i'm a quitter and i'm leaving singapore.... join me
-
@soul_rage: I am sure foreigners in SG also feel this discrimination.@Boomslang4829: For sure it's politics dude.
-
Originally posted by Boomslang4829:
I know I'm going to catch some flak for saying this, but here's my personal opinion about US politics compared to SG politics.
The basis of the US gov't is that it's a free democracy. However, that's the ideal situation, and reality is much more dissapointing as usual. You see, in the US, most politicians speak and act just to stay in office. It's all about self prevervation, so they don't make the decisions that are best for the country as a whole, but what is most advantageous to the electorate in their district. Therefore, there is no long term decision making either, just enough action to get voted into office in the next elections. Many laws that are signed into effect are hundreds, if not thousands of pages long, because they contain favourable earmarks for the respective policiticans that will sign the law.
For example, if the person who created the law wants a policitican from Iowa to sign the bill, he will include a part where it gives farmers in Iowa some kind of subsidy. This is why the bills have so many pages, since so many politicians need to have something that benefits them before they will sign it.
And then here are private companies that represent industry, that lobby politicians to sign or not to sign certain law by making campaign contributions to them during the next elections. Call it bribery if you will.
SG in reality is also a free democracy, but seriously, the politicians aren't under the gun to keep the electorate happy. So, they can do what they please, which might be good or bad.
Case in point, the recent hullaballo about the US going into possible default, and the debt ceiling needing to be raised. Well, Congress was mired in so much partisan bickering that we almost did go into default, but was saved by a BS short term plan which still got our bond rating downgraded.
However, if a similar situation arose in SG, the PAP, with it's single-party system, just passes whatever law immediately without any internal bickering.
Now, don't get me wrong, internal checks and balances in a 2 or more party system is required in a fair democracy. But nowadays, partisan politics has become childish to the point that no one belives in the US govt much anymore.
So once again, pros and cons, even with the political system. The system is SG is coldly efficient, but the danger becomes that the policitics get too big-headed and arrogant, which appears to be the case nowadays. They are ruling like a polical elite class. I imagine if SG has the same electoral system as the US, where the MPs must live in their respective wards, they will be more careful in making decisions that affect their fellow residents. The US system gives you plenty of freedom, and I dare say sometimes too much of it. In the end, a democracy only works if the electorate are educated enough to make the right decisions when voting. This is, sadly, never the case.
Most ppl agree that Obama hasn't been able to do anything the economy, although I'm glad he didn't get us mired in the war in Libya.
See, if you live in any country long enough, you'll start complaining about the political system too! :)
No good reason why Singaporeans who migrate overseas have no complaint or fewer complaints about the incumbent in the overseas countries. No government is similar to PAP overseas.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
yuck!!!! sway sway!!!, where is the mod, sleeping ar!!!
Mod miss it completely.
-
In response to sgdiehard,
I concur with what Boomslang4829 said about US politics. To be really honest, it's a total mess right now. The current president is pretty useless at getting things done, lots of hot air. The current congress is pretty useless at anything except bickering with the White House. You have petty politics going on, and NO thoughts for the progress of the country. It's both the bane and boon of the example George Washington made when he stepped down after 2 terms.
On one hand, you have the idea that no one should hold onto power indefinitely, so they MUST step down after 2 terms. On the other hand, you pretty much end up with politicians that are in it for the short term (their horizon is at most 8 years out)
Yet, the SG political system is not ideal as well, because we are allowing leaders to hold onto positions indefinitely, and passing down the baton to related people. We have a system where the leaders turn a deaf ear to the citizens.
Still, there is ONE important thing that I think we in Singapore should learn from US, and it is that everyone is OPEN about who they support. They are not worried to tell you in the face that they are a Democrat or Republican supporter. In Singapore, our politics is still immature, the govt still must tell everyone that our vote is secret. The point is, there is NO NEED to keep it secret. Everyone should be able to vote without fear of consequences.
-
Originally posted by Boomslang4829:
I know I'm going to catch some flak for saying this, but here's my personal opinion about US politics compared to SG politics.
