Originally posted by angel3070:But there may be splits in the party after Lee Kuan Yew is dead.
The game changes after Lee Kuan Yew is dead.
-rubs hands in glee-
*grabs popcorn & sits on couch*
Originally posted by angel3070:But there may be splits in the party after Lee Kuan Yew is dead.
The game changes after Lee Kuan Yew is dead.
thats speculation on your part and may not happen. if use if or may, then if I strike toto, I will retire. all ifs and buts lar.
Originally posted by Rooney9:thats speculation on your part and may not happen.
It may or may not happen.
I pray hard that it will happen.
I want Lee Kuan Yew to die and I want PAP rule to end.
Originally posted by angel3070:My thinking and your thinking is complete opposite. That's interesting.
Like that national identity and nation building will be weak.
That will cause problems for the society.
Then i see us only repeating the mistakes of history. You'd be rid of one dictator only to happily replace him with another for the vague goals of national identity and nation building.
No leader i know of ever mutter those words that didn't ended up bringing death and destruction to those around him.
You don't want democracy, you're just unhappy that someone else has the power and you didn't get to have any.
Originally posted by Stevenson101:You'd be rid of one dictator only to happily replace him with another
How so?
You don't want democracy, you're just unhappy that someone else has the power and you didn't get to have any.
That's a weird thought.
vague goals of national identity and nation building.
Vague? Weak identity, weak bond to country, migration increase.
Originally posted by Stevenson101:Then i see us only repeating the mistakes of history. You'd be rid of one dictator only to happily replace him with another for the vague goals of national identity and nation building.
No leader i know of ever mutter those words that didn't ended up bringing death and destruction to those around him.
You don't want democracy, you're just unhappy that someone else has the power and you didn't get to have any.
Why should such an outcome be even contemplated in the manner stated in your post ?
If such is the outcome for poltical change - would the Berlin Wall have crashed and brought about political change for the East Germans ?
What would Life be for the Poles, the Czechs and the Slovakians - if they did not pushed for the revolution that ushered out the oppressive Communist autocrats that ruled with the support of Soviet Russia ?
What about the Hungarians and Rumanians, Yugoslavian, and Albanians ?
Singapore is similarly ruled by a bunch of disguised "Communist Autocrats" - with the good fortune of having the vestige of British Institutions left behind and allowed to remain intact without allowing its true form to function - but serve to conceal the reality of the Singapore style ONE-Party "Communist Autocraticism" without the "socialism" but with the double-whammy of "harsh capitalism".
Is it any wonder that Singaporeans are finding life harsh, and those who can leave, has left - but have not given up citizenship but waiting for change to allow them to return to contribute in a more open society ?
If change is to happen, Singaporeans will not allow the new political parties to continue with the present status quo.
Singapore's future with the PAP following LKY's vision can only result in a legacy of chaos that LKY's vanity and ambitions have skewed all the institutions that allow checks and balance to exist, and for no single political figure of institution to rule supreme and unquestioned.
Can LKY guarantee that there can be another clone like him to ensure Singapore's will continue where he left off before PM GCT and PM LHL took over ?
If he cannot guarantee a LKY clone to repeat his success, time is running short for LKY to build a sound legacy that will not allow any single individual or instituion to rule unquestioningly supreme, and to rule by fear.
Change is often exciting. A belief of a better tomorrow, a better life for all, from the humdrums of daily living. Mankind are often creatures of habit and find their own existance within a protected shell known as his comfort zone, and yet some would become bored, to seek change for the sake of change based on his perception and beliefs, rousing others to his crusade of change.
For every berlin wall torn down, there is another tale of walls being erected.
The China monarchy was abandoned and Sun Yat Sin thought a new era was borned. He was wrong, and could not withstand even the japs from gobbling Manchuria. Warlords ruled and the common citizens lives were no better, only worse.
Along came an idealistic concept of rule under commie Mao, who maneuvered his position capably and kicked out Warlord Chiang and ruled China. Yet for all the idealism the commie promised, millions of lives were lost.
Similarly, hunger for change, the french bravely stormed the Bastille and remove the head of the sun king, yet they only recieved Napolean the dictator who wrecked havoc in Europe, with the french paying the price.
Equally hungry for change, the Bolsheviks removed the Tsar, and had to be contented with Stalin and being murdered by him.
The Zimbabwe africans remove the colonial whites and ended up with Mugabe.
The lists goes on with 'change'. And here in Singapore, does anyone wants to contend with the Outlaw, with his followers - unconstitutional beasts and denial of freedoms type animals whom smearing others who disagree with them is second nature, possibly murder when power is gain as evidently seen by their rapacity for mind control presently?
