TR EMERITUS

By Gilbert Goh Fearful fickle-minded voters According to the latest Registers of Electors in 31 March 2010, a total of 2.311 million Singaporeans are eligible for voting (elections.gov.sg). During the last elections in 2006, a total of 2.150 million Singaporeans were eligible to vote. There is thus only a mere increase of less than 200,000 new voters comprising mostly of people turning 21 years old and foreign-born citizens subtracting those who have passed away or citizens who have moved abroad and did not register as electors. Many Singaporean voters, however, will have the unique opportunity of not being able to vote because of the walk-over phenomenon. 43% (936, 279) of eligible voters, during the last 2006 election, do not have to vote as their constituencies were not contested by an opposition candidate. Many eligible voters were unhappy and pinned the blame on the feeble opposition for not fielding in enough candidates to contest the elections. Our voters are also a fearful lot. During the last elections, there was much hype about the Singaporean voters wanting to vote for the opposition but changed their mind last minute at the polling station when they saw the serial number on the poll card. The government has always assured the voters that the serial numbers are there for registration purposes but due to the many dirty tactics of the government to curb political resistance, voters still fear that there will be targeted for voting reprisal if they voted for the opposition. No one has managed to soothe the nerves of the voters and it is unknown still how much percentage of votes are affected by this fear factor. However, in a closely-contested ward such as the one in Aljunied GRC, every vote counts and this fear factor should have benefit the ruling party considerably. As some voters also work in government-linked companies and others conducting business dealings with the government, this fear factor should be discounted flippantly. This fear factor, I believe, affects the older voters more as they grew up with the PAP and have witnessed how political dissidents have suffered during the past few decades when the ruling party is in power. The fear factor may not affect the younger voters much though and they will vote for the opposition without any deliberation. The government has also all along used estate upgrading to coerce the electors to vote for them. However, voters in the Potong Pasir and Hougang constituency did not waver and forfeited almost $100 million worth of upgrading goodies when they voted for the opposition parties. Nevertheless, such tactics may have worked well in other constituencies with older married voters who cared much for their prized assets. Who does not want a covered walk way and a better transport system in their estates?   Economic Factors – feel good effect The latest GDP figures are out and the economy grows by an astounding 32% during the last quarter. Economic growth has being revised upwards (7-9%) and re-employment has improved considerably. HDB and private home sales have also shot through the roof and prices have nowhere to go but up. Those who buy properties only a year ago can actually sell out now for a decent profit. The good old years are back again. Most governments know that when you hold an election during any booming economic period, the feel-good effect will naturally bring in lots of extra votes. The favourable economic factors will only directly benefit the ruling party when they call for an election now. The government has a weighted advantage here as they can claim credit for the rejuvenated economy though this may not be all true just as it could not be entirely blamed for a economic recession raging beyond it’s control last year. A economic recovery will only fan up the optimism of the people to vote for the same government that helps bring the feel-good sentiments now. The government has everything to benefit from a set of recently-announced prosperous economic factors when they call for an election. Singaporeans are a very pragmatic lot and they will vote for the party that have help them fatten their bank account even though it is for a season. A controlled press has also benefit the government much. A lot of propaganda is published in the official newspapers and this has helped the population to believe that the country is doing well. The government will naturally uses the press as its mouthpiece to trumpet the many achievements that it want the people to believe. For many Singaporeans, freedom of speech and other democratic values seem to be issues that are secondary when compared to more pragmatic pursuits such as a good job and decent salary. However, has our economy really emerge from the last recession unscathed? With growing frustration at the low salary executives are getting these days and under employment a real concern among professional workers, there is every reason to believe that there is a sizeable group out there who are not satisfied with the performance of the current regime even when the country is bathed in a set of rosy economic figures.   