Elections 2011: Xiaxue, why you so liddat? A serious response to “Vote Wisely”.

Before I begin- I want this to be very clear- I respect Wendy a lot. She’s accomplished. I see her as a remarkably intelligent person who knows how to get what she wants, and she is admirably straightforward and consistent in her thoughts. This is not a personal attack on Wendy- this is an alternative perspective to her’s. I do this because the elections are important, it’s more important than Xiaxue, it’s more important than me, and it’s most important that you really get a full sense of all the information that is available to you. Vote wisely.

PS: If the above seems redundant to you, that’s because you’re an intelligent person. Nice to meet you.

Original post can be found here.

1) Everybody’s ANGRY

It is ridiculous. People are all angry over SOMETHING in their lives. Be it that buying a HDB used up all their savings or that they are losing hair… It is so convenient please, to vent all that frustration of your unhappiness on your government – the PAP!

Suddenly it’s not your own fault that driving a taxi is not enough to feed your 6 children. It is the PAP’s. What an awesome liberating feeling! Yeah PAP ask you to keep fucking without contraception so it is their responsibility to give you welfare!

People always yakking about how PAP doesn’t help the poor… Nicole Seah even said her stupid inspiration for dabbling in politics is because she saw an old lady with a roof over her head but no food…

EXCUSE ME? THE ROOF FLY TO ABOVE HER HEAD BY ITSELF AH? Must give her roof must provide food everyday… Must help her wipe her ass or not?

Yes. I agree. There is a lot of anger, frustration and resentment in the atmosphere, and a lot of it seems rather unjustified and excessive. I wish Singaporeans could be calm, rational and systematic in their thoughts and approach to politics.

Unfortunately, as demonstrated by Wendy herself, this doesn’t seem to be the case. I’m guessing this has to do with the fact that we don’t have much practice when it comes to civilized disagreement.We’re kind of like angry whining children- stomping our feet, as Wendy describes. This needs to change, but it will take time. We need a co-operative mindset more than a competitive one. I’m fairly certain that our politicians know this- my theory is that they’re appealing to the masses by emulating their style. All parties are doing this. The overwhelming assumption is that if one party is right, the other party must be wrong, that there is one superior, “best” way to lead a country, and that either the PAP or the opposition has right of way.

In a sense, the PAP has indirectly brought this upon itself. After all, there has been only one party dominating the government for decades. I would argue that the PAP’s economic policies- wonderful, quality policies that lifted an entire generation out of poverty- had the unfortunate side-effect of turning a lot of Singaporeans into selfish, materialistic and self-obsessed kiasu buggers- and I think it’s that kind of mindset that we see being reflected today by irrational anti-PAP heretics.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t help the poor. We should. But everything needs to be in balance. To say that the rich and able should constantly be giving to the poor, needy or lazy is a childish idealistic notion that simply won’t work. We must simply accept that some people suffer in life – we can try to limit it, but we cannot eradicate it.

I agree that everything needs to be in balance, and I agree that demanding the rich and able to constantly support the poor is idealistic. I even agree that we “must simply accept that some people suffer in life”. I’d like to focus on the line “We can try to limit it, but we cannot eradicate it.” How effectively are we limiting it? We can never be 100% perfect- so how much is good enough? Is it okay if 10% of Singaporeans suffer needlessly? Suppose we were talking about illness. We can try to limit viruses from spreading, but we cannot eradicate them. Again, how effectively are we limiting them? If we could doing better, should we? Every year, Singaporeans will fall prey to dengue fever. And we try our best to limit it.

The question I want to ask is: Are we limiting suffering and poverty in Singapore to the best of our ability? 90% effectiveness? 80% effectiveness? How much is okay? It should be a full time job for some to go around correcting this. I don’t see this being resolved without our present political system, or in most of the systems in the world. We need a global cultural shift to start correcting these inefficiencies… I’m not sure if either voters or politicians are interested in thinking that far ahead.

People like to hear things like TAX THE RICH LAH! REDUCE MINISTER’S PAY! WHY SHOULD THEY EARN SO MUCH WHILE WE ARE SUFFERING?

Excuse me? WHY? Who is stopping you from being a hardworking student, getting a scholarship, and becoming minister yourself? Who is stopping you from setting up your own business after saving up money from doing several jobs? YOU THINK ALL THESE PEOPLE DIDN’T WORK HARD?

You want to blame, you blame yourself. Don’t think just because you are faring worse than others everyone else has to contribute to a better livelihood for you? FUCK THAT. You know what is COMMUNISM not?