You readers be the judge, and it is hope that all are aware that change can only occur at a pace when citizens are prepared and ready for it so that none gets left behind, and not forced upon or manipulated by others.
Originally posted by Atobe:
Why should such an outcome be even contemplated in the manner stated in your post ?If such is the outcome for poltical change - would the Berlin Wall have crashed and brought about political change for the East Germans ?
What would Life be for the Poles, the Czechs and the Slovakians - if they did not pushed for the revolution that ushered out the oppressive Communist autocrats that ruled with the support of Soviet Russia ?
What about the Hungarians and Rumanians, Yugoslavian, and Albanians ?
Singapore is similarly ruled by a bunch of disguised "Communist Autocrats" - with the good fortune of having the vestige of British Institutions left behind and allowed to remain intact without allowing its true form to function - but serve to conceal the reality of the Singapore style ONE-Party "Communist Autocraticism" without the "socialism" but with the double-whammy of "harsh capitalism".
Is it any wonder that Singaporeans are finding life harsh, and those who can leave, has left - but have not given up citizenship but waiting for change to allow them to return to contribute in a more open society ?
If change is to happen, Singaporeans will not allow the new political parties to continue with the present status quo.
Singapore's future with the PAP following LKY's vision can only result in a legacy of chaos that LKY's vanity and ambitions have skewed all the institutions that allow checks and balance to exist, and for no single political figure of institution to rule supreme and unquestioned.
Can LKY guarantee that there can be another clone like him to ensure Singapore's will continue where he left off before PM GCT and PM LHL took over ?
If he cannot guarantee a LKY clone to repeat his success, time is running short for LKY to build a sound legacy that will not allow any single individual or instituion to rule unquestioningly supreme, and to rule by fear.
Who decides what is the national identity we want ? And what happens if i don't agree with that identity ? What is the definition of nation building? How often are those terms used so that one man could incite a group to oppress another?
Just because we have a common agreement on what the problem is does not mean we would have the same ideas on what the solution is.
angel3070 have no interest in creating a national identity, he has already decided what that identity should be.
The change you mention takes place after the collapse of the Soviet Union and it collapsed under its own weight, it has nothing to do with the will of the people or what they wanted. It was decided by the powerful autocrats who decided they could profit and enjoy so much more by being capitalists than communists.
The collapse was already decided in Moscow before the satellite nations would have even dared to make a peep.
Have i ever said i did not want the PAP gone? But how many times have an oppressive presence removed itself only for another to take advantage of the power vaccum to seize power? How easily would the wrong man take power singing the slogans of "National Identity" and "Nation Building", regardless of the vocal minority who disagrees with him?
LKY is not an exception in the annals of history, he is not an alien anamoly that somehow seized power and could manipulate the people to dance his tune. There are dozens more eager to do or say anything to enjoy the same taste of power the moment he is gone.
Those, are who i am worried about.
Originally posted by Atobe:
Why should such an outcome be even contemplated in the manner stated in your post ?If such is the outcome for poltical change - would the Berlin Wall have crashed and brought about political change for the East Germans ?
What would Life be for the Poles, the Czechs and the Slovakians - if they did not pushed for the revolution that ushered out the oppressive Communist autocrats that ruled with the support of Soviet Russia ?
What about the Hungarians and Rumanians, Yugoslavian, and Albanians ?
Singapore is similarly ruled by a bunch of disguised "Communist Autocrats" - with the good fortune of having the vestige of British Institutions left behind and allowed to remain intact without allowing its true form to function - but serve to conceal the reality of the Singapore style ONE-Party "Communist Autocraticism" without the "socialism" but with the double-whammy of "harsh capitalism".
Is it any wonder that Singaporeans are finding life harsh, and those who can leave, has left - but have not given up citizenship but waiting for change to allow them to return to contribute in a more open society ?
If change is to happen, Singaporeans will not allow the new political parties to continue with the present status quo.
Singapore's future with the PAP following LKY's vision can only result in a legacy of chaos that LKY's vanity and ambitions have skewed all the institutions that allow checks and balance to exist, and for no single political figure of institution to rule supreme and unquestioned.
Can LKY guarantee that there can be another clone like him to ensure Singapore's will continue where he left off before PM GCT and PM LHL took over ?
If he cannot guarantee a LKY clone to repeat his success, time is running short for LKY to build a sound legacy that will not allow any single individual or instituion to rule unquestioningly supreme, and to rule by fear.
As i said many time already, Singaporeans are comfort zone seekers, once their social status and economy is stable and life goes on happily, they dun mind the political arena to remain under one rule, at least they can see a light at the end of the tunnel, that is they at least get a glimpse of the future, as for Change, it is a risk, and as comfort zone seekers, they hate risk.
