Singapore Politics
I must admit: I am pro-PAP.
How difficult must it have been to raise a country from the ruins up to where it is today? Yet, PAP did it. The system of governance that we currently live in does have its own flaws. But consider first the fact that countries all over the world -- from pro-democratic America to Myanmar currently still under military junta to Communist China -- have been shown to be more greatly flawed.
America possesses a highly polarised society, with the poor being very poor and the rich being very rich. Their policy on owning arms has opened the floodgates to violence and hatred. The numerous avenues for the public to voice their views have led to political leaders spending precious resources to satiate the unending demands of the public. It is as current Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew once said prior to the merger between Singapore and Malaya in the 1940's, that if his power as a ruling party is not in jeopardy, he would be in a much better position to rule Singapore more efficiently. A leader that does not have to pend to the desires of the populace is much better equipped to make tough but necessary decisions; but a leader that is not subjected to checks and balances is at high risk of abusing his power.
Communist countries have often been seen as highly oppressive. They pursue the noble aim of equality, sharing in essence very similar aims with democracy. The difference is that while democracy empowers the people, communism empowers the government. And when that happens, when the government is fully in control, there is nothing to prevent the leaders from usurping the money placed under their control. There is no motivation for the leaders to set, much less achieve, difficult goals. Meanwhile, the people suffer from poverty and deprivation.
And if you feel that Communism is oppressive, the political method of military junta is even more so. While China denies people their right to free choice by denying them access to the arts and to free, unbiased education, Myanmar pummels the people into sheer fear. Using military might, soldiers are given the authority to remove the people who even pose a slight threat. The people are denied opportunities to weaponry and other ways of protecting themselves, and so are pretty much at the mercy of the political rulers. In this way, the leaders maintain order, albeit a forced one.
Singapore, however, has so far managed to tread a fine line between all these extremes, resulting in a balance that is close to perfection. We do possess an army capable of taking down any threat from outside the nation as well as within the nation. And they will be called upon should any internal chaos result. Yet, the army does not actively maintain control within the city. And while Singaporeans are empowered, this empowerment is conditional. The government has shown on numerous times their ability to strike back when their rule had been threatened. Some say that this has resulted in a situation much like Jigsaw's twisted mind games in the popular movie trilogy Saw: people are offered a voice, but with conditions so strict and so tight that it would be better to stay away from attempts. While it is in part true, that the standard procedures have been made complicated and risky by the government, it is also only understandable. If voicing out becomes so simple and without any risk of repercussions, any person on the street could throw stones at the government freely. It then goes without saying that the government's image would be impacted very severely. In addition, their decision-making opportuinites would be choked by their attempts at appeasing the public.
The PAP, in particular, have set themselves up as a no-nonsense party. Whatever they say can only be contested in the privacy of friends or acquaintances. And it has served to bring about a tremendous orderliness about the society at large. There was one particularly striking incident when an American representative came down to Singapore to learn more about how we had been governing out people: we had, at that time, raised taxes and only elicited little more than a sigh of resignation from the people. American leaders were impressed, for a similar incident in America shortly ago had resulted in large-scale protest by the American people. The leaders of Singapore clearly have a huge amount of restraint upon the people of Singapore. Within this noose, the people are allowed as much freedom as they possibly desire -- but only within the set boundaries. Yet, without this, there would be widespread chaos. There is no other more effective method.
And so, I am pro-PAP. No other opposition party has set themselves up as viable alternatives. Most of their rallies involve shooting down the PAP. They do not propose anything new. I suspect that this is due, in large part, to the fact that the PAP has gotten it right so far. Their 100% success track record of 42 years clearly attest to this fact. Can the opposition propose anything new? Perhaps, but so far, not yet. And so, they are resigned to attempting to weaken the PAP's stand. In itself, this is a very weak case to contest for an election. And so, the opposition has failed time and time again to wrestle for power with PAP.
My fear now lies with the currently disgruntled citizens of Singapore. Majority of the current voters had come from riotous times, and they have seen the PAP bring them from a climate of fear into a secure lifestyle today. The newer, upcoming voters, however, have from young been thrust into high-pressue environments known as schools, where grades are everything that matters. Many of them blame the government. Many of them do not see that when people are our only resource, we need a method of measure to rank them. Should anyone at all be able to conjure up a new, accurate method, an honorary medal ought to be conferred upon them. Educational failing is an epidemic that is triggered where there are schools. Still, many students believe that the government could have done something about it, but has not. I have come across many of them, and they are fervent opposers.
I trust that the ruling power of the PAP will be severely contested in the time to come. It will be a tremendously exciting time then, and whoever comes out the winner would definitely be more attuned to the new demands of this new society. Change is coming, and either the PAP will get replaced or they will become more efficient. Only time will tell.
posted by Jerome @ 12:13 pm
0 comments
