Politics of gratitude
-
Saturday July 3, 2010
Politics of gratitude
INSIGHT DOWN SOUTH
By SEAH CHIANG NEEThe Star Online
New migrants can be the single best thing going for the ruling PAP in 11 years’ time, when they are expected to make up half the population
AT the rate their numbers are increasing, it will not be long before the population of new migrants will start leaving a mark on elections in Singapore.
It is widely believed that the bulk of their support will go “out of gratitude” to the ruling party for giving them a chance to get a new life here.
This has fuelled talk that the immigration policy is partly motivated by politics to keep the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) in power for many more years.
Citizenship was given to some 20,000 foreigners a year in the past two years, half the number of babies born here. This is the highest in modern history here.
An online analyst calculated that in 11 years’ time – by 2021 – half the population here will be foreigners.
Straits Times columnist Rachel Chang said in a random survey she was hard-pressed to find a single new citizen who had anything but admiration for the ruling party.
“The new citizens I have spoken to – originally from India, China, Israel, Myanmar and Malaysia – ranged from the placidly approving to the aggressively proselytising.”
Popular social website Temasek Review also said these people were forming a new support base for the ruling party.
“To a Chinese or Indian immigrant family completely clueless about Singapore’s political baggage or history, the PAP represents a sort of ‘saviour’, without which they will not be allowed to start life afresh here.”
Others dismiss the talk of the PAP deliberately importing citizens to boost votes as merely venting anger against an unpopular policy.
Besides, they argue, the figures, although rising rapidly, are still insufficient to cause any fundamental change in an election now or in the next decade.
Official statistics showed that since the 2006 general election, 70,936 foreigners had become citizens.
Assuming that 25% are children, this amounts to 53,000 new voters.
And if an election is held a year from now, another 15,000 names could be added, pushing the total to 68,000 – or 5.5% of the total votes cast in the last election.
These new migrants will soon be voting in an election in Singapore for the first time.
These 68,000 new voters seem like small potato elsewhere, but here they can make a big difference in an election, especially if they are concentrated in a few constituencies.
They comprise 42% of the 163,700 more people who can vote in the coming election compared with 2006.
The PAP garnered only 747,860 (66.6%) votes when winning the last election, while the opposition polled a total of 375,000 or 33%.
Assuming these 68,000 people had gone to the PAP, its total votes in 2006 would have risen by 9.1%; and if it had gone the other way, the opposition’s votes would have been 18.1% higher.
In real life, of course, an en masse vote by such large numbers is impossible. In fact, few are likely to vote for opposition politicians, whom they know little about (the mainstream media generally avoids them).
The staunch pro-PAP sentiment of new migrants could, at least temporarily, be the single best thing going for the party in a future without Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.
In its 50th year of uninterrupted rule, and led by younger leaders without the vision and ability of Lee’s generation, the party is perceived as losing some of the ground that it held in the past.
After massive election wins since 1959, the People’s Action Party is finding it harder to maintain its winning streak among the new generation of Singaporeans.
(Lee recently said he believed the PAP would win the next two elections, a span of 10 years.)
“In general, the longer political parties stay in power, the more reasons the electorate will have to dislike them,” said a retired journalist who had covered Lee’s brilliant past.
That’s why they seldom last very long. After half a century, the PAP and its policies are encountering increasing public coolness, he said.
Some analysts believe it is difficult to restore its former popularity, except to inject a brand new electorate with a new set of values different from that of many youths here.
The statistics do not include foreign permanent residents (PRs) who are not allowed to vote, but from whose ranks about a third are accorded citizenship.
To say that the government realises their potential political worth is an understatement. In recent years, ministries and party grassroots have been courting, and making, PRs feel at home.
Many of them have responded, an increasing number even joining community grassroots activities that exclude Singaporeans in opposition parties.
In recent years, more have become community representatives, seen as the first step to joining politics within the PAP.
PRs are believed to make up 10% of grassroots leaders, people who work in heartland communities and even help PAP candidates to campaign during elections.
