Cadreship for Minority members of the WP

[tanwahp]

The general public would also not expect him to know what other parties do as these are typically not revealed.

But he seems to know a lot about WP. With the same probing skills, he won't have a problem knowing how other parties appoint cadres.

In fact the author knows that WP would have a tough time explaining the role of cadres and the selection process as these are confidential.

If he knows that, he is trying to mislead into thinking that WP is the only "untransparent" party around.

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

WP people are trained to shut up on policy issues but just attacking their critics... nothing on PAP policies at all but just their critics. It is really pretty obvious here and it makes one wonder how different WP is from PAP, both are intolerant against criticisms. In fact, I think PAP is learning fast to cope with criticisms and live with it while WP people are totally intolerant, behaving like little tyrants jumping up and down when poked.

Nowadays, I get much less, if not zero, of attacks from PAP IBs but more from WP IB and people.... interesting development indeed.

Goh Meng Seng

I wonder how many actual WP people you have talked to or interacted over Facebook recently, to claim that WP members are only interested in attacking critics, or are not speaking up about policies.

Obviously if you are a party member, especially GE candidate, there is a certain ethic to follow when voicing opinions. In a sense, you are no different from Sanjeev, throwing smoke bombs because you know the audience doesn't know how the internal party mechanisms work.

As for the PAP taking up criticisms, just look at how Zainudin behaved, not to mention countless others in recent months - TCJ, Vikram, LHL, etc. Don't jerk the facts around just to bolster an argument.

Interesting point indeed about the PAP IB having stopped targetting you. I guess your course has been recognized as beyond reproach and they consider you kindred fellow rather than opponent.

 

[scroobal]

Very good points. Then we are dealing with a crafty individual.

But he seems to know a lot about WP. With the same probing skills, he won't have a problem knowing how other parties appoint cadres.



If he knows that, he is trying to mislead into thinking that WP is the only "untransparent" party around.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Well, you will just have to look around the cyber space to see it for yourself. Don't get into self-denial. Let's face it, using whatever anonymous handlers will not erase the fact that WP people are more interested in hitting out at their critics while so call WP members with real names, are just putting up inconsequential remarks on their FB and such, or just basically re-posting stuffs on their party's website. Sometimes it makes people wonder whether we are just dealing with drones or what. Not much of personal individual opinions, least about policy views.

Well, PAP IBs may not attack me but at the very least, they are engaging in various ways, cordially, debating and discussing issues in a civilized manner. At the very least, most of the time, they have their own views and opinions. It would be a mistake to think that they consider me as a kindred fellow rather than opponent because they are still concerned about the potency of my attacks on the various policies. I am still very much under their various radar.

However, I would put it simply, as compared to some of the uncivilized WP people here, who go on and on to put up disparaging remarks and even using vulgarity in their private messages to me, PAP IBs have indeed evolved significantly over the months and years. Just a thought here, WP and its people are really fast becoming the PAP of the past.

Goh Meng Seng

I wonder how many actual WP people you have talked to or interacted over Facebook recently, to claim that WP members are only interested in attacking critics, or are not speaking up about policies.

Obviously if you are a party member, especially GE candidate, there is a certain ethic to follow when voicing opinions. In a sense, you are no different from Sanjeev, throwing smoke bombs because you know the audience doesn't know how the internal party mechanisms work.

As for the PAP taking up criticisms, just look at how Zainudin behaved, not to mention countless others in recent months - TCJ, Vikram, LHL, etc. Don't jerk the facts around just to bolster an argument.

Interesting point indeed about the PAP IB having stopped targetting you. I guess your course has been recognized as beyond reproach and they consider you kindred fellow rather than opponent.

 

[metalmickey]

Even if you take out the "dumb" things, in a nutshell this is minor. Its like a torn toenail. In the scheme of things, WP have done tremendously well bearing in mind the adversary that they are facing. In fact the PAP is expected to emulate some of the things that WP has got right.

It depends. If they resolve the issue, it becomes a minor issue. If they don't resolve the issue, then it becomes a major issue. Because it's supposed to be relatively easy to resolve - unless of course they are fucked up. Now if the Indians and the Malays stay away from WP because WP has a bad reputation - things could get even worse.

This cadre membership thing - let's not beat around the bush. It's just not democratic. It has proven to be the downfall of the PAP because it led them in the wrong direction. At some point, maybe in the distant future, this cadre membership thing will return to haunt the WP once it's outlived its use.

He's not really trying to say that the WP are the only undemocratic party around. Everybody knows that the PAP are also not democratic. You don't have to say that. It's like saying that the sky is blue. There's no need to switch topic to talk about the PAP when we are talking about the WP. There's no such thing as "well the PAP is undemocratic too so let's just have WP go down to the same level as the PAP". Just concentrate on doing what's good for the WP.
Some idiot WP IB tried to zap me when he didn't have any points to zap me - what a moron.

