You are really a "Steffy". Unlike you, guys like me carry tissues to wipe our faces in the toilet. Your type wipes an extra area.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Is Protest Effective?
- Thread starter rusty
- Start date
You are really a "Steffy". Unlike you, guys like me carry tissues to wipe our faces in the toilet. Your type wipes an extra area.
SINGAPORE FOR SINGAPOREANS
SINGAPORE NOT FOR FOREIGN TRASH BROUGHT IN DELIBERATELY BY PAPs TO DISPLACE SINGAPOREANS
FTs BROUGHT IN BY PAPs TO REDUCE THE MONEY SINGAPOREANS CAN TAKE HOME FOR THEIR FAMILIES
FTs BROUGHT IN TO DEVALUE SINGAPOREANS
PAPs THEN USING FUCKING WORDS LIKE RACISTS AND XENOPHOBES TO FURTHER KICK SINGAPOREANS IN THE TEETH
REMEMBER IT IS THE FUCKING PAPs THAT DELIBERATELY BROUGHT IN THE FTs
SO THAT LESS MONEY FOR SINGAPOREANS AND LESS MONEY TO FIGHT THE FUCKING PAPs
TO HAVE LESS JOBS AVAILABLE FOR SINGAPOREANS AS FTs WILL BE GIVEN THAT JOB PREFERENCE OVER SINGAPOREANS
PAP TIEWING AND FUCKING STINKIES FOR SMEAR OF SHIT ON SOLE OF SHOE LKY AND PAPs
A LUCRATIVE JOB FOR WHICH PAPs ARE PAID UNTIL THOSE FUCKERS CAN LAUGH ALL THE WAY TO THEIR BANKS AND BACK FROM THEIR BANKS
They continue to laugh all the way to their banks
And all the way back from their banks
HA HA HA HA
HEE HEE HEE HE HEEEE
HOO HO HOOO HO HO
Hang those PAP maggots cockroaches with piano wires from lamp posts to make them dance before it is too late and we have no more CPF to get back.
BBQ those PAP maggots cockroaches before it is too late and we have no more CPF to get back.
Cut a few more arseholes into those PAP maggots cockroaches to let out their shit before it is too late and we have no more CPF to get back.
Make those PAP maggots cockroaches eat joss sticks and candle wax before it is too late and we have no more CPF to get back.
Well, thanks, but no thanks. I came to Singapore not because of Singapore but because I wanted to see China a little more, I happen to be based here for work. As for being fucked, as a tax paying working class Joe, I will always get fucked - that's life. As for being lumped in with the 60%, wish to make it known that I do not support any political group, but if I were to vote, I'd choose the underdog, and this applies not to just politics, but most contests I watch.
For the politicals parties in Singapore, everyone who is contesting and is not the PAP will be considered underdog as the PAP is the biggest, best organized, best funded, and has led the scene since the 60s. The "opposition" has not presented themselves convincingly and so far has only picked up the "disgruntled" votes. None of them (the opposition) has proposed a plan or strategy that the voters hope to see implemented if elected. Could this be because the current ruling party has covered every angle of people's lives in the city-state? Sorry to drift, just got carried away. The thread's titile is about protests in Singapore, which I don't see any justified reason to. There are elections.
Cheers!
For the politicals parties in Singapore, everyone who is contesting and is not the PAP will be considered underdog as the PAP is the biggest, best organized, best funded, and has led the scene since the 60s. The "opposition" has not presented themselves convincingly and so far has only picked up the "disgruntled" votes. None of them (the opposition) has proposed a plan or strategy that the voters hope to see implemented if elected. Could this be because the current ruling party has covered every angle of people's lives in the city-state? Sorry to drift, just got carried away. The thread's titile is about protests in Singapore, which I don't see any justified reason to. There are elections.
Cheers!
Cut and paste from somewhere:
Free and fair elections are a necessary, but not sufficient condition of democracy. Enthusiastic and unquestioned support of elections without the necessary groundwork can lead to unpleasant surprises.
After all, following the election of Mr. Morsi, Egypt had not suddenly turned into a democratic country.
The military maintained its dominant role in society. Government institutions continued to lack the capacity of serving their citizens in a fair, equitable and efficient manner. And Egypt’s judiciary maintained the biases of the past.
The most recent mass demonstrations in Egypt are testimony to the disenchantment of large chunks of Egypt’s population with this type of “democracy.”
Abraham Lincoln had it right when he defined democracy as government of the people, by the people and for the people. In other words, there is a lot more to democracy than holding elections:
1) a society must have in place or intend to build institutions that allow its citizens on a daily basis to participate in all aspects of the political process.
2) a democratic society must guarantee that all people are equal before the law. That, in turn, demands an independent and apolitical judiciary.
3) a true democracy acknowledges and respects all cultural, ethnic or religious differences that may exist within its borders.
4) freedom of opinion without fearing repercussions from those who have been elected is also critical.
5) there is also the true purpose of government, i.e. to do its best to sustainably, responsibly and transparently serve the people in an effort to improve their standards of living in an equitable manner.
In other words, holding elections in a democratic void can easily lead to outcomes that might in the end undermine the goal of achieving democracy itself.
Of course, there are many aspects to democracy that are left out by this short definition and philosophers have spent their lifetimes in an effort to arrive at the perfect definition.
However, one thing is for sure: Elections alone do not define democracy.