The basis of the US gov't is that it's a free democracy. However, that's the ideal situation, and reality is much more dissapointing as usual. You see, in the US, most politicians speak and act just to stay in office. It's all about self prevervation, so they don't make the decisions that are best for the country as a whole, but what is most advantageous to the electorate in their district. Therefore, there is no long term decision making either, just enough action to get voted into office in the next elections. Many laws that are signed into effect are hundreds, if not thousands of pages long, because they contain favourable earmarks for the respective policiticans that will sign the law.
For example, if the person who created the law wants a policitican from Iowa to sign the bill, he will include a part where it gives farmers in Iowa some kind of subsidy. This is why the bills have so many pages, since so many politicians need to have something that benefits them before they will sign it.
And then here are private companies that represent industry, that lobby politicians to sign or not to sign certain law by making campaign contributions to them during the next elections. Call it bribery if you will.
SG in reality is also a free democracy, but seriously, the politicians aren't under the gun to keep the electorate happy. So, they can do what they please, which might be good or bad.
Case in point, the recent hullaballo about the US going into possible default, and the debt ceiling needing to be raised. Well, Congress was mired in so much partisan bickering that we almost did go into default, but was saved by a BS short term plan which still got our bond rating downgraded.
However, if a similar situation arose in SG, the PAP, with it's single-party system, just passes whatever law immediately without any internal bickering.
Now, don't get me wrong, internal checks and balances in a 2 or more party system is required in a fair democracy. But nowadays, partisan politics has become childish to the point that no one belives in the US govt much anymore.
So once again, pros and cons, even with the political system. The system is SG is coldly efficient, but the danger becomes that the policitics get too big-headed and arrogant, which appears to be the case nowadays. They are ruling like a polical elite class. I imagine if SG has the same electoral system as the US, where the MPs must live in their respective wards, they will be more careful in making decisions that affect their fellow residents. The US system gives you plenty of freedom, and I dare say sometimes too much of it. In the end, a democracy only works if the electorate are educated enough to make the right decisions when voting. This is, sadly, never the case.
Most ppl agree that Obama hasn't been able to do anything the economy, although I'm glad he didn't get us mired in the war in Libya.
See, if you live in any country long enough, you'll start complaining about the political system too! :)
I like the term "coldly efficient" . I guess at the end of the day, the US is such a big continent with many different states, and you have cities and country sides, and wilderness, your economy can be self sustaining, so you have lots of room to play with.
Singapore, just a little dot, not a lot of space to play around with, not an excuse for high handed politics though.
Thanks for sharing.
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
In response to sgdiehard,
I concur with what Boomslang4829 said about US politics. To be really honest, it's a total mess right now. The current president is pretty useless at getting things done, lots of hot air. The current congress is pretty useless at anything except bickering with the White House. You have petty politics going on, and NO thoughts for the progress of the country. It's both the bane and boon of the example George Washington made when he stepped down after 2 terms.
On one hand, you have the idea that no one should hold onto power indefinitely, so they MUST step down after 2 terms. On the other hand, you pretty much end up with politicians that are in it for the short term (their horizon is at most 8 years out)
Yet, the SG political system is not ideal as well, because we are allowing leaders to hold onto positions indefinitely, and passing down the baton to related people. We have a system where the leaders turn a deaf ear to the citizens.
Still, there is ONE important thing that I think we in Singapore should learn from US, and it is that everyone is OPEN about who they support. They are not worried to tell you in the face that they are a Democrat or Republican supporter. In Singapore, our politics is still immature, the govt still must tell everyone that our vote is secret. The point is, there is NO NEED to keep it secret. Everyone should be able to vote without fear of consequences.
you may be pleased to know that there is a big change at home right now. From the last GE, people are openly supporting oppositions, we have oppositions in every single constituency. Nobody cares if the voting is secret and are opening declaring who they vote for. To the extent, at the PE, all candidates, including those with PAP background are quick to dissociate themselves from the PAP.
For the first time, the SM and the MM announced their departure from the cabinet, for the first time, in response to the election results, 3 ministers announced their "departure" from the cabinet. So LHL is making changes.
Our people are more matured now politically, and also there are more credible opposition members now then ever before.
