• 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.

Dissension in S'pore Political Parties

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
25,134
Points
83
I have seen some comments from time to time in this forum and more often in the various popular local forums and the impression is that normal and good democratic political parties are not expected to have dissension, internal strife and other surprises.

The only political parties operating within a democratic framework that does not have such issues are either not democratic or basically a moribund party. There is no other organised entity that has such things issues than political parties.

In Singapore, opposition parties do not have the luxury to fish in a large pool of potential members and candidates. You grab whatever you can. The fact that WP had to persuade an inactive member with not even O Level qualifications to his name is clearly testimony to this. He not only rejected her the first time, the interesting thing is that it was Chairman of the Party dealng directly. It shows how desperate the situation is.

Dr Poh Lee Guan is another example. HE comes from the immediate past generation where if you had a degree and you took part in politics, you were considered an outstanding candidate and a hero of sorts. Wong Wee Nam is another. These guys generally consider themselves as the gifts to Singapore and some Singaporeans actually do think that. With the recent GE and PE, the tide is turning and quality candidates are popping up. The Poh's and Wong's of the yesteryears are feeling rejected and unimportant. So do expect erratic behaviour. Remember Wong Wee Nam's endorsement of Tan Kin Lian and his U turn and his claims to know everyone standing for PE intimately. I occasionally read his articles and wondered if doeshave family or friends that could tell him that his content is rubbish in the main.

These 2 are not the ones, there is whole bunch of irrelevant and hopelessly inadequate and under-qualified from previous generation and some holding CEC and key office bearer positions getting roundly thrashed during the last GE. I recall how they wanted their own SMCs.

The next category are the minorities. We all know that PAP intentionally did this for GRCs and then attempt to control quality Malay candidates by various bribes to the community. The Indians are by nature never team players and therefore community bribes do not work so the PAP can't apply the same medicine. But as they are not team players they do not work generally well in party matters in the first place unless in a leadership position.

Opposition Political Parties and their members are better off if they understand these constraints and begin to apply specific strategies and not do what they do now. Make phone calls just before GE.
 
Last edited:
Good write-up scroo.

What WP must not under-estimate is the damage the MSM could inflict by playing up such incidents. Sadly these individuals feel they have contributed so much and should not disappear into oblivion, afterall they were among the pioneers... i remember clearly how PLG gave Ho Peng Kee a scare years back. Nevertheless LTK has shown his mettle as a tough leader. The fact that he does not explain his reason does not mean he does not have a good reason. A wise leader does not wash dirty linen in public.
 
Contrary to what you just said, LTK has shown himself to be inept leader that does not understand the psychology of its members. Thats why we are seeing all these embarrassing episodes from even among its leaders.
WP need sto change and LTK needs to move on and allow other more capable people to take over leadership.
 
Agree with both your points

The parties do need to recognise contribution in some form or another. Frankly making all candidates cadres is nothing in the scheme of things. The idea is all should be treated in similar ways. They need to engage them in some ways and it becomes an investment. LTK in his own shrewd way has learnt to manage the media and the public. He knows pretty well that the media is not on his side. Over the years, he has the media eating from his hands. Something that Chee needs to pick. You cannot operate on 2 fronts.



Good write-up scroo.

What WP must not under-estimate is the damage the MSM could inflict by playing up such incidents. Sadly these individuals feel they have contributed so much and should not disappear into oblivion, afterall they were among the pioneers... i remember clearly how PLG gave Ho Peng Kee a scare years back. Nevertheless LTK has shown his mettle as a tough leader. The fact that he does not explain his reason does not mean he does not have a good reason. A wise leader does not wash dirty linen in public.
 
Agree with both your points

The parties do need to recognise contribution in some form or another. Frankly making all candidates cadres is nothing in the scheme of things. The idea is all should be treated in similar ways. They need to engage them in some ways and it becomes an investment. LTK in his own shrewd way has learnt to manage the media and the public. He knows pretty well that the media is not on his side. Over the years, he has the media eating from his hands. Something that Chee needs to pick. You cannot operate on 2 fronts.

Media eating from his hands? How sir? Please explain.
 
Media eating from his hands? How sir? Please explain.
Fuck you, kanina

Since i am in the mood i will take yr bait of trying to engage yr pathetic bleatings devoid of sense n insights.

So talking sense wont help to u.

U r here being paid to do a dirty job trying to smear Low.

low's leadership is excellent n tats why PaP finds him a formidable opponent.

U n GMS can harp on n on your bleeding heart immature take on all recent events..

But u guys know nuts how to build up political orgsnizations.

Only kpkb about not fair, racist, poor parliament performances blah blah blah...

