I do not speak for anybody except myself.
-
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.
No Basis for S'pore Opposition Parties to Mimic M'sian Opposition Coalition
- Thread starter ray_of_hope
- Start date
I do not speak for anybody except myself.
Here is something for you to ponder. Just before the 1997 GE CSJ led an SDP team with 3 MPs (although CST was only nominally a member of the SDP) and JBJ led a WP team of 1 MP (LTK). Did CSJ broach unity talks with JBJ then? I contend that back then these 2 parties were quite evenly matched and a semblance of unity might have been possible, since the 2 sec-gens shared similar philosophies. However, there was no unity, except in terms of no multi-cornered fights. So, why no unity then? Could it be because CSJ thought he was top dog? Think about that. So, those who are not top dog now and are now seeking opposition unity are barking up the wrong tree, yes?
Let's get back to the theme of the thread.
Any Opp party that expects to propose or join any coalition to defeat the Evil Empire cannot and shld not rely on others feeling it's for the greater good. It has to bring its own strengths, added value and comparative advantages to the table. Not by appealing to altruism.
Derek's article has pointed out that in the case of malaysia, the coalition members came together with complementary strengths that abet each other, that is why it is sustainable. And that in the case of Singapore, we have yet to see that happen.
SDP has strengths in certain areas and weaknesses in others; so do the other parties. The challenge is how you can convince the major Opposition party that by working with you, the outcome is bigger than the sum of the parts.
Any Opp party that expects to propose or join any coalition to defeat the Evil Empire cannot and shld not rely on others feeling it's for the greater good. It has to bring its own strengths, added value and comparative advantages to the table. Not by appealing to altruism.
Derek's article has pointed out that in the case of malaysia, the coalition members came together with complementary strengths that abet each other, that is why it is sustainable. And that in the case of Singapore, we have yet to see that happen.
SDP has strengths in certain areas and weaknesses in others; so do the other parties. The challenge is how you can convince the major Opposition party that by working with you, the outcome is bigger than the sum of the parts.
Well Chee Soon Juan back then was the leader of a party with 3 seats in parliament for a very very short time. He's probably in a situation where LTK is in right now. And he got his priorities totally wrong because at that time he was fighting Chiam See Tong. As for what his relationship with JBJ is, that's not important. Opposition unity starts first and foremost by having internal party discipline. Keep your own party united first, then talk about uniting with other peoples' parties. Therefore opposition unity was not an issue back then.
In fact, opposition unity became a very big issue because of his fight with Chiam See Tong. After that, people learnt from Chee Soon Juan's mistake of not uniting his own party and also they know that politically, being seen to fight amongst yourself is very bad. But somehow CSJ didn't learn his lessons well.
Last edited:
Hi brother metalmickey, when I wrote my post, I was very affected by the disunity displayed in this thread. And I wrote the Obama example specifically regarding *the Obama 2008 Campaign* and his famous line about "not the blue states nor the red states, but the UNITED States of America". That was all that I wanted to convey. I did not intend to discuss anything about Obama's performance in office since 2009, which would take a thread, if not a book, of its own.
Someday, when I have the nerve and the energy, I will write a post about why, in MY personal opinion, LTK has intentionally, or unintentionally, caused the division in the opposition supporters. I have NEVER been anti-WP until that incident when he made a public announcement about "opposition disunity" at the Punggol East By-election Rally. In my language, he did a totally insensitive and inelegant thing. But I will share those thoughts on another day, and another time, if I choose to do it at all. For now, I just want to say I have always enjoyed reading your posts. Thanks
Last edited:
By 1997 the dispute with CST was already over. The dispute began in 1993 and the GE was in 1997. By 1997 CSJ drew the full ire of the PAP. He stood at MacPherson and was soundly defeated. In that campaign PAP distributed leaflets calling CSJ all sorts of things including pembohong (liar). Yes, there were Malay leaflets. Equally, JBJ and TLH were facing heavy PAP attacks in Cheng San GRC. If CSJ and JBJ had coordinated somewhat they could have parried off the attacks. Like I said it would have made sense for those 2 parties to have been more united back then since their relative political weight was similar, their sec-gens believed in the same philosophy, and the PAP treated both parties harshly. If there was no anti-PAP coalition then (in 1997), it seems very far-fetched to see one now. Only the weak parties would disagree, as one would expect.
