• 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.

The Mandarin-speaking strategy

theDoors

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Oct 17, 2008
Messages
867
Points
0
The Star Online > Insight down south
Saturday October 29, 2011
http://thestar.com.my/services/prin...tdownsouth/9791429.asp&sec=insight down south

The Mandarin-speaking strategy

INSIGHT DOWN SOUTH BY SEAH CHIANG NEE

The PAP has been winning elections since the 1950s because it has commanded the support of many Chinese-speaking middle-class Singaporeans.

HOWEVER much the government may dislike the idea, a two-party system is already a reality in Singapore’s Parliament, although a very lop-sided one. From the Workers Party’s point of view, concentrating on the Chinese-speaking heartland – rather than the Western-educated social networks – is imperative for the next election.

Relatively bite-size, the Workers Party (WP) – with only six out of 88 MPs – appears to be working hard to expand by winning over the non-English speaking heartland.

Their strength is, however, far inferior to the People’s Action Party’s (PAP), and few really believe it can unseat its rival any time soon.

But its recent ability to attract good candidates and its rapid rise in popularity has taken most Singaporeans, including the PAP, by surprise.

Former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew had repeatedly warned that a two-party system would cause Singapore to go into decline. Some of his cabinet colleagues apparently disagreed.

The two parties facing each other in Parliament both possess strength of history dating back to pre-independence. The PAP was created in 1954, and WP three years later.

Their fortunes, however, took separate paths until recently when the latter began to expand just as the PAP showed some signs of weakness.

In May, this traditionally left-of-centre party polled 47% of the votes compared to the PAP’s 53%.

It has shown that it is aware of the importance of taking the large Chinese-speaking ground if it wants to win.

During the past months, it had a programme of home and community visits in the heartland.

Holiday group tours were organised for housing board residents to visit Malaysia and Thailand, including a recent one to China led by party leader Low Thia Kiang.

In addition, the party generally stayed away from embracing liberal causes like eliminating ISA detention laws or capital punishment, gay rights or advocating peaceful public protests. They do stir much heartlander interests.

It chose to aim its arguments to bread-and-butter issues like jobs, immigration, housing and high costs of living that upset Singaporeans.