 

[wwabbit]

Sajeev is trying to make the Worker's Party look like hypocrites by demanding Transparency and Accountability from the government while not being "transparent and accountible" themselves. This however is not a fair comparison. Whereas there is a need for "transparency and accountability" in the running of the country, does a political party need to be "transparent and accountable" on how it runs itself? Similarly, do companies have to be "transparent and accountable" in their hiring process and decision on promotions?

The truth is, hiring and promotions are very subjective things. The decision makers will often make such decisions based on experience and instincts rather than on objective measurable numbers. When asked to give a reason for their decisions, no one would simply say that they made the decision on their own instinct and instead give vague reasons, after which the questioner would simply accept it and stay, or not accept it and leave. It looked like Sajeev did not accept the explanations given by Ms Sylvia Lim and continued to hound her for an explanation until he managed to fish a politically incorrect response from her that he could use.

If people don't like the political party or the company they are in, they have an option to leave and find another one. Can someone unhappy with the way his country is run just leave his country and join another? To some extend it is possible, but it's not really the same, is it?

I find it laughable that Sajeev is claiming the credit for Mr Somasundaram and Mr Watson Chong's promotions. Correlation does not imply Causation.

Personally, I do think that the minorities are underrepresented in the Worker's Party, and this is something that the Worker's Party need to look into. This is definitely not the result of racism, and I don't think anyone rationally really believes that Worker's Party is a racist party - even Sajeev implied from his article that he does not believe that, but enjoyed having the media pick up on that. In any case, whatever happened hasn't really damaged the party as is apparent from the results of the two BEs.

Overall, I'm just looking forward to see what kind of candidates Worker's Party put forward in 2016, which will likely give us some indication of whether things have improved from within that party. Hopefully we can see an increased representation of minorities without overly relying on affirmative action.

 

[tanwahp]

Whereas there is a need for "transparency and accountability" in the running of the country, does a political party need to be "transparent and accountable" on how it runs itself? Similarly, do companies have to be "transparent and accountable" in their hiring process and decision on promotions?.

This is not entirely true. When a CEO or important head of department abruptly resigns, this gets into the news. If a major company in a country has an en masse resignation one after another, it gets into the news as well. Critics will also argue that if promotions and firings relate to discrimination, esp on race or gender, it is not only important to clarify to the public if the matter is publicized, it is also against the law in most countries.

It looked like Sajeev did not accept the explanations given by Ms Sylvia Lim and continued to hound her for an explanation until he managed to fish a politically incorrect response from her that he could use.

To say that Indians tend to leave the party is more than just a politically incorrect response. I can't remember if Sylvia Lim clarified, but I feel it is important that she does. Although laws like sedition, ISA or racial harmony act is not likely to be applied here, such laws do exist that can haul in not only Sylvia, but Sajeev as well. That shows how grave the situation is that warrants rebuttal. As for now, whether Sylvia uttered a gaffe or Sajeev invented the story will remain a mystery.

I don't think anyone rationally really believes that Worker's Party is a racist party

Not true, remember that RP member?

even Sajeev implied from his article that he does not believe that, but enjoyed having the media pick up on that.

Again not true. Sajeev has raised several times Sylvia's remark on Indians leaving the party. Sylvia is WP's chairman - what other impression does he have or response is he trying to paint on WP, other than race? Never mind that he cited Chinese persons like Watson, Poh, Eric etc. - that I think is scrapping at the bottom of the barrel in coming up with arguments.

About the media, that is the most telling point about Sajeev's character, because he expressed "disappointment" that the media carried that "remark by Sylvia", yet he was the one who quoted it.

 

[scroobal]

In view of the what has transpired WP still needs to address what this chap has put out. It certainly cannot avoid or skirt the issue. However it does not need to disclose the deliberations behind how cadres are chosen or find the need to justify individual appointments.

Now matter how one cuts this - the allegations is about race - why Hong Boon and not Soma or Sajeev. This needs to be dispelled strongly. Eric and Poh cases are more in the line of red herrings. They might even want to accommodative and state that they need to work harder to bring in more minority members who are like-minded.

If NSP can do it which many were surprised I am sure WP can.

ps. anyway it seems plans are afoot on the minority front.

 

[wwabbit]

This is not entirely true. When a CEO or important head of department abruptly resigns, this gets into the news. If a major company in a country has an en masse resignation one after another, it gets into the news as well. Critics will also argue that if promotions and firings relate to discrimination, esp on race or gender, it is not only important to clarify to the public if the matter is publicized, it is also against the law in most countries.