The other side of the coin will be a more divisive entity in Singapore.
The theory that new citizens will always support the ruling party is not taken seriously here.
Most politicians, in and outside the PAP, believe that once they have settled down with their likes and prejudices, they will redistribute their political support.
And the PAP could end up on the wrong end of the stick one day – of finding support from older true-blue citizens and facing hostility from the new citizens.
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/7/3/focus/6590708&sec=focus
-
Straits Times finally admits: New Citizens overwhelmingly support PAP
-
Originally posted by SANTA CLAUSE:
The theory that new citizens will always support the ruling party is not taken seriously here.
Most politicians, in and outside the PAP, believe that once they have settled down with their likes and prejudices, they will redistribute their political support.
And the PAP could end up on the wrong end of the stick one day – of finding support from older true-blue citizens and facing hostility from the new citizens.
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/7/3/focus/6590708&sec=focus
This statement I have to agree.
Older Singaporeans had gone through the hardships of building up the country to what it is today having lived through the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s and had seen the country grow through their contributions. In a sense, they have a stake in the country.
Singaporeans may complain and whine about government policies every now and then, but you won't see them do anything aggressive to upset the social harmony and peace built over the years because they have lived here long enough to know better. (Or they have been conditioned to be compliant - that's another matter)
Most of the new citizens only see what it is today - the spanking new buildings, bright lights, beautiful structures etc. Once the novelty of these features have died off and they begin to understand how the people at the top works, they will not hesitate to switch their alliances and support just at a whim. After all, this is not their native country. They will just go for whoever that will protect their interests. They will definitely not support anybody who will exploit them by withholding their CPF money, charging them higher and higher GSTs, making them pay for higher and higher basic necessity costs etc.
-
excellent analysis, i totally agree.
i like your previous post on how future generations will pay for the sins of PAP
but from a historical standpoint, small islands like Singapore can last around 300 years at best.. in today's fast changing world, i would give it 150..
the actions of people can only decelerate or accelerate the process.
i think the PAP is only representative of what has to happen, rather than of what they caused to happen
-
Is Animal Farm relevant to Singapore?
Wednesday, 10 June 2009
Tan Kin Lian / Columnist
Are we seeing a modern Animal Farm happening in Singapore, where corruption and propaganda are used to control the populace?
ANIMAL Farm is a novel written by George Orwell in 1945. I studied this book for Literature when I was in Secondary Two.It is a satire, depicting events in Russia leading up to and during the Stalin era before World War II. The animals of Animal Farm threw out the owner Mr. Jones and took over the farm, depicting the overthrow of the Czar of Russia during the Russian Revolution in 1917.
The animals, representing the people, looked forward to a better life under a new leadership. Their leaders were the Pigs, and Napolean was the supreme leader. He ruled Animal Farm initially with the support of the animals, but later kept his power through all means, including propaganda, lies and the use of terror.
Two memorable parts of the book were the Seven Commandments and how they became distorted and the story of the loyal horse Boxer.
Seven Commandments
The original seven commandments of Animal Farm were written to reflect equality of the animals, ethical behaviour and the search for a better life:Whatever goes upon two legs enemy
Whatever goes upon four legs or has wings is a friend,
No animal shall wear clothes. No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.Corruption
Later Napoleon and the Pigs (elites) were corrupted by the absolute power they held over the farm. To maintain their popularity with the other animals, they secretly painted additions to some commandments to benefit the pigs while keeping them free of accusation of breaking the laws. The Pigs manage to get away with this because only Benjamin the donkey and Muriel the goat can read to any effective degree, but they were not willing to challenge the pigs.The commandments were changed to accommodate the desire of the leader for a life of luxury and wealth, while ignoring the lot of the other animals.
No animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets.
No animal shall drink alcohol to excess.
Four legs good, two legs better!