You want cheapo HDB flats… Singapore’s land is so limited, HOW CHEAP YOU WANT? You think what? HDB grow like mushroom? All you need is soil, sunshine, water and some love? NO LEH A LOT OF BANGALA NEEDED TO BUILD THEM!

Either be contented or blame yourself!

I don’t like the prices here… Move out lor!

I agree with a lot of this, and you can see that I spoke about this here: The analogy I like to use is that of the relationship between students and school administration. It’s kind of silly for an average student to complain about the school administration, even if they’re unreasonable- because the best thing that a student can do for his own future is to focus on his own studies rather than spend his time writing up petitions after school. I’m sure Wendy and I both agree very strongly on that.

But it’s a bit more complicated than that.

“If you don’t like the prices here, move out lor!” That’s a very cruel and insensitive remark to make, and it’s been part of PAP rhetoric for a very long time. It’s immature and childish, because it’s a position of no-compromise. Boys use that line on their girlfriends when they refuse to budge. “If you don’t like my smoking, break up with me lah!” It’s very insulting to the relationship, which should be built on compromise, negotiation and mutually beneficial outcomes.

People don’t want “cheapo flats”, they just want it to be marginally more affordable. I don’t think that’s a completely unreasonable request.

I’m not saying don’t blame the PAP for anything that has gone wrong. Sure, they make mistakes. Big mistakes that may have cost our country billions. I also don’t like all the foreign construction workers in SG. Don’t like it that my future HDB so puny and still must ballot. And maybe….. a change will do us good.

But will it? Why are people making their choices only focusing on the mistakes that were made, the limitations that the PAP has? I’m focusing on the good work the PAP did.

Am I willing to sacrifice our safety, our political stablity, our ultra low unemployment rate, our high standard of living… all to try out some new Ah mao Ah kow leaders? (No offence to Chen Show Mao) I don’t want leh!

Change from what to what? If our bar is at “GOOD” now, you want to change it to “EXCELLENT”? You think opposition can do it? What if they change from “GOOD” to “FUCKED”? There is no perfect system. “GOOD” is good enough for me.

And I trust. I believe PAP is listening. I trust that they will strive to improve our lives, and I believe they will do a good job because they have proven they can do a good job.

p/s: For the above I’m addressing people who are 100% against PAP, not those who just wish to have some opposition voices in the government.

On this last bit, me and Wendy are both in agreement. I too have a bone to pick with people who are 100% against PAP. I am not against the PAP. I love the PAP. The PAP has accomplished great things. It’s one of the best political parties in the history of mankind, and that’s not an exaggerated claim to make. I am against single-party dominance of any kind. If the Worker’s Party has 80 seats in Parliament after GE2016, you can bet that I will be campaigning for the PAP in GE2021. Why?

It’s a simple premise- Nobody knows best. Super-dominant forces are inherently dangerous.

The opposition will not be able to change the bar from “Good” to “Fucked”- only the PAP has the power to do that. Let me repeat myselfcarefully here- I’m not saying that the Opposition is good or the PAP is bad- I’m saying that only a super-dominant force has the power to create such circumstances. Can you think of such an instance? US Foreign Policy, perhaps? Or the sub-prime mortgage crisis? Too much power in anybody’s hands is a dangerous thing, however good their intentions, however good their track record.

A chicken lovingly clucks at its farmer for a thousand days, until on day 1001 he brings a chopper instead of chickenfeed. We are the chickens, clucking away importantly. The PAP is like the farmer, lovingly providing for us. Single-party dominance is the chopper.

Am I saying the PAP will fuck things up? No, I can’t say that with any certainty. But I’m saying- get rid of the chopper. We live in a world full of uncertainty, more so now than ever before- and the future is going to be even more crazy. (Personally, I’m excited.) Can die-hard PAP supporters guarantee the rest of Singapore that the PAP will never lose its way? They can’t. Every institution in the history of mankind- ultimately either crumbled or adapted and changed beyond recognition. (Think of the mighty Roman and Egyptian empires, and look at what is happening to the USA today.)

Wendy asks herself, “Am I willing to sacrifice our safety, our political stablity, our ultra low unemployment rate, our high standard of living… all to try out some new Ah mao Ah kow leaders?” It’s a false dilemma.

Firstly, no opposition politician is going to be a leader. They’re only going to be Members of Parliaments, not Ministers.

Secondly- our safety, stability, standard of living and unemployment rate are not pegged to our political leadership. Thank Buddha, Jesus and Allah for that- because if it was, we’re screwed. Our political leaders leave all the time, anyway! Abdullah Tarmugi and Jayakumar are leaving, and nobody seems to be very bothered by that. Our stability is dependent primarily on the robustness of our civil service. It’s ordinary Singaporeans who keep Singapore running! It was our visionary firebrand leadership in the post-war years that created the systems that are still operational today- and these visionaries, in my opinion, were largely non-partisan.