in 1984GE, hougang was part of punggol smc helmed by Ng Kah Ting was always win at least 60%plus while he was MP of punggol. The HDB estate of Hougang was TOP in 1982 and bulk of the punggol forced resettlers moved into the HG ave 1, 5 & 7 by 1983. HG ave 3 was built even earlier in 1970s. hougang smc was chopped from punggol smc in 1988, by that time, there already discontendments against the inept NKT for unable to help ex-punggolites with employment. Tang Guan Seng was even worse, farking aloof bastard. Those oldies who were forced out of their land for pittance $$ gave pap plenty of chances from 70s till 1990 and enough was enough when LTK came in 1991. in 1991, a vote for WP was a vote of protest against pap, simply as that.
as for your teochew clan heresay, no proof, could be a make up story on your side. if the teochew clan really rallies support for LTK in 1991, then surely LTK shd get more than 52%. When WP and LTK do walk about, selling hammer at ave 7 market as late as 2000, many residents still avoid them like plague. it not like recent years where aunties attract to LTK like bee to honey, those days, aunties really stop their husband from buying the hammer. where is the teochew kaki langs effect?
i saw what really happen on the ground while u only give BS theory that a 3rd rate whore would write in shitty times.
Hi brother metalmickey, when I wrote my post, I was very affected by the disunity displayed in this thread. And I wrote the Obama example specifically regarding *the Obama 2008 Campaign* and his famous line about "not the blue states nor the red states, but the UNITED States of America". That was all that I wanted to convey. I did not intend to discuss anything about Obama's performance in office since 2009, which would take a thread, if not a book, of its own.
Someday, when I have the nerve and the energy, I will write a post about why, in MY personal opinion, LTK has intentionally, or unintentionally, caused the division in the opposition supporters. I have never been anti-WP until that incident when he made a public announcement about "opposition disunity" at the Punggol East By-election Rally. In my language, he did a totally insensitive and inelegant thing. But I will share those thoughts on another day, and another time, if I choose to do it at all. For now, I just want to say I have always enjoyed reading your posts. Thanks
I have something to say about that. For the longest time, LTK would not touch on "opposition unity". His comment was no comment. It was just something you didn't talk about. His hand was forced by Chee Soon Juan's brainfart.
He understands something. Opposition unity is like polygamy. Just like the husband fantasises about being legally entitled to fuck a different woman every night, the electorate cherishes the idea that the opposition parties join hands to defeat the evil forces of the PAP. But it is a very messy arrangement under the best of circumstances. I don't think that Low Thia Khiang was saying much more than this, I believe his position - 井水不犯河水 - is a very sensible one. Whether his underlings or supporters understand this is another matter.
Obama had his brief shining moment when he talked about healing the divisions in his country. What you got to understand is "Obama's performance in office since 2009" is the WHOLE POINT of 2008. Obama did not get very far with healing the divisions in the country. Yes, he restored some sanity. But when dealing with the houses, he found himself in situations where he was compromising and compromising and getting nothing back. Then the Republicans became even more extremist, what with the Tea Party and all that craziness. And even the saner people like Ron Paul were pretty nutty. Then he changed tack, probably realising that the extremism was more damaging to the Republicans than it was to him. He just allowed the Republicans to literally go fuck themselves.
Obama 2012 - did he let up on the negative campaigning? No. He painted Romney as a president for the rich, of the rich, by the rich - any opportunity he had to do so. He started realising that there was no way he could truly unite the country. At best he could only stop the fighting from getting way out of hand.
Opposition unity is easier to achieve than Obama joining up with the Republicans. But I think there has to be some respect for boundaries and Chee Soon Juan didn't understand that. My view is that there is a real possibility that one day the PAP will lose slightly more than half the seats, and the "other opposition parties" will have to figure out whether to join with the PAP or join with the WP. Unless the WP-PAP have a coalition, in which case you guys don't matter anyway. Well that's the day when we really see what this opposition unity is all about.
Now I do want to see the SDP succeed but I'm not 100% hopeful. In particular: you said that you don't have the "nerve or the energy" - well it's OK to say that about replying to me. But in general politics is something that requires a huge amount of nerve and energy. (Maybe that's why there are so few women in politics!). But my feel is that the SDP needs a larger amount of nerve and energy than it has been demonstrating in the recent past.