No animal shall kill another animal without cause.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.Boxer
I felt strongly attached to the horse Boxer. He was the symbol of the working class: loyal, kind, dedicated and respectful. He was physically the strongest animal on the farm, but naïve and slow. His two maxims were “I will work harder” and “Napoleon is always right”, reflecting his strong and unquestioning loyalty to the leader. He was, to a large extent, taken in by the propaganda of the leaders. His work ethic is often praised by the Pigs, and he is set as a prime example to the other animals.When Boxer was injured and could no longer work, Napoleon sent him off to the knacker’s yard to be slaughtered and used to make glue and leather. He deceived the other animals, saying that Boxer died peacefully in the hospital and that the ambulance was an old knacker’s van that hadn’t been repainted.
Transformation
Towards the end of the story, the pigs learned to stand on two legs and regarded the four-legged populace as inferiors (i.e. lesser morons). They started to wear Mr. Jones’ clothes, slept in beds and drank alcohol.They brutally ordered the killings of the confessing animals (who were forced to confess to crimes they did not commit).
The slogan “Four legs good, two legs bad!” was later changed to “Four legs good, two legs better!” as the pigs became more human.
Relevance to Singapore
Although this book was written as a satire to the Russian Revolution, some bloggers have started to compare it with what is happening in Singapore today.There are grounds for the people of Singapore to be concerned. We have seen the good old values of Singapore being replaced by new values. In the past, Singaporeans were more honest in their dealings and had a stronger sense of caring for each other. In recent years, ethics and honesty are being set aside in the pursuit if wealth. There was less care or concern for the welfare of the weak and the poor.
Even the pursuit of equality was now thrown aside unashamedly. Someone told me that this is now replaced by the expression: “Look at the fingers of your hand – do you find them of equal length?”
I cannot help but think of Boxer as reflecting the workers of Singapore – hard working, dedicated and loyal, but were let down when they grow old. After a lifetime of work, they could not afford to retire and were asked to continue working. They have no security, no pension, no savings for old age (many lost through the credit linked notes) and cannot afford the expensive health care.
I have seen many examples in our society where business and public leaders say one thing but acted in a different way. They declare a concern for the welfare of the customers, but continued to make excessive profit at their expense. They declare a strong belief in corporate governance, but felt it proper to hide information “in the interest of the organisation”. Similar examples can be found in the public realm. If one is used to distorting the truth, in due course, one will believe the distortions to be true!
I like to mention the wise old donkey Benjamin in the story. He could read as well as any pig, but preferred to have a low profile. Benjamin had known about the pigs’ wrongdoing the entire time, but he said nothing to the other animals. He represented the cynics in society or the intellectuals who had the wisdom to stay clear of the purges, but take no action themselves.
Why we employ FT? Support LHL policy !!
Source: http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?t=38336
Singapore PRC PR Zhang Yuan Yuan Flashed Nric on Chinese TV and Proclaimed Loyalty to China Publicly.
Why singapore govt will want to mass import PRCs into singapore
1. Cheap labour , bring down cost of labour to attract more investment from foreigners
2. To further increase the chinese population and dilute the the races , chinese in sg birthrate is only 1.2 compared to another race which is 3+ ( u know who) , they are very worried about this increasing trend
3. If the PRCs chose to settle down here and become citizen , they will continue to vote for PAP in election as PAP are pro-foreigners
4. If the PRCs choose settle down here and continue to be PR , after working till 50 and beyond and F.O from our country , Singapore stand to reap the work they have contributed and the government don't have to take care of them when they are old
5. If they didn become PR or citizen at all , they are still contributing and helped to keep the cost of wage down ( those prc beer girl , road cleaners , construction worker etc )
6. When singapore population increase to say 6mil through mass migration, they earn more through tax and additional income ( electricity bills...phone bills...bus etc) as compared to when singapore native population is only 3mil
As you can see , it's a win-win-win-win-win situation for singapore govt as a whole , i have a better chance of winnning election , i have a better economy report card , i can earn more $$$
never forget the PAPs are a bunch of selfish people who only think of making more and more money , who cares about YOUR feeling? , how much per kg is your feeling worth compared to $$$$ and benefit i stand to reap if i mass import robots from PRC. -
So sad.