What analysts conclude is that Singaporeans want changes that are gradually and controlled, nothing drastic. The point is, changes are taking place, some like it faster, some like it slower. But contrary to the US, we cannot take short term view.
-
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
you may be pleased to know that there is a big change at home right now. From the last GE, people are openly supporting oppositions, we have oppositions in every single constituency. Nobody cares if the voting is secret and are opening declaring who they vote for. To the extent, at the PE, all candidates, including those with PAP background are quick to dissociate themselves from the PAP.
For the first time, the SM and the MM announced their departure from the cabinet, for the first time, in response to the election results, 3 ministers announced their "departure" from the cabinet. So LHL is making changes.
Our people are more matured now politically, and also there are more credible opposition members now then ever before.
What analysts conclude is that Singaporeans want changes that are gradually and controlled, nothing drastic. The point is, changes are taking place, some like it faster, some like it slower. But contrary to the US, we cannot take short term view.
Yep, I know. I was part of the voting contingent overseas, for both elections this year.
The issue is, there is still a huge chunk of the population that are voting for the incumbent for fear of consequences. There is still this irrational fear that the govt will 'fix' them if they vote based on their hearts.
Until this fear is removed completely, Singapore is still immature as a democracy because you cannot see the true support that each political group has.
I do not have any issues with people who really truly support the PAP. I have issues with people who vote for the PAP because (1) they are fearful, (2) they cannot be bothered.
But yes, I agree with you, that things are changing. I only hope that the changes are in time to negate or neutralize the policies that the PAP introduced some time back, which is to grab foreigners from 2nd-class cities and convert them to citizens in the hopes that these new citizens are grateful to the PAP and will vote for the PAP no matter what.
-
Originally posted by Boomslang4829:
I know I'm going to catch some flak for saying this, but here's my personal opinion about US politics compared to SG politics.
The basis of the US gov't is that it's a free democracy. However, that's the ideal situation, and reality is much more dissapointing as usual. You see, in the US, most politicians speak and act just to stay in office. It's all about self prevervation, so they don't make the decisions that are best for the country as a whole, but what is most advantageous to the electorate in their district. Therefore, there is no long term decision making either, just enough action to get voted into office in the next elections. Many laws that are signed into effect are hundreds, if not thousands of pages long, because they contain favourable earmarks for the respective policiticans that will sign the law.
For example, if the person who created the law wants a policitican from Iowa to sign the bill, he will include a part where it gives farmers in Iowa some kind of subsidy. This is why the bills have so many pages, since so many politicians need to have something that benefits them before they will sign it.
And then here are private companies that represent industry, that lobby politicians to sign or not to sign certain law by making campaign contributions to them during the next elections. Call it bribery if you will.
SG in reality is also a free democracy, but seriously, the politicians aren't under the gun to keep the electorate happy. So, they can do what they please, which might be good or bad.
Case in point, the recent hullaballo about the US going into possible default, and the debt ceiling needing to be raised. Well, Congress was mired in so much partisan bickering that we almost did go into default, but was saved by a BS short term plan which still got our bond rating downgraded.
However, if a similar situation arose in SG, the PAP, with it's single-party system, just passes whatever law immediately without any internal bickering.
Now, don't get me wrong, internal checks and balances in a 2 or more party system is required in a fair democracy. But nowadays, partisan politics has become childish to the point that no one belives in the US govt much anymore.
So once again, pros and cons, even with the political system. The system is SG is coldly efficient, but the danger becomes that the policitics get too big-headed and arrogant, which appears to be the case nowadays. They are ruling like a polical elite class. I imagine if SG has the same electoral system as the US, where the MPs must live in their respective wards, they will be more careful in making decisions that affect their fellow residents. The US system gives you plenty of freedom, and I dare say sometimes too much of it. In the end, a democracy only works if the electorate are educated enough to make the right decisions when voting. This is, sadly, never the case.
Most ppl agree that Obama hasn't been able to do anything the economy, although I'm glad he didn't get us mired in the war in Libya.