Lau Hum Ku, you cannot take in the Berlin wall or the eastern states of europe seeking for independent as compare to us here, we are not fighting for independency or freedom, you stupid fool
Originally posted by Stevenson101:Who decides what is the national identity we want ? And what happens if i don't agree with that identity ? What is the definition of nation building? How often are those terms used so that one man could incite a group to oppress another?
Just because we have a common agreement on what the problem is does not mean we would have the same ideas on what the solution is.
angel3070 have no interest in creating a national identity, he has already decided what that identity should be.
The change you mention takes place after the collapse of the Soviet Union and it collapsed under its own weight, it has nothing to do with the will of the people or what they wanted. It was decided by the powerful autocrats who decided they could profit and enjoy so much more by being capitalists than communists.
The collapse was already decided in Moscow before the satellite nations would have even dared to make a peep.
Have i ever said i did not want the PAP gone? But how many times have an oppressive presence removed itself only for another to take advantage of the power vaccum to seize power? How easily would the wrong man take power singing the slogans of "National Identity" and "Nation Building", regardless of the vocal minority who disagrees with him?
LKY is not an exception in the annals of history, he is not an alien anamoly that somehow seized power and could manipulate the people to dance his tune. There are dozens more eager to do or say anything to enjoy the same taste of power the moment he is gone.
Those, are who i am worried about.
That is so true.
We can't blame the PAP for everything. The problem with Singapore is that it is an accidental nation, it didn't become a nation through the typical ways that most nations come to be.
So basically, yes, if you suddenly find nationhood trust upon you, lets not talk about culture when what it means to be Singaporean is also a big question.
Where we can prehaps critique the PAP for is their prescriptive model of culture that they tried during the early "nation building" days. Ie. our idea of culture has been falsely tied to our ethnic roots- if you are chinese this is your culture. malay, this is your culture. indian... so on and so forth.
You can speculate a lot of things as to why they did this, but the bottom line is that such an approach will not work in the long run. As opposed to being prescriptive and a regime, culture should be something that is organic, and naturally evolving from the interactions of the populace. Unfortunately a lot of the governments actions have not been too encouraging of culture, but seemingly playing merely a censoring role.
Things like Singlish, our Colonial past (Eurasians are prehaps the true, blue Singaporeans and they feel alienated), the average fashion, thoughts and whims of the common person cannot be ignored. They are what truly makes up the culture of Singapore, if they want Singapore to be vibrant and unique, then ultimately they should CHILL and stop trying to control and define what Singapore is.
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:We can't blame the PAP for everything. The problem with Singapore is that it is an accidental nation, it didn't become a nation through the typical ways that most nations come to be.
So basically, yes, if you suddenly find nationhood trust upon you, lets not talk about culture when what it means to be Singaporean is also a big question.
Where we can prehaps critique the PAP for is their prescriptive model of culture that they tried during the early "nation building" days. Ie. our idea of culture has been falsely tied to our ethnic roots- if you are chinese this is your culture. malay, this is your culture. indian... so on and so forth.
You can speculate a lot of things as to why they did this, but the bottom line is that such an approach will not work in the long run. As opposed to being prescriptive and a regime, culture should be something that is organic, and naturally evolving from the interactions of the populace. Unfortunately a lot of the governments actions have not been too encouraging of culture, but seemingly playing merely a censoring role.
Things like Singlish, our Colonial past (Eurasians are prehaps the true, blue Singaporeans and they feel alienated), the average fashion, thoughts and whims of the common person cannot be ignored. They are what truly makes up the culture of Singapore, if they want Singapore to be vibrant and unique, then ultimately they should CHILL and stop trying to control and define what Singapore is.
i agree in most part of what you wrote.
that said, the reality in singapore, as in malaysia is that it has 3 dominant races here. it will have an ethnic culture closely associated with each race. we may be able to accept or tolerate the culture of others, but it will be hard to assimilate and embrace what's not ingrained in us.
i am not absolutely sure if i understood what you meant by the government tie-ing the notion of nation-building to our ethnic culture. that's a square peg in a round hole.
as you said, this has to be naturally evolved. with as little intervention if i may add.
One thing i notice about democractic countries in our immediate region is that the better performing ones are those that are more ethnically and culturally concentrated (Japan, Korea, Thailand and Taiwan)
Malaysia may be a functional democracy but the racial and ethnic differences are resulting in paralysis of decision making and establishing common concensus ( their minister encouraging speaking of Malay because he feared the loss of ethnic identity? I guess he never asked the Chinese and Indians on their opinion.)
