The hypocrisy of the "opposing for the sake of opposing" mentality:
By RANDOM THOUGHTS OF A FREE THINKER:
I came across on my Facebook feed this post which expressed a very negative opinion on what transpired during Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) Teo Chee Hean's dialogue session with the participants of the 2012 Pre-University Seminar (PUS).
This post, it seems, has garnered quite a lot of "Likes" and positive feedback. I however find it to be a rather confused and biased piece.
To start off, judging from how the author of the post dismisses what DPM Teo said at the dialogue session as "PAP manifesto" and "vanilla PAP policy", the author appears to have rejected outright the official/PAP/Government thinking on issues even before he attended the dialogue session. With such an attitude, I suppose no matter what DPM Teo said, the author would have seen it in a negative light and rejected it. Nothing can enter a closed mind. Or to borrow a Zen analogy, a full cup cannot be filled further.
Yet, despite evidently dismissive of official thinking, the author expects DPM Teo to provide him and his fellow PUS participants solutions to the questions and issues they raised. As mentioned above, this begs the question of whether the author would have accepted the solutions provided by DPM Teo. And it is a rather confused and contradictory stance to adopt - to reject/dismiss the official thinking but expect to be given an official solution.
Also, the author appears to think that just because DPM Teo is a member of the government, he should or must have all the solutions to all the questions and issues raised at the dialogue session. I find this rather funny, in light of how there are those arguing that the Government does not have a monopoly on wisdom, does not have all the solutions, that the Government should be humble enough to seek the opinions and inputs of the people and not impose its thinking on the people. But here we have the author expecting the Government to be an omniscient entity that can and should come up with all the solutions. As a friend of mine puts it on Facebook, it seems that the author expects to be "spoonfed for answers" (sic). And I suppose if DPM Teo had provided solutions, the author would then perhaps accuse him of imposing his thinking on him and his fellow PUS participants.
http://searchingforenlightenment.blogspot.sg/2012/06/response-to-17-year-old-cynic.html