See, if you live in any country long enough, you'll start complaining about the political system too! :)
Just to add on, I think you need to view things in its proper scheme of things.The fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights pretty much encapsulates the very flaws you mentioned in the US system. The right to disagreement - and dissent - is very much a fundamental right and; hence, when you've got a bunch of people coming together shaped by different backgrounds, cultures and socio-economic classes, you do run into frequent gridlocks which, in essence, captures the essence of what a democratic government is all about - as much as you hate the inconvenience, it's a necessary evil you need to live with as you invariably need to live with the difference in opinions.
In dictatorships, however, what you see is not "efficiency" - it's a brand of brainless, self-serving actions that serve the interest of a secluded few at the expense of the vast majority. Realistically, you have no hope in hell of toppling these regimes through peaceful, non-violent means however much you may be prepared to do that. Therein, lies the fundamental difference between democratic and non-democratic governments.
I guess the bone most freedom-loving folks have with democratic regimes is the fact that they have to live with inconveniences which are inevitable facets of such societies; however, the other extreme by and of itself is never a solution. It clearly is not even an alternative worth contemplating as a means to any meaningful end.
An analogy I would usually cite to jokers who try convincing me Singapore is a "great" place to live because of its security is that, quite simply, if all I cared in life was about security, then I'd be the first to emigrate to North Korea (after all, it's just about the final frontier well beyond the threats any terrorist could reasonably pose) for it surely must be the safest place in the world.
Democracy doesn't guarantee a perfect government - nor does it guarantee a world where everyone else sees things the same way as you do. In spite of all its imperfections, however, I'd rather live in one than be a part of any despotic regime the world over where your fundamental rights cannot even be reasonably exercised as a birthright.
As bad as despotic regimes are, despots and tyrants perpetuating a democratic image are just about the most despicable lifeforms imaginable - in all honesty, it's certainly an easy choice if I had to choose between living in an imperfect democracy and under a shameless regime masked under the guise of a legitimate parliamentary democracy. Governments certainly don't come much more shameless than the PAP.
Rogue governments run by despots and tyrants are nothing more than organised criminal syndicates in my book. They certainly are no more honourable than other organised criminals that we conventionally know and understand the term to identify with.
-
The senior people are still touring around the world and making speeches.
They are still getting their perm secretary to service them.
Some of the retired men are re-hired as advisors.
Even the dragon is singing praises of a prata man who have done nothing.
So, what changes are we seeing ?
-
Originally posted by Medicated Oil:
The senior people are still touring around the world and making speeches.
They are still getting their perm secretary to service them.
Some of the retired men are re-hired as advisors.
Even the dragon is singing praises of a prata man who have done nothing.
So, what changes are we seeing ?
are the perm sec still servicing the retired? I don't think so.
re employment of the old and retired, is to be encouraged, isn't it? you need to ask if they are paid the same as before, and what exactly are they doing.
What is the problem with singing praises to the old and retired, as long as it doesn't cost money. a new grey hair folk with an old fashion spec has taken over with only 1/3 of the votes, that is a big change compared to no fight in the past.
and for the very very old man, why are people still inviting him to speak, around the world somemore, he didn't speak at the corner of hyde park, why do people invite him at all? may be the world hasn't changed. that is where the old man is right, "you can't change the world"!!
changes are there, may be not what you want to see, may be it is not enough, but things have changed.
-
Originally posted by walesa:
Just to add on, I think you need to view things in its proper scheme of things.The fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights pretty much encapsulates the very flaws you mentioned in the US system. The right to disagreement - and dissent - is very much a fundamental right and; hence, when you've got a bunch of people coming together shaped by different backgrounds, cultures and socio-economic classes, you do run into frequent gridlocks which, in essence, captures the essence of what a democratic government is all about - as much as you hate the inconvenience, it's a necessary evil you need to live with as you invariably need to live with the difference in opinions.
In dictatorships, however, what you see is not "efficiency" - it's a brand of brainless, self-serving actions that serve the interest of a secluded few at the expense of the vast majority. Realistically, you have no hope in hell of toppling these regimes through peaceful, non-violent means however much you may be prepared to do that. Therein, lies the fundamental difference between democratic and non-democratic governments.