Political Candidates – familiarity helps The ruling party has managed to convince the voters that they have carried out laborious stringent selection processes when it comes to putting up the right political candidate for election. Many tea sessions were held before the right candidate is chosen and placed on the pedestal. Man for man, the opposition candidates will not be able to compete with that of the ruling party’s as bright capable people will prefer to join the PAP. Their selection pool will be obviously larger. The intimidating tactics used by the PAP to thumb down opposition candidates previously have also deter many people from joining opposition politics considerably shrinking the pool for selection. We are also unsure how the selection criterion of the opposition party is and only see them weeks before the elections. Constant chopping and changing of candidates also do not help in the familiarity factor here. Most of the MPs from the ruling party are there for at least two to three terms and voters know them very much through walk-about sessions and meet-the-people session (MPS). To voters, familiarity is important and when they see a trusted sincere face, they will vote for the candidate regardless of the party that he is affiliated with. However, we have seen from parliamentary debates, that the performance of the recent lot of new MPs remained sublime at best. Not only are they not well connected with the ground but they could not really think independently and tend to flow along with the views of the majority. Only one or two MPs managed to stand out from the mediocre lot notably Mr Inderjit Singh, MP for Ang Mo Kio-Yio Chun Kang GRC. He not only could speak eloquently but also did it for the welfare of the people and is not afraid to express his views though they were contrary to the ruling party’s stance. For example, he was the only MP who questioned the government’s continued dependence on foreign workers during the last parliamentary sitting when many other MPs supported the move. He reminded me of the popular MP Mr Tan Cheng Bock who never failed to speak his mind even if what he said was against the ruling party stand. Many voters actually patronized the opposition election rallies to see how the candidates fared. If he could speak eloquently and hold himself well, chances are people will vote for him especially when the voter has not pledge any allegiance to any party yet. Many people have told me that they wanted to vote in an opposition party candidate but after attending the rallies, they changed their mind. The opposition parties need to dig deep to search for capable matured candidates and not to take in anyone who want to stand for elections. Singaporeans who are abled and well educated also need to stand up and be counted. Singapore will be a better nation if we have a solid well-grounded opposition force in Parliament to check the current regime.   Civil Servants and foreign citizens – bonus votes The government has a 100,000-strong civil service base and most will certainly pledge alliance to the ruling party. Who will not vote in the one that feeds them especially when there are unfounded rumors that your vote could be traced? It will take the most die-hard fearless anti-PAP civil servant to vote for the opposition. So, the ruling party has a solid headstart it seems. More significantly, during the past four years immediately after the 2008 elections, the ruling party has aggressively brought in hundreds of thousands of foreigners with the main aim of converting them into citizens. As many as 100,000 foreigners were granted citizenship during the past few years, negating the effects of the new voting rights of the mostly anti-PAP overseas Singaporeans. Non-professional foreigners working in coffee shops, factories and cafes were granted citizenships with many first given permanent residences like “toilet