This is my own: Freedom of assembly is guaranteed under the Sinkie Constitution so when you do protest, know what you are protesting about and that you have the right to do it in spite of what the Lightning and its cronies say!
Ok. To come down to details, the general definition of democracy may not be applicable in every situation/community, but let's stick to Singapore's situation. The current existing state of affairs in Singapore was laid down by PAP's early leaders and their style/vision. During her early formative years (60s, 70s) their style was accepted, embraced, and later even glorified by the majority of the citizens. No one opposed. Even when a stupid law was passed (eg. ban on motorcycle full face helments and visors) no one opposed. Those who voiced up were ignored and viewed as immatured non-conformists seeking attention. So the paternalistic styled pursued, and whatever the PAP leadership proposed, was considered insightful, beneficial, and for society's good. Do not challenge, just listen and obey, and you'd be better off. Then came the GCT years, and Singaporeans continued voting PAP for more good years.
What is there to protest? It was the people's own choice.
Cheers!
That is what is taught in the PAP kindergarten and primary schools which I attended. When my father found out what was being taught, including but not limited to the fallacy that Sinkieland was a fishing village before Old Fart became Pee M, he immediately took steps to teach the true history.
Besides, as a kid I moved freely amongst the participants of adult hen and rooster parties and listened to their conversations which were always spattered with complaints and grouses against the PAP. I learned from Sammyboy that the 1963 election was a very close call. You see, I was not born then.
These two sentences are mutually inconsistent as highlighted.
Well, the answer is simple - the People have changed!
The composition is different because significant portions have died and new generations with different upbringing et cetera are getting the right to vote. Those who had some misgivings but voted PAP out of fear in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, now have a change of heart having seen electoral promises being made and broken.
I personally do not have much to protest about but I will defend the right of freedom of assembly because it is key to a vibrant democracy and a constitutionally protected individual right! Cheers!
Last edited:
That is what is thought in the PAP kindergarten and primary schools which I attended. When my father found out what was being taught, including but not limited to the fallacy that Sinkieland was a fishing village before Old Fart became Pee M, he immediately took steps to teach the true history.
Besides, as a kid I moved freely amongst the participants of adult hen and rooster parties and listened to their conversations which were always spattered with complaints and grouses against the PAP. I learned from Sammyboy that the 1963 election was a very close call. You see, I was not born then.
These two sentences are mutually inconsistent as highlighted.
Well, the answer is simple - the People have changed!
The composition is different because significant portions have died and new generations with different upbringing et cetera are getting the right to vote. Those who had some misgivings but voted PAP out of fear in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, now have a change of heart having seen electoral promises being made and broken.
I personally do not have much to protest about but I will defend the right of freedom of assembly because it is key to a vibrant democracy and a constitutionally protected individual right! Cheers!
JUST HANG THE PAPs AND THEIR COLLABORATORS
They continue to laugh all the way to their banks
And all the way back from their banks
HA HA HA HA
HEE HEE HEE HE HEEEE
HOO HO HOOO HO HO
Hang those PAP maggots cockroaches with piano wires from lamp posts to make them dance before it is too late and we have no more CPF to get back.
BBQ those PAP maggots cockroaches before it is too late and we have no more CPF to get back.
Cut a few more arseholes into those PAP maggots cockroaches to let out their shit before it is too late and we have no more CPF to get back.
Make those PAP maggots cockroaches eat joss sticks and candle wax before it is too late and we have no more CPF to get back.
Such as Pink Dot?
Nothing but an ANAL MASTURBATION
Nothing but an ANAL MASTURBATION
Wow, I am surprised you picked out inconsitencies in my writing, I myself wasn't paying that close attention to my choice of words. Allow me to clear this up:
In this instance, what I meant when I said that "no one opposed" was that there wasn't an outright display of rejection to the law(s) implemented or a display of defiance by ignoring the law (full-face helmet and visor ban) - that is, forms of "protests". There was however a lone and single voice of opposition, that came from a newspaper columnist. His name was Lee Chiu San, he wrote a weekly column on two-wheel affairs in the newspaper and not only did he highlight the idiocy of the law, he made suggestions to overcome the fear of facial coverage by making wearers of full-face helmets display a registration number on the helmets. No one of course took notice, not many people even read his column, or were concerned about the safety concerns of motorcyclists.
I agree that the new generation of Singaporeans are better-read than their parents before them, and exposure to views offered other than the Straits Times allow the forming of differing viewpoints. This leads to a better-informed and more diverse public thoughts. Let's see how the result of the next general election turns out. It won't be that easy for the PAP as it was in past elections I think.
Cheers!
In this instance, what I meant when I said that "no one opposed" was that there wasn't an outright display of rejection to the law(s) implemented or a display of defiance by ignoring the law (full-face helmet and visor ban) - that is, forms of "protests". There was however a lone and single voice of opposition, that came from a newspaper columnist. His name was Lee Chiu San, he wrote a weekly column on two-wheel affairs in the newspaper and not only did he highlight the idiocy of the law, he made suggestions to overcome the fear of facial coverage by making wearers of full-face helmets display a registration number on the helmets. No one of course took notice, not many people even read his column, or were concerned about the safety concerns of motorcyclists.
I agree that the new generation of Singaporeans are better-read than their parents before them, and exposure to views offered other than the Straits Times allow the forming of differing viewpoints. This leads to a better-informed and more diverse public thoughts. Let's see how the result of the next general election turns out. It won't be that easy for the PAP as it was in past elections I think.
Cheers!
Similar threads