I guess the bone most freedom-loving folks have with democratic regimes is the fact that they have to live with inconveniences which are inevitable facets of such societies; however, the other extreme by and of itself is never a solution. It clearly is not even an alternative worth contemplating as a means to any meaningful end.
An analogy I would usually cite to jokers who try convincing me Singapore is a "great" place to live because of its security is that, quite simply, if all I cared in life was about security, then I'd be the first to emigrate to North Korea (after all, it's just about the final frontier well beyond the threats any terrorist could reasonably pose) for it surely must be the safest place in the world.
Democracy doesn't guarantee a perfect government - nor does it guarantee a world where everyone else sees things the same way as you do. In spite of all its imperfections, however, I'd rather live in one than be a part of any despotic regime the world over where your fundamental rights cannot even be reasonably exercised as a birthright.
As bad as despotic regimes are, despots and tyrants perpetuating a democratic image are just about the most despicable lifeforms imaginable - in all honesty, it's certainly an easy choice if I had to choose between living in an imperfect democracy and under a shameless regime masked under the guise of a legitimate parliamentary democracy. Governments certainly don't come much more shameless than the PAP.
Rogue governments run by despots and tyrants are nothing more than organised criminal syndicates in my book. They certainly are no more honourable than other organised criminals that we conventionally know and understand the term to identify with.
you have my sympathy for whatever the PAP has done to you.
-
Sorry to digress from the topic, but just to add a point about the craziness of US politics...they have plenty of TV channels/shows and radio stations specifically for discussing and reviewing politics!
My favourites are the satirical political programs like The Daily Show, and the Colbert Report is awesome.
-
Originally posted by walesa:
Just to add on, I think you need to view things in its proper scheme of things.The fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights pretty much encapsulates the very flaws you mentioned in the US system. The right to disagreement - and dissent - is very much a fundamental right and; hence, when you've got a bunch of people coming together shaped by different backgrounds, cultures and socio-economic classes, you do run into frequent gridlocks which, in essence, captures the essence of what a democratic government is all about - as much as you hate the inconvenience, it's a necessary evil you need to live with as you invariably need to live with the difference in opinions.
In dictatorships, however, what you see is not "efficiency" - it's a brand of brainless, self-serving actions that serve the interest of a secluded few at the expense of the vast majority. Realistically, you have no hope in hell of toppling these regimes through peaceful, non-violent means however much you may be prepared to do that. Therein, lies the fundamental difference between democratic and non-democratic governments.
I guess the bone most freedom-loving folks have with democratic regimes is the fact that they have to live with inconveniences which are inevitable facets of such societies; however, the other extreme by and of itself is never a solution. It clearly is not even an alternative worth contemplating as a means to any meaningful end.
An analogy I would usually cite to jokers who try convincing me Singapore is a "great" place to live because of its security is that, quite simply, if all I cared in life was about security, then I'd be the first to emigrate to North Korea (after all, it's just about the final frontier well beyond the threats any terrorist could reasonably pose) for it surely must be the safest place in the world.
Democracy doesn't guarantee a perfect government - nor does it guarantee a world where everyone else sees things the same way as you do. In spite of all its imperfections, however, I'd rather live in one than be a part of any despotic regime the world over where your fundamental rights cannot even be reasonably exercised as a birthright.
As bad as despotic regimes are, despots and tyrants perpetuating a democratic image are just about the most despicable lifeforms imaginable - in all honesty, it's certainly an easy choice if I had to choose between living in an imperfect democracy and under a shameless regime masked under the guise of a legitimate parliamentary democracy. Governments certainly don't come much more shameless than the PAP.
Rogue governments run by despots and tyrants are nothing more than organised criminal syndicates in my book. They certainly are no more honourable than other organised criminals that we conventionally know and understand the term to identify with.
That's a great post.
-
Originally posted by walesa:
Just to add on, I think you need to view things in its proper scheme of things.The fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights pretty much encapsulates the very flaws you mentioned in the US system. The right to disagreement - and dissent - is very much a fundamental right and; hence, when you've got a bunch of people coming together shaped by different backgrounds, cultures and socio-economic classes, you do run into frequent gridlocks which, in essence, captures the essence of what a democratic government is all about - as much as you hate the inconvenience, it's a necessary evil you need to live with as you invariably need to live with the difference in opinions.