Henceforth, i will ignore u failing which i will come fuck yr sorry arse with my police baton...
 
Contrary to what you just said, LTK has shown himself to be inept leader that does not understand the psychology of its members. Thats why we are seeing all these embarrassing episodes from even among its leaders.
WP need sto change and LTK needs to move on and allow other more capable people to take over leadership.

Why don't you take over LTK?
 
Dissension among political parties are common. Its how the political party control these dissensions to the public that is important. Look at Hawke-Keating, Gillard-Rudd, Howard-Costello, Turnbull-Abbott. If there are no perceived political dissension, then the public should really start to worry. I'm sure there are many dissensions among the PAP as well. Its just not as readily reported.
 
Dear Scroobal,

You are right about this. Engagement and communication are important factors lacking. Proper system structure to apply empowerment and recognition is important as well. That is why I have set up Malay Bureau in NSP during my time.

Goh Meng Seng
 
hahaha....the cockeral talking cock again....
whoever expects that there will be no dissents, disagreements, etc... in any organisations can join the kuku club....
even families.... husband/wife, siblings etc...fight among themselves.....
the difference if any is whether the fights are kept within the families/organisations or the dirty laundries are washed in public.
for this...we have to give credits where credits are due.......
we can be sure there are disagreements in papee.....however they are seldom if ever washed in public....
of course all the open dissents in opps can be conveniently attributed to hidden hands theory.
 
Why WP supporters want to detract from discussion on issues and focus on personal attacks?
Why you so lidat?
 
hahaha....the cockeral talking cock again....
whoever expects that there will be no dissents, disagreements, etc... in any organisations can join the kuku club....
even families.... husband/wife, siblings etc...fight among themselves.....
the difference if any is whether the fights are kept within the families/organisations or the dirty laundries are washed in public.
for this...we have to give credits where credits are due.......
we can be sure there are disagreements in papee.....however they are seldom if ever washed in public....
of course all the open dissents in opps can be conveniently attributed to hidden hands theory.

I must agree with you on this bro.

If we go on the basis of political party internal strives;the biggest culprit still remains the PAP.

Only that we hardly hear about it;except for a rare moment like wooden Goh who cried,why George Yeo (scarifical lamb)and not WKS in the last GE2011.

And the bigger the loot of the spoils the greater the in fighting.As the PM of Malaysia and India had tacitly acknowledged they loose certain constituencies merely because their own party men sabotage.Because the stakes are high,Even in PAP,not only the mere selection of it's party member as candidates gurantees big bucks as a part time MP,but the spin off and other directorship is colossal money.Hence it's reasonable to expect PAP cadres/members back stabbing and nit picking their very own.

But in WP?....the in-fights are merely for some self respect.Which reflects on their poor leadership material.

Even in this forum,if a genuine dissent for WP is found than the first person who sharpens his knife is Scroobal for all the unkind cuts.He goes ballistic at the mere mention of SDP.Otherwise a sane and a sensible chap.Yes!one may have high IQ & EQ but it takes a different ability to run a political shop.Clearly WP lacks it.But Scroobal rather obfuscates it than face the truth.
 
Last edited:
...the PM of Malaysia and India had tacitly acknowledged they loose certain constituencies merely because their own party men sabotage.

They "lose" certain constituencies.
In the famous words of Sam, "loose" is the term to describe your arse
 
Why WP supporters want to detract from discussion on issues and focus on personal attacks?
Why you so lidat?

Which issues did WP supporters detract from? Every posts you made there were at least a couple of responses demolishing your nonsense to pieces and yet you still claim WP supporters detracting from issues? You are a true disciple of Goh Meng Seng. Everything you said about WP supporters is probably a repetition of what your masters say about you. Poor rebuttal skill. Be careful... you are about to lose your job as PAP IB.

I think you bunch of PAP IBs are better off just following RonRon's style ie. don't get into any reasoning or argument because you can't.
Stick to posting a few pictures of your masters attending funeral wakes, kissing aunties, spam the forum with countless threads attacking WP and promoting PAP but avoid all sorts of discussions... you are probably better off that way. I respect RonRon for knowing what he is not good at.
 
Last edited:
I am only a neutral supporter my fren.
Why you people so lidat?
 
Dear Score

The problem is not in itself the existence of "internal strife" "ambition" "dissent" The problem is its management and the leadership ethos behind it. The PAP sought and has successfully sought renewal without care, recruiting, parachuting and turning them into overnight senior party members and cadres whether they were in the PAP for five mins or five years perviously.