paper”. The lax easy way in which foreigners were given permanent residences and then citizenships caused many people to suspect that it was a plot politically conjured by the government to gain votes. Moreover, not many overseas Singaporeans, numbering almost 100,000 or more, have registered to vote as the polling stations are too far for them to travel. The opposition parties must be disappointed to know that the ooverseas Singaporeans as a source of votes for them. The traditionally- strong civil service base and new foreigner citizens will critically improve the votes of the ruling party even though there is still the hot-button controversial foreigner factor. This issue will be a double-edged sword and will remain so until the last vote is cast. Will local Singaporeans used the foreigner issue to vote against the PAP or will foreign-citizen votes sufficient to help them retain power and improve on the GE 2006 performance? Your guess is good as mine.   Conclusion Many Singaporeans will, no doubt, be looking forward to the next general elections with glee. It is the first time that there is a serious enough issue to ensure that voters will want to use their votes to decide their own destiny. All along, previous general elections have used the more-opposition slogan to check the government in parliament. The situation is more dicey now as the general population’s rice bowl is severely affected by the influx of foreigners. Many Singaporean, displaced by cheaper younger foreigners in the work place, will not hesitate to cast their votes for the opposition given the opportunity. Starting salaries of those who found new jobs have also being much lower than in their previous jobs and under employment is also a serious issue. When the pocket is hurt, pragmatic Singaporeans will want to show their displeasure by voting for the opposition. Tens of thousands of new younger voters have also come into the picture now and they may not show kind of the fear that older voters have when it comes to voting for the opposition. A majority of them will want to see more democratic reforms in the country given their exposure to Western-styled values through the media and internet. Major online socio-political blogs such as The Online Citizen and Temasek Review have gained much readership recently and fearlessly talked about political reforms undeterred. Though the opposition may realistically win one or even two GRCs, my fear is that it will not change the status quo very much. The ruling party will as usual comes into power even before a vote is cast and they will rule for another five years with its hybrid oppressive democratic system unless the other main player – the opposition – decides to change tactics and do something drastically different from previous elections.     Other articles by Gilbert Goh: >> Five reasons why it is difficult to dislodge the PAP from power (Part 1) >> Upgrading out of employment: Is it possible? >> Eight reasons why foreign workers will be preferred over local ones   About the Author: Gilbert Goh blogs at transitioning.org, a support site for the unemployed and retrenched in Singapore. It is a non-profit registered societyproviding counselling and group activities free of charge to Singaporeans who need them. The above article was sent to us for publication and was initially published on Gilbert’s site.   EDITORS’ NOTE: Please join our Facebook discussion on this article here and invite your friends to do so as well to raise awareness among fellow Singaporeans.   Copyright © 2009 – 2010 The Temasek Review (If you are going to reproduce this article on your blog or forum, please provide a link back to ours)   Related articles: >> The scourge of personality-driven politics within the Singapore opposition >> Triggering the Singapore political tsunami with a highly motivated minority >> Singaporeans think highly of opposition’s chances in next general election >> What will happen to Singapore if the opposition wins the next general election >> Dr Ng Eng Hen welcomes greater contest from opposition >> Chee slammed again for introducing confrontational politics in Singapore >> Lim Hwee Hua: opposition “trying” to work the ground for next GE >> Let the next GE be a primer for Singapore’s own political tsunami >> Are opposition MPs becoming redundant in Singapore ? >> Why do we need so many strawberry PAP MPs in Parliament? >> PAP MPs complain of fast-pace of parliamentary debates >> Why PAP MPs are no more but a “wayang” >> A disaster in the making: PAP’s “instant tree” mentality >> Yes-men PAP MPs embarrassed themselves by saying instinctively “yes” to wrongly reduce budget  Read More →