In dictatorships, however, what you see is not "efficiency" - it's a brand of brainless, self-serving actions that serve the interest of a secluded few at the expense of the vast majority. Realistically, you have no hope in hell of toppling these regimes through peaceful, non-violent means however much you may be prepared to do that. Therein, lies the fundamental difference between democratic and non-democratic governments.
I guess the bone most freedom-loving folks have with democratic regimes is the fact that they have to live with inconveniences which are inevitable facets of such societies; however, the other extreme by and of itself is never a solution. It clearly is not even an alternative worth contemplating as a means to any meaningful end.
An analogy I would usually cite to jokers who try convincing me Singapore is a "great" place to live because of its security is that, quite simply, if all I cared in life was about security, then I'd be the first to emigrate to North Korea (after all, it's just about the final frontier well beyond the threats any terrorist could reasonably pose) for it surely must be the safest place in the world.
Democracy doesn't guarantee a perfect government - nor does it guarantee a world where everyone else sees things the same way as you do. In spite of all its imperfections, however, I'd rather live in one than be a part of any despotic regime the world over where your fundamental rights cannot even be reasonably exercised as a birthright.
As bad as despotic regimes are, despots and tyrants perpetuating a democratic image are just about the most despicable lifeforms imaginable - in all honesty, it's certainly an easy choice if I had to choose between living in an imperfect democracy and under a shameless regime masked under the guise of a legitimate parliamentary democracy. Governments certainly don't come much more shameless than the PAP.
Rogue governments run by despots and tyrants are nothing more than organised criminal syndicates in my book. They certainly are no more honourable than other organised criminals that we conventionally know and understand the term to identify with.
I'm hit! (By flak)
Good points on democracy. You should tune in to some Rush Limbaugh or see reruns of Glenn Beck to see extreme things have gotten with free speech and dissent. Disagreement for disagreements sake makes one not see the forest for the trees.
-
To answer your questions, they are still being served by a few secretary.
You can check on the PMO listing.
How much they are being paid is already exceeding considering they are collecting pension at the same time.
As to whether they can still contribute, the answer is obvious as they are just touring around with no role in policy making.
The re-appointment move is a question that the dragon can answer.
The change is the commoners are more aware of their rights and have made the decision to know what is really going after paying so much for no results, no improvements and lots of excuses and honest mistakes.
-
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
I like the term "coldly efficient" . I guess at the end of the day, the US is such a big continent with many different states, and you have cities and country sides, and wilderness, your economy can be self sustaining, so you have lots of room to play with.
Singapore, just a little dot, not a lot of space to play around with, not an excuse for high handed politics though.
Thanks for sharing.
Cannot really compare sg and US.
US thousand times bigger than Sg.
How they control is totally different from Sg. And is very difficult too.
Just like controlling a crowd, one control 10 people while another one controll 100,000 people. Who gets the easy job?
-
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
you have my sympathy for whatever the PAP has done to you.
You have my heartfelt condolence in being the ignoramus the fascist propaganda machinery has churned you out to be. -
Originally posted by Boomslang4829:
I'm hit! (By flak)
Good points on democracy. You should tune in to some Rush Limbaugh or see reruns of Glenn Beck to see extreme things have gotten with free speech and dissent. Disagreement for disagreements sake makes one not see the forest for the trees.
Democracy is not a perfect system of government - nor does it guarantee prosperity.However, for the life of me, there isn't any other system of government I would rather live under - certainly not a fascist dictatorship run under the guise of a Westminster-style parliamentary democracy.
For the sake of argument, let's take extremes for comparisons then: would you rather have disagreement for disagreement's sake leading to necessarily avoidable gridlock or would you rather have disagreements leading to one being incarcerated in a labour camp as a prisoner of conscience?
That's two extremes far from utopia - but I know which I'd rather settle for.
-
Originally posted by walesa:
You have my heartfelt condolence in being the ignoramus the fascist propaganda machinery has churned you out to be.
sama sama lah...hehehe.... -
Originally posted by Medicated Oil:
To answer your questions, they are still being served by a few secretary.