Last edited:
It's totally different today. This talk of opposition unity came up because of lessons learnt during the mistakes of those times. If you want to say, there was no opposition unity in 1997, and therefore there is no opposition unity today, then most likely you have an even worse understanding of opposition unity than Chee Soon Juan. Just because the people from the older generation act like assholes, the younger generation is not obliged to do likewise. There's no jealousy here. Unless the older people are jealous of the ability of the younger generation to learn from their mistakes.
My take is that it is not that there is no such thing as opposition unity. There is a lot of room for co-operation to an extent that is less than opposition unity. Because real opposition unity means that your two parties merge and there's no need to bother about who or what belongs to who.
Last edited:
Someday, when I have the nerve and the energy, I will write a post about why, in MY personal opinion, LTK has intentionally, or unintentionally, caused the division in the opposition supporters. I have NEVER been anti-WP until that incident when he made a public announcement about "opposition disunity" at the Punggol East By-election Rally. In my language, he did a totally insensitive and inelegant thing. But I will share those thoughts on another day, and another time, if I choose to do it at all. For now, I just want to say I have always enjoyed reading your posts. Thanks
mr cosmos10, LTK never assume the seat of leader of opposition. only idiots believe LTK willing to remain the co driver. LTK is doing to win, not share power with pap or any other parties. he is basically as doing a "acting the pig to eat the tiger". LTK will not do anything that is not helpful to the cause. he will wayang when there a need to wayang, what the point of harping on ISA when most voters dont give a shit? It only by satisfying the voters can LTK get WP candidates into parliment. Only by winning a seat in parliment can the party have a say on singapore future. you can hold a placard and shout your throat sore outside parliment house and nobody will care, see or hear. it inside parliment that matter, not outside.
hear hear.... cooperation is the key.
Right from the start there has been jealously of WP when it secured seats at 2011. Those who express jealously won't extend congratulations to the party whenever it wins, and in fact would travel as far as the US to run down the WP to foreigners who, not knowing the political situation in Singapore, would then write up pieces in such places as the HuffingtonPost critical of the WP and simply based on what the jealous politicians told them. It is naive to think that the WP has not kept an account of all these things. The jealous politicians who do all these things then turn around and expect cooperation with, and unity from, the WP. This is the kind of politics of those other parties play -- theirs is a double game. At least the WP has been consistent in one thing, as demonstrated during the PEBE, that anyone can contest in any constituency. That should be the working assumption for all at the next GE.
The situation here is different and the success formula of Malaysian opposition cannot be replicated here. Any form of coalition or merger must be win-win for all parties and not one riding on the coattail of better one.
You've lost me here. You seem certain LTK has all along been quiet and docile, and now you say he is inconsistent. Being inconsistent would mean noisy one moment and then quiet the next.
You may not like his brand of politics, but voters do, as can be seen by voting in 7 MPs thus far. It is not your thoughts or my thoughts that count in the end, if they represent only the tiniest fraction of views in Singapore.
You are repeating what I said. It was nothing to do with working the ground WP style but the resentment factor and the Teochew link. LTK / WP model that we know now came about after he captured Hougang and not before. He was in Tiong Bahru closer to the former Anson which is miles away from Hougang.
Go read your first post on this.
Go read your first post on this.
Figure that if they vote for PAP's paper they are not doing anything and if they vote against then it's cosmetic? If you are here to find fault you might just well say it.
We have the right to our view, but it's not up to us to determine if he has not achieved anything. You can say LTK has said nothing for 20 years and I can say that parliament is located at Sungei Gedong. That doesn't change the fact that he can get elected for 20 years and if he did so without his performance in parliament, I would be amazed.
did i post ltk work the ground pre-91? i didnt hor, i only post ltk work the ground post-91. i knew ltk won at 91 because of resentment. resentment can only win him first time, to win second time, ltk would have to show the residents the real deal.
u were the one tat gave BS theory on teochew cohiesiveness and teochew clan influence. u didnt even write anything about resentment from begining, only the lanjiao teochew and catholic BS.
now the farmers & fishermen resentments become yours revelation liao huh?
Opposition parties cooperation is and will be the only way to go.
This talk about opposition unity, united under who's vision? united under who's leadership? united under who's directive?
I think we all know what some people here whom had been screaming so much about oppsotion unity actually wanted.
You want unity? Then show some results where matters can be finally put on the table where there would be unity to talk about, otherwise, its only cooperation and avoidance of 3CF.
Similar threads
