Recently I was reading a thought provoking post shared over Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/notes/joel-joshua-goh/my-vote-counts-10-reasons-why-i-cannot-vote-for-the-pap-in-the-next-election/236626774675?ref=notif¬if_t=note_reply and the follow-up: http://yaevlejunce.wordpress.com/2010/03/04/how-singaporeans-discuss-national-issues/
Reading them set me thinking about how shortsighted many people are, not the author but more of the people who comment at times. Although I have said my pennies worth on the issue and gotten shot down rapidly, I think perhaps I should spend some time delving more deeply into why I personally think we should not rush off to vote against PAP. I might not be the best judge for this but in this time of the IT generation, I think we should be allowed to air our thoughts freely.
Like most of my peers, I was quite sick of seeing a single party dominating our democratic country. Yes because of our stability, we can afford long term policies and can attract MNCs and so on. I had always envisioned myself wanting to vote against PAP (considering that I was in Aljunied GRC then and nothing was ever done to improve my estate) but now I don’t think I will pass judgement that readily.
A few things covered in the post includes the bloody as well as cloudy past of Singapore’s political history. Yes contrary to popular belief, PAP was founded NOT by LKY and popularised NOT by LKY but by a long forgotten soul, Lim Chin Siong. Also few people know about harry’s famous operation to clean up the communist. Well yes the operation was brutal and cruel, not entirely humane. However one thing I feel is that we cannot always judge past actions with the moral scope of the present. We know naught about the situation and the conditions then. Yes it is condemnable but perhaps we should pepper it with a little more caution before plunging in to say it was wrong. Hiding it from the general masses is perhaps not entirely the doing of our education system, perhaps consider who were the first few authors of Singapore’s history – non-singaporeans. Even now most of what we are learning is not from the perspective of what makes up most of our heritage. We have had rich history before Raffles but nothing is being taught or conserved. I believe more singaporean historians like derek heng should stand out more and demand a revise on our history. Singapore was no founded by Raffles, Singapore existed and thrive before Raffles was here.
Second main train of argument is salary. That I fully agree and I thinking pegging pay is not the way to go. Our gini coefficient is high enough as it is, why help drive it higher. Pointless.
Lastly, yes Singapore needs change but not a revolution. Singapore no matter what is an Asian country with huge Confucianism influences, Singapore can scarely afford to put revolutions to work. Look to our neighbours and you can see that. China revolutionise with bloody civil war, Philippines had major disruptions from the show of People’s Power, and not to forget Sukarno’s removal from power. None of these revolutions in Asia has not set those countries back for some time. In addition, Myanmar to me serves as a timely reminder of what might happen if we try. Singapore cannot afford a drastic change – I seriously doubt that we can put through with our low local consumption rates (if it’s the wrong term pardon my lack of knowledge in economics). Can we afford to scare investors away?
With all that said, I must say that it is a well written argument. The only thing he hasn’t considered was perhaps this: are we just going for the lesser of 2 evils now? Do you really want someone like CSJ to become the head of state?
Just a thought.
-wonght
A slow accumulation of change leading to an evolution might be more suited.