You can check on the PMO listing.
How much they are being paid is already exceeding considering they are collecting pension at the same time.
As to whether they can still contribute, the answer is obvious as they are just touring around with no role in policy making.
The re-appointment move is a question that the dragon can answer.
The change is the commoners are more aware of their rights and have made the decision to know what is really going after paying so much for no results, no improvements and lots of excuses and honest mistakes.
no disagreement with that.
-
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
sama sama lah...hehehe....
No wonder the fascists are alarmed by the standards of English these days...
-
Originally posted by walesa:
Democracy is not a perfect system of government - nor does it guarantee prosperity.However, for the life of me, there isn't any other system of government I would rather live under - certainly not a fascist dictatorship run under the guise of a Westminster-style parliamentary democracy.
For the sake of argument, let's take extremes for comparisons then: would you rather have disagreement for disagreement's sake leading to necessarily avoidable gridlock or would you rather have disagreements leading to one being incarcerated in a labour camp as a prisoner of conscience?
That's two extremes far from utopia - but I know which I'd rather settle for.
Since you put it like that, I guess I'll take democracy over the fascists any day! :)
But seriously, we might have side-tracked this thread a little too much with the political slant.
The gist of it is, if you move to another country, and you start being aware of daily life and it's challenges in your new surroundings, we all start to gripe.
The key to being happy wherever you are is being able to accept that there'll always be some issues, be it with the govt or society, no matter where you live.
Llife is too short to bitch and moan about our place in the world, so I personally try to focus on the good things around me and find joy in waking up everyday healthy and surrounded by friends and family.
-
Nobody really have a feel of our poltiics until you are in it or get burnt by it, to a normal street man, it is basically the bread and butter issue that will pre occupy most of his time and way of thinking, for him, democratic is what he see now, you can go and talk about facist or communist or whatever social system to him, at the end of the day, he only think of his earning for the day. This is cultured successfully by LKY, his ideology is basically, everyone must hv work to survive, if your salary is higher, they will bringing in luxury goods and houses to cap you down, so that you remain as working class, alway believing that without FDI, MNC, industrialisation, we cannot survive, it that true? aren't we a agriculture industrial before that, were not there more birthrates, family cohesion and a much better place to live in with only singaporeans, no one else.
The working democratic created here is nothing but work, because they believe with a hunger for foods and better living, people will work, so they cannot allow social orders like welfare funds, minimium wages and other perks to kick in because all these will divert a working class mentality leading to having time to think about politics, which is dangerous to them, the ruling party. Back to the man on the street, with liabilities to pay and pay, feed family, houses, car etc etc, the work naturally will outstrip politics thinking by a big margins. And that is what govt want the citizen to be, alway hungry, alway need to pay, alway need a job, but never bother about politics
-
Originally posted by walesa:
No wonder the fascists are alarmed by the standards of English these days...did I speak english? sama sama is Malay, in Chinese it is å½¼æ¤å½¼æ¤ã€‚When you use english language standard to judge Malay language, of course everything is wrong, nothing wrong with the Malay, it is something wrong with you!!!!
-
Originally posted by Boomslang4829:
Since you put it like that, I guess I'll take democracy over the fascists any day! :)
But seriously, we might have side-tracked this thread a little too much with the political slant.
The gist of it is, if you move to another country, and you start being aware of daily life and it's challenges in your new surroundings, we all start to gripe.
The key to being happy wherever you are is being able to accept that there'll always be some issues, be it with the govt or society, no matter where you live.
Llife is too short to bitch and moan about our place in the world, so I personally try to focus on the good things around me and find joy in waking up everyday healthy and surrounded by friends and family.
Mr. Boomslang,
I salute you for you remarks here.
We talk about daily life and our surroundings, not some political ideologies and it is important to acknowledge and accept that "there'll always be some issues,....no matter where you live" .
I just like to add that there are things we can change, some quickly, some slowly, there are some we cannot change, not because we are not capable, but there is always a need to acknowledge of the needs of others, which may not be the same as what we want.
Life is indeed short indeed, but you certainly have what it takes for a happy life. thanks for sharing.
have a good day.