the kettle black, examine yourselves in the mirror.
Pap has been doing political education for all of 50 years and now
Mugan comes out to declare that students must be given political
education. It is nothing new but he talks like he has just invented
the wheel!
Mugan knows, so does the pap’s top leadership, that the young are
not enamored with them and the trustworthy old are dying off. That’s
the reason why they are in such a hurry to make citizens of foreigners,
that is to replace the votes they stand to lose in the existing scenario.
What he wants is for the pap to redouble and intensify its efforts in
shoving pap propaganda (under the guise of “education”) down the
throats of Singaporeans in general, and those of the young in particular,
in order to upswing the downswing, as Lim Suay Suay would put it.
Nobody should be fooled by him. He’s not in it for our good. He’s doing
it for himself and his masters.
Effective and efficient government?!
How come Mas Selamat can escape?
Please check your facts lah, Shanmugam.
well, if you people observe closely that the ruling party is now trying out everything that they can just to shut you people down from disliking them these days, they can conrinue lying to the people but its too late now cos majority already woke up from their long sleepzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, and now very very angry with those white color which are now stained with alot of dirts in them.
Don’t you guys know this so-called Law minister is actually an Indian, a FT imported by PAP to lead the native singaporean? And being an Indian FT, he’ll do whateve is told to do, speak whetever is needed to convince singapore thier policies are the best. For one I see such a poor effort from this Indian Law minister & his ministry. He is not convincing at all ! Just search on youtube and listen to what he said. He is a poor speaker, seriously.
This guy is FT indeed….he can spew his propoganda and half truths without the usual head bopping we usually see from Indian FTs.
We can’t really blame Mr Shanmugam – he is paid a massive “salary” to sing praises of the PAP. A multi-million job is at stake here.
Oh my goodness! an amazing article dude. Thank you However I am experiencing issue with ur rss . Don’t know why Unable to subscribe to it. Is there anyone getting identical rss problem? Anyone who knows kindly respond. Thnkx