Thirdly- all of those wonderful things about Singapore are still very much at risk even with PAP dominance. In fact, I believe that they are even MORE at risk when we have a super-dominant force in control- it’s less risky on a day to day basis, but it’s explosively risky in the worst case scenario. This was exactly the reason why the last global financial crisis happened- financial analysts and risk forecasters and the like were convinced that they were safe because they had such a great track record. Nobody bothered to listen to anybody who thought otherwise.

2) Marine Parade GRC

You don’t want Tin Pei Ling as your MP, but you want ABDUL SALIM HARUN??

Tin Pei Ling – Education: Crescent Girls’ School, Hwa Chong JC, NUS Bachelor in Social science.

Pros: Seems motherly. Volunteered for last 7 years at YoungPAP.

Cons: Likes Kates Spade, act cute, airheaded.

Abdul Harun - Education: Woodlands Secondary School, ITE, Part-time Diploma in RETAIL MANAGEMENT. Works as a warehouse assistant.

Cons: Cannot even lead in a warehouse want to lead the country. Education unimpressive. Blog shows he cannot write proper English and uses words like “our belove Singapore”.

Tin Pei Ling is better qualified than Abdul Harun, by far. The important difference is that Pei Ling will be a member of the ruling party, while Harun will be a member of the opposition. That’s actually a very big difference. I put it to you that the opposition Members of Parliament don’t actually have to be very qualified- because their primary role is to question and challenge the ideas that are generated, and that doesn’t really require academic qualifications. I would say the most important thing that an opposition MP should have is an alternate perspective- and Harun, coming from an ITE background, is likely to present a side of Singapore that nobody else in Parliament is genuinely familiar with. I think that can be a good thing. The more sides presented, the more perspectives consulted, the better the ultimate decisions will be- or at least that’s how I feel about things.

On a slightly unrelated note, It’s kind of funny to imagine Wendy, with her blonde hair and big beautiful eyes- perhaps clutching her MENSA certificate for added authority- pointing at Nicole Seah and going “Attention Whore!” (In their defense, I am totally an attention whore too. Why are you even reading this?)

George Yeo. It is not everyday that we get a minister who is as good as him. Even online where the sentiment against PAP is very strong, most of the comments about Minister George Yeo (hereby known as GY) are all pretty positive.

We are very, very lucky to have him as one of Singapore’s ministers.

For those of you in Aljunied GRC – please consider this before voting: If Workers’ Party wins, we, as a nation, loses George Yeo as a minister.

I fear a bleak future for our nation should the PAP topple. And don’t say it won’t! My god the day we have a coalition government our country will go to the dogs.

As human beings we tend to obsess over losing what we have, while overlooking what we might have already lost by negligence. George Yeo is a wonderful human being and it’s a shame that we’ll lose him from Parliament should the Worker’s Party win Aljunied GRC. Personally, I have faith in the man- he’s highly accomplished, talented, humble and driven- and I firmly believe that if he wants to contribute to society, he will find a way, and people will let him.

If we’re talking about how terrible it is to lose one awesome minister, then we have to get some perspective and take into account how terrible it is to lose hundreds of equally talented people. Think of all the people that we have already lost, and will continue to lose- tens of thousands of talented, intelligent, hardworking and passionate Singaporeans have left our shores over the years and will continue to leave because they are so deeply dissatisfied with the status quo. Surely amongst some of these sons and daughters of Singapore we have lost men and women who are even more passionate, talented and hard-working than George Yeo! The two issues are not unrelated- if we can play a part in making Singapore a more tolerable place for the people who feel repressed, we will see more talent blooming on our soil than we did in the 1960s.
Wendy fears a bleak future for our nation should the PAP topple. I find that bleak in itself! Why is Singapore so dependent on the PAP, and why doesn’t it seem to ever occur to everybody to question this dependence? We’re constantly reminded that we shouldn’t be dependent on water from Malaysia, in case they cut it off. We should diversify our portfolios instead of investing all our money in a single venture, in case it blows up. Yet strangely, it has taken so long for Singaporeans to realise that it’s pretty dangerous to hand over all of government to a single political party!

As Wendy herself suggests, “Vote the party that will move our nation forward.” Excessive dependence is a dangerous thing. And remember, we all want what’s best for Singapore, for ourselves, for our children, for our future. The one thing I care about even more than the outcome of the General Elections is how Singaporeans handle their disagreements. Please, be civil and respectful- we’re all in this together. Majulah Singapura!