The issue with the WP in its current form is its emphasis on loyalty and discipline above all else in order to secure its base for its next stage of growth as the leadership see it.

a. After GE 2006, Cadre's automatic for Candidates, Membership no qualifications

b. After GE 2011, Cadre's not automatic, Membership subject to same qualification and dedication to party work as Cadreship.

I can almost hear the same management excuses for such a policy. After GE 2006, lots of enthusiasm, but they disappeared members, they did not stick around. We only want members who stick around. After GE 2006, we appointed a lot of cadres, but they disappeared,they did not stick around, especially Indians Malays. GMS , CTL etc etc etc.

In essence party activities centre around grassroots, building, house visits , hammer sales and or constituency tours events together with MPS. All organized broadly in constituency silos. Membership and or cadreship to be earned with points scored from such events.

Is the problem of sustaining enthusiasm post GE a problem with the people or a problem of leadership ? At this juncture would it be better to have 20 people each devoting 180% to the party or 200 people each devoting 50% ? Is a chinese communist style expectation even realistic for this day and age ?



Locke







[
 
Well written. If only opposition apologists can always write like this.

I have seen some comments from time to time in this forum and more often in the various popular local forums and the impression is that normal and good democratic political parties are not expected to have dissension, internal strife and other surprises.

The only political parties operating within a democratic framework that does not have such issues are either not democratic or basically a moribund party. There is no other organised entity that has such things issues than political parties.

In Singapore, opposition parties do not have the luxury to fish in a large pool of potential members and candidates. You grab whatever you can. The fact that WP had to persuade an inactive member with not even O Level qualifications to his name is clearly testimony to this. He not only rejected her the first time, the interesting thing is that it was Chairman of the Party dealng directly. It shows how desperate the situation is.

Dr Poh Lee Guan is another example. HE comes from the immediate past generation where if you had a degree and you took part in politics, you were considered an outstanding candidate and a hero of sorts. Wong Wee Nam is another. These guys generally consider themselves as the gifts to Singapore and some Singaporeans actually do think that. With the recent GE and PE, the tide is turning and quality candidates are popping up. The Poh's and Wong's of the yesteryears are feeling rejected and unimportant. So do expect erratic behaviour. Remember Wong Wee Nam's endorsement of Tan Kin Lian and his U turn and his claims to know everyone standing for PE intimately. I occasionally read his articles and wondered if doeshave family or friends that could tell him that his content is rubbish in the main.

These 2 are not the ones, there is whole bunch of irrelevant and hopelessly inadequate and under-qualified from previous generation and some holding CEC and key office bearer positions getting roundly thrashed during the last GE. I recall how they wanted their own SMCs.

The next category are the minorities. We all know that PAP intentionally did this for GRCs and then attempt to control quality Malay candidates by various bribes to the community. The Indians are by nature never team players and therefore community bribes do not work so the PAP can't apply the same medicine. But as they are not team players they do not work generally well in party matters in the first place unless in a leadership position.

Opposition Political Parties and their members are better off if they understand these constraints and begin to apply specific strategies and not do what they do now. Make phone calls just before GE.
 
One main advantage the PAP has in keeping dissenting voices in-house is due to its incumbency. With the large number of directorships in GLCs. NTUC, Think-tank organisations at its disposal, it is able to "reward" its members and keep him quiet. WP and the opposition parties have no such luxury. Couple with the fact that getting elected as MP on an opposition ticket is extremely difficult, those with weaker heart and passion may not stay for the long haul.
 
a. After GE 2006, Cadre's automatic for Candidates, Membership no qualifications

b. After GE 2011, Cadre's not automatic, Membership subject to same qualification and dedication to party work as Cadreship.

I don't want to address the opinion points but the technical points, and it is good that someone other than the FVI had mentioned about why the rules for cadres shifted, so that I know I am responding to a more worthy cause.

I don't have the answers myself, but noticed that before/after 2006, there were a few veterans such as TBS, NAC, GSS etc. that was in line for renewal.

By 2011 period, we can see the renewal had more or less been achieved and the bar could be raised. Most of the CEC ran for election anyway and even if the 5 candidates (which TOC cited) had been raised to cadre, they may not get into the CEC. But do note that the non-cadres who were MPs/NCMPs became cadres (eg Chen, Pritam, Yee, Gerald etc.).

Hence, the bar was raised from candidates to MPs/NCMPs. For raising bars, I see it as natural for an organisation. It may not be "change of rules" or "lessons learnt from fast promotions", as what you and some had alleged.

The only thing I think can be considered is Scroobal's point that the WP should look at its cadre pool, determine the racial balance and take it into account during such appointments, never mind the quality. But I am not sure if that is already done and how many Malay/Indian non-CEC cadres there are that the public does not know of.
 
Back
Top