The newly formed NGO Singaporeans for Democracy (SFD) will "highlight the practice of political discrimination by the PAP government in its upcoming meeting with the UN Special Rapporteur," according to its latest press release. SFD was formed in January this year to advocate for political and civil reforms in Singapore. It is led by Dr James Gomez who contested as a Workers' Party candidate during the last general election in Aljunied GRC. According to the release, the SFA delegation will have "a face-to-face meeting with the UN Special Rapporteur on racism, Githu Muigai, during his visit to Singapore from 21-28 April 2010." to draw attention to PAP policies which encourage racism, xenophobia and intolerances in Singapore. It did not elaborate on what the policies are. The Straits Times reported yesterday that Mr Muigai will be meeting various PAP ministers on his visit here as well as two NGOs Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2) and the Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics (Home). but did not mention his arranged meeting with SFD. While Singapore is an advanced economy with one of the highest GDP per capita income in the world, it is frequently criticized by international human rights groups for its poor human rights record. Human Rights Watch described Singapore as a "textbook example of a politically repressive state" in its annual report this year. Singapore is a democracy in name only. Its political system resembles more like North Korea with the ruling PAP controlling every single institution of the state from the media, police, civil society and grassroots organizations. U.S.-based NGO Freedom House noted that Singaporeans are unable to vote out the government as the electoral process has been engineered to guarantee a victory for the incumbent.   Please join our Facebook discussion on this article here and invite your friends to do so as well to raise awareness among fellow Singaporeans.  Read More →

作者: 洪振快（历史学者）   据说法国波旁王朝的君主路易十四说过“朕即国家”的话，尽管全世界的君主都喜欢专制，但很少有人会像路易十四那样露骨和无所顾忌。路易十四于1643— 1715年在位，同时代的中国皇帝是康熙，康熙的心里想的未必不就是“朕即国家”，但他显然比路易十四更具“中国特色”的“智慧”——— 经常作些仁君秀，既行专制之实，又享仁君之名。   按照路易十四之后的法国启蒙思想家的“主权在民”思想，国家的主权属于人民，所以不是“朕即国家”，而应该是法国人民说的“我们才是国家”。当然，这种思 想观念是路易十四的时代之后才形成的。在路易十四的时代，世界上其实还没有多少人能够区分君主、政府、国家的概念有什么不同。在中国，虽然先秦的孟子已有 “民为贵，社稷次之，君为轻”的观念，但实际上秦汉以来的二千余年中，爱国即是忠君，忠君亦即爱国，君主与国家在观念上还是混淆不清的。直到西方思想传入 之后，中国人对国家、政府(朝廷)、君主的概念才逐渐形成清晰的现代认识，这其中第一人当推梁启超，他是在经历戊戌变法失败流亡海外的痛苦之后，才获得这 种认识的。   梁启超指出，中国之所以积弱，根源之一就在于国人不能正确区分国家与朝廷的概念，以致爱国心没有用在正确的地方。国家是什么？朝廷又是什么？“今夫国家 者，全国人之公产也。朝廷者，一姓之私业也。国家之运祚甚长，而一姓之兴替甚短。国家之面积甚大，而一姓之位置甚微。”中国有悠久的历史，唐虞夏商周、秦 汉魏晋、宋齐梁陈隋唐、宋元明清，“此皆朝名也，而非国名也”。从殷族的商、姬族的周，到嬴氏的秦、刘氏的汉、李氏的唐、赵氏的宋、朱氏的明，还有蒙古人 的元、满人的清，它们都是一族一姓的朝廷，而不是国家，都是一族一姓的私业，而非全体中国人的公产。然而，中国人常常将国家与朝廷混为一谈，梁启超认为， 这是中国人的大患。   国家和朝廷不分的不良后果，最明显的一点就是爱国变成爱朝廷，甚至变成爱领袖——— 君主。梁启超说：“试观二十四史所载，名臣名将，功业懿铄、声名彪炳者，舍翊助朝廷一姓之外，有所事事乎？其为我国民增一分之利益、完一分之义务乎？而全 国人民顾啧啧焉称之曰：此我国之英雄也。夫以一姓之家奴走狗，而冒一国英雄之名，国家之辱，莫此甚也！乃至舍家奴走狗之外，而数千年几无可称道之人，国民 之耻，更何如也！而我国四万万同胞，顾未尝以为辱焉，以为耻焉，则以误认朝廷为国家之理想，深入膏肓而不自知也。”二十四史中的那些将相们，他们为一姓之 功业杀人，以“万骨枯”换取自己的功名利禄，这本来与爱国无关，但却被各王朝树立为爱国的模范，而国人因不能正确区分爱国家与爱朝廷的差别而跟着礼敬之颂 扬之，实在是可悲可悯。   比梁启超晚一些时候，陈独秀写过一篇题为《我们究竟应当不应当爱国？》的文章，文中说：“要问我们应当不应当爱国，先要问国家是什么。原来国家不过是人民 集合对外抵抗别人压迫的组织，对内调和人民纷争的机关。善人利用他可以抵抗异族压迫，调和国内纷争;恶人利用他可以外而压迫异族，内而压迫人民。”所以， “若有人问：我们究竟应当不应当爱国？我们便大声答道：……我们爱的是国家为人民谋幸福的国家，不是人民为国家做牺牲的国家。”   国家的功能，如陈独秀所说，一是抵抗异族压迫，一是调和国内纷争，前者对外，后者对内。调和国内纷争是就消极方面来说的，积极方面国家还需履行一定的公共职责，如救灾、赈济等。   国家功能的实现，须通过政府去完成。如果政府能完成国家功能，国家就是“为人民谋幸福的国家”;如果政府不能完成国家功能，国家则有可能成为“人民为国家 做牺牲的国家”。人类历史实践中的普遍情况是，政府常常不能完成国家功能，或者完成得很差，这样就有可能出现有政府等于无政府，甚至有政府还不如无政府的 状况。   地理环境决定了中国是一个水旱灾害频发的国家。有一项统计说，中国在民国前的2270年中，见于官方报告的旱灾有1392次，水灾有1621次，可见年年 有灾。因此，中国古代的政府最重要的一项公共职责便是领导抗灾，这可以说是政府合法性的基础之一，灾异现象历来也是帝王们最关心的事。清代的皇帝还要求各 省大员定时汇报雨水、收成、粮价等情况，以便随时了解各省灾情和民生，如出现灾荒可以及时组织赈济、减免受灾地方的税赋。但是，从历史记载来看，受灾得不 到及时救助的情况还是非常普遍。当大规模灾害出现而政府不能履行其职责时，灾民为了生存就会铤而走险，如明末李自成等人领导的农民起义，其主要活动空间是 在陕西、河南，原因即是两省大旱，而明政府却不能组织有效的赈济，使得灾民成为流民，进而升级为暴民。   一个社会，有许多涉及大范围、众多人群的公共事务是无法由其他社会组织去完成的，而只能是由政府去完成。一旦政府不能履行其职责，社会就会无序，公共利益就会受到侵害。比如食品安全、公共卫生安全、环境保护之类的公共事务都要由政府去完成。   人类社会在发展过程中，曾经长期陷入一个难解的困境：即人们需要政府，但政府却不能履行人们期待的外而抵抗异族压迫、内而提供公共服务的国家功能，在很多 情况下还常常演化成一个与民争利、侵害民权的组织。要使政府尽职尽责，人民必须有监督政府的权力，而最有效的监督方式是用投票的方式去选择政府的权力。人们有必要了解一个常识———即梁启超所说的国家不是朝廷(政府)，朝廷可换而国家永存，人们应该爱的是国家而不是朝廷。   来源：《南方都市报》 相关信息：《南方都市报》历史评论版编辑朱蒂因4月11日编发在该版的历史评论《爱国家不等于爱朝廷》而遭停职处理，由广东省委书记汪洋作出批示。该文已遭全面封杀。以上内容是从谷歌cache里面捞出来的。 转录自：大马论坛， 转录者：路人  Read More →