The Philipines and Indonesia have the same problem as well. Religious and ethnic violence still rages on.
You can argue that America is an exception but how long did it took for them since Independence to enact the Equal Rights Amendment? How much blacks had to suffer under the oppression (One can even argue that they're not really equal now either) The American Indians are devastated as a race now. And are the majority whites immigrants really that different? They share the same religion after all and they had two centuries to sort themselves out.
The Chinese have a saying �我�類, 其心必異.
Translated it means if you're not my race, you're going to think differently. It's not as racist as it sounds, neither does it hint of any racial superiority or inferiority. It just means that if i'm born of a particular race i'm going to grow up with different values and piorities in life than that of another race.
In every day life it's not really an issue, i live my way and do not interfere or comment on the lives of Malays and Indians. But it's different under democracy, which is a system that favours the one that would incite hatred and dissent based on those differences and attempt to draw politically correct lines seperating the groups.
Cocky as we may be that Chinese are the majority in Singapore, we are a minority in a region that's not shy about their dislike for Chinese. We needed someone then that weren't part of the major races and LKY fitted the profile(a Chinese he is not).
We are slowly progressing towards a country where people viewed themselves as Singaporean first (hell, i find the news report that an Indian Nsman was beaten up by a Chinese, Malay and Indian hilariously progressive).
A culture and national identity will eventually form whether we like the end results or not, we're a country that still have plenty of people who were adults at Independence when they start passing on the barriers between the races will start to fall. It should not and cannot be done because some hack uses it as a ticket to get more votes
Originally posted by xtreyier:
Change is often exciting. A belief of a better tomorrow, a better life for all, from the humdrums of daily living. Mankind are often creatures of habit and find their own existance within a protected shell known as his comfort zone, and yet some would become bored, to seek change for the sake of change based on his perception and beliefs, rousing others to his crusade of change.
If the X-rated Fraud is not at its best when it utilise its pseudo-intellect to pursue its grand standing performance that leads itself to nowhere.
If "Change is exciting" and lead to "A belief of a better tomorrow, a better life for all" - is the pseudo-intellect implying that such desired for change is a consequence of "boredom, to seek change for the sake of change" - which is NOT to be desired ?
Has the X-rated Fraud repeated its master stroke at Double-XX itself again ?
Is it any wonder that the X-ratef Fraud cannot pull itself out of its pseudo-intellectual mode, as "change is too much an effort for the sake of change only" - and being a Fraud is more exciting that will lead itself to a fraudulent belief of a better tomorrow, and a better fraudulent life for all except to itself and its master that wag its tail ?
For every berlin wall torn down, there is another tale of walls being erected.
The China monarchy was abandoned and Sun Yat Sin thought a new era was borned. He was wrong, and could not withstand even the japs from gobbling Manchuria. Warlords ruled and the common citizens lives were no better, only worse.
With its pathetic claim to being a disinterested student in History, it is amazing that the X-rated Fraud will dare to pass any of its personal views about Historical events.
What possibly could the X-rated pseudo-intellect intend to mean in its statement that -"the China monarchy was abandoned" ?
Which "China Monarchy was abandoned" ? When was the China monarchy or dynasty abandoned, and replaced by who - and which caused "Sun Yat Sen thought a new era was borned" ?
Did Sun Yat Sen waited for the China Monarchy to be abandoned before appearing on the political scene as the Father of Modern Republic of China ?
Along came an idealistic concept of rule under commie Mao, who maneuvered his position capably and kicked out Warlord Chiang and ruled China. Yet for all the idealism the commie promised, millions of lives were lost.
It is amazing that with three lines, the X-rated Fraud will attempt to exercise its pseudo-intellect to make a comprehensive rundown of the History of Mao and his Communist ideology that defeated Chiang Kai-shek.
It is even more entertaining when at the same paragraph, it will also be dismissive of the role that Mao played in bringing China out of the ruins of WW-2 and prevented the return of the Colonial Powers to dominate China in the new 20th Century.
What did the X-rated Fraud consume for its daily diet to bring itself to make such strident claims with so much reckless bravado ?
Similarly, hunger for change, the french bravely stormed the Bastille and remove the head of the sun king, yet they only recieved Napolean the dictator who wrecked havoc in Europe, with the french paying the price.
For one who has shown little interest in history in any part of the World, is the X-rated Fraud certain of its expertise to mix a cocktail of history to suit its own political line of thinking ?
The French King Louis XIV was known as the Sun King and lived through the period of 5 September 1638 till 1 September 1715 - he ruled for a period of 75 years.
If the Sun King was overthrown by a revolution, why did history record that he was succeeded by his five-year old great grandson, Louis de France ?