To say that Indians tend to leave the party is more than just a politically incorrect response. I can't remember if Sylvia Lim clarified, but I feel it is important that she does. Although laws like sedition, ISA or racial harmony act is not likely to be applied here, such laws do exist that can haul in not only Sylvia, but Sajeev as well. That shows how grave the situation is that warrants rebuttal. As for now, whether Sylvia uttered a gaffe or Sajeev invented the story will remain a mystery.

If you read Sajeev's latest article, he hardly mentioned the racism issue at all. He was mostly griping about it being unfair that ex-GE candidates have not been given cadreship. His disagreement is with the amount of contribution and the length of service that a member needs to attain before being granted cadreship. He was disappointed with Ms Sylvia Lim's comment, however he never accused her of racism.

It is notable of course, that Sylvia Lim never denied making that comment, although she and the Worker's Party have of course denied being racist. Mr Low Thia Khiang has said that cadreship is voted on by the CEC, so it is not solely the decision of Sylvia Lim or Low Thia Khiang, so it would require most of the CEC to be racist for racism to be the cause of Sajeev failing to get cadreship.

Not true, remember that RP member?

I did say "rational people"....



In any case, yes, Worker's Party have work to be done. It looks to me like they have problems getting commitment from the minorities. Sajeev himself has admitted that he was hardly involved before GE2011. This definitely have to be addressed.

 

[tanwahp]

If NSP can do it which many were surprised I am sure WP can.

We can agree on WP's shortcomings but to compare them to NSP is quite stretching it. The WP we know hates such cosmetics and NSP is a good example of bad cosmetics.

After the 2011 election the head of the Malay bureau was voted out of the CEC. In the next term, the recent one, it was the Malay treasurer's turn to be voted out. When they decided to coopt some losing members, the Malay ex-treasurer was not among them. (The guy that you spoke at length about, Tan Chee Kien, got coopted instead.)

Then despite appointing the large number of appointment holders among opposition parties (10 positions in all), the remaining 2 Malay CEC members are not among them. WP has 2 key positions occupied by Malays - vice chairman and youth wing head. Who can say WP is worse?

3 out of 4 2011 Malay candidates are no longer around, one has left NSP. Why all this when there is a Malay bureau.

Where minorities are concerned, NSP is doing even worse than WP. At least SDP has two Indian names that are always being mentioned, compared to no Indian names (but a Sikh) for WP.

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

There are some personalities going around Facebook, adding friends and asking them to re-post Sanjeev's article as well as related materials.

It seems there are some elements who really want Sanjeev's missive to gain traction.

 

[scroobal]

Bro, in politics image goes a long way - cosmetic or otherwise.Whether the Malay bureau has substance or sustainable or not is secondary for the short term. The run-up to GE2011 had that much zing for NSP when the Malay Bureau was formed. It was not a few malays joining the party. It gave the impression that it was a group, an important sub-entity within NSP. All cosmetics but I would suggest that it did the job.No one could suggest the it was sino-centric or racists.

I know that WP prefers to drive piles for its foundation but it cannot afford any more Sajeev or his antics or anything similar.

Familiar with what happened after GMS departure. It was shame. Unless they throw the old guards who are pretty much charlatans nothing can be achieved. We all know these guys are not there to serve anyone.

If something similar happened with WP, I am sure that it will be sustainable and it I reckon it has to be done.

We can agree on WP's shortcomings but to compare them to NSP is quite stretching it. The WP we know hates such cosmetics and NSP is a good example of bad cosmetics.

After the 2011 election the head of the Malay bureau was voted out of the CEC. In the next term, the recent one, it was the Malay treasurer's turn to be voted out. When they decided to coopt some losing members, the Malay ex-treasurer was not among them. (The guy that you spoke at length about, Tan Chee Kien, got coopted instead.)

Then despite appointing the large number of appointment holders among opposition parties (10 positions in all), the remaining 2 Malay CEC members are not among them. WP has 2 key positions occupied by Malays - vice chairman and youth wing head. Who can say WP is worse?

3 out of 4 2011 Malay candidates are no longer around, one has left NSP. Why all this when there is a Malay bureau.

Where minorities are concerned, NSP is doing even worse than WP. At least SDP has two Indian names that are always being mentioned, compared to no Indian names (but a Sikh) for WP.

 

[scroobal]

It is clearly well organised and more than one person involved. This chap is really silly for being used in this manner. I am sure it will be matter of time before Soma will be marginalised as he shared certain things which he should not.

There are some personalities going around Facebook, adding friends and asking them to re-post Sanjeev's article as well as related materials.

It seems there are some elements who really want Sanjeev's missive to gain traction.