That's quite a leap in logic though.
Being unhappy if you are unable to afford the landed property your parents could 30 years ago, is different from being unhappy if you are able to afford the landed property BUT feel for those who are sleeping on their streets and watching ah pors make a living from collecting paper boxes. The former is not seeing past one's nose; the latter is.
Ever wonder why there's a tendency to equate rich people as voting for the status quo, and poor people not? Because we like to assume that if the current system serves you well, there is no need to seek alternatives. Why rock the boat, most will ask. That assumption itself is very telling: it presupposes that if you are affluent, you wouldn't spare a thought for the handicapped, destitute, single mothers who receive no subsidies, uncles and aunties who have to compete with foreign workers for table-cleaning jobs, young couples who keep putting off their marriage because they cannot afford a flat.
Are people not being self-centred if they
only start looking at alternative methods of governance because they sense a futility in their effort to get ahead? It's one thing to expect the establishment to fulfil its end of the social contract; it's another to want a different social contract altogether. My personal sense is that more people are voting due to the former, not the latter.
Here's an example of a person who sees past his own nose: Alex Au of Yawning Bread fame. Some of us might equate him solely with the anti-377A movement, but that cannot be further from the truth. Read his blog, and you'll see that he devotes considerable time to discussing even the plight of low-skilled foreign workers in Singapore, some of whom get very short shrift. That's a completely different ball-game from the typical anti-PAP rant that runs along the lines of, "Vote them out! They're bringing in too many cheenapoks and banglas!"
Am I expecting everyone to speak out for the same things Alex Au does? No. But I'm saying that until and unless more people are able to see past their own needs, the movement to get rid of ISA will continue to remain a marginal one. I once had a law student tell me, "I support the use of the ISA on anyone but myself." Believe me, it sent a shiver down my spine and a chill to my heart. But you know what? I can't help thinking that most Singaporeans are, somehow or another, wired this way.
Most people are materialistic, self-centred, want to be one-up because feels good. But at some point, as it gets too competitive, stressful, crowded, they become more aware how useless their efforts to get ahead are.
This is different generation from those growing up in 50s or 60s when lives got better and better. Many younger people 30-40 yrs will be 'poorer' than their parents when they were their age (taking into account different value of money eg many school teachers in the 1970s-80s easily own landed homes or large flats, fully paid in less than 10yrs - their more highly educated children can only dream of getting this now).
So people getting more and more unhappy, angry as hopes and expectations not met. Start to notice inequalities, unfairness, alternatives, and act / vote on them. Aided by unstoppable free flow of information on internet/ social media. Otherwise all this ancient ISD history won't be popping up so often 20 years later.