Napolean Bonaparte was born on 15 August 1769, almost 54 years after the death of the Sun King.
How did the brilliance in the X-rated Fraud see the immediate transition from the demise of the Sun King to a Napolean that wrecked France ?
Equally hungry for change, the Bolsheviks removed the Tsar, and had to be contented with Stalin and being murdered by him.
Did the X-rated Fraud stopped for a moment to think why were the Bolsheviks "hungry for change" - and caused that "hunger" ?
After the overthrow of the Tsar in the Russian Revolution had actually begun in 1905 and consisted of a series of revolution that culminated in 1917 that totally destroyed the Tsarist autocracy, and led to the formation of the Soviet Union as the world knew.
Did Stalin stepped in to takeover from the Tsar - as the X-rated pseudo-intellect intend to have its wider audience to believe in the X-rated rushed knowledge about history by its shallow interest in the historical past ?
Conveniently, with its X-rated method in handling big issues, it will "white-wash" the success of the Bolshevik October Revolution in forming the Bolshevik party led by Vladimir Lenin to form themselves as leaders of the new Soviet Government, and with their revolutionary leader Leon Trotsky.
Stalin was only a minor figure and did not rise into prominence until the Bolsheviks broke into two factions that led to a Civil War over ideology.
Were the Russian murdered by Stalin, or could Russia have survived the onslaught of Hitler's double-cross without Stalin's guiding hands ?
It is a surprise that the X-rated Fraud will cast aspersions on Stalin's methods, when its pseudo-intellect will not see Stalin's ghost in the role of a "Singapore Stalin" that is professionally and realistically played by LKY.
The Zimbabwe africans remove the colonial whites and ended up with Mugabe.
Conveniently, having touched on the continent of Africa, the X-rated Fraud can only see the evils of Mugabe, but have no ability to link the petty of politics of Mugabe with that of LKY.
Was it a deliberate act of deceit that the X-rated Fraud will not even mention that with the removal of Aparthied in South Africa, the South African natives found a voice for themselves in their homeland after more then 100 years of oppression by the Whites who ruled over them.
The lists goes on with 'change'. And here in Singapore, does anyone wants to contend with the Outlaw, with his followers - unconstitutional beasts and denial of freedoms type animals whom smearing others who disagree with them is second nature, possibly murder when power is gain as evidently seen by their rapacity for mind control presently?
For one who believes that - "Change is exciting" and lead to "A belief of a better tomorrow, a better life for all" - is it not a surprise that its positive spark of intelligent hope could be so quickly diminished, even as its inverted propensity to spread fear, despair and negativism will grow as quickly with it deliberate act of dropping the curtain down to block the light ?
Fear can only fear itself, should one with hope have any fear at all ?
What possibly could be the agenda of one who will spread doubt, negativism, and lethargy - even as it will know that "change is a belief of a better tomorrow, a better life for all" ?
One can only suspect that "change" is only available to the "privileged and exclusive", who can "afford" the "changes" that they seek to maintain their status quo, while those who are not in the privileged and exclusive circle are kept out of the loop of "change".
Change in the status quo require too much sacrifice from the priviledged and the exclusive, as their operating philosophy is one of self-interest and self-centeredness
You readers be the judge, and it is hope that all are aware that change can only occur at a pace when citizens are prepared and ready for it so that none gets left behind, and not forced upon or manipulated by others.
It is amazing that the pseudo-intellect will want its wider audience to judge, when it had clearly promoted in its opening statement that "Change is exciting" and lead to "A belief of a better tomorrow, a better life for all" - yet it has to the capacity to place a caveat that change can only occur when citizens are prepared and ready for it.
How does the pseudo-intellect intend to elaborate an ingenious web of deceitful standards that present itself as obstacles for any change to occur ?
How does the pseudo-intellect intend to elaborate the standard of measure to determine when citizens are prepared and ready for change to occur ?
Why should change occur that will result in someone getting left behind ?
Can the pseudo-intellect of a X-rated Fraud guarantee any works that can be 100 per cent fool-proof in successful implementation ?
While a system can be designed to prevent change from being "forced upon or manipulated by others" - who will "police the policemen" ?
It will now seem that the X-rated Fraud is repeating the same regurgitated lines of the master - whose tail when wagged will shake the body of a X-rated Fraudulent Dog.
The master is afraid of change, as change means its own power to wield its tail is lost, and it is not a surprise that the dog will protect its master's tail, as the life of a dog is reflected in the tail.
singapore needs less foreigners. And definitely lesser "FTs" from third world countries. I would appreciate if FTs were really FTs. But those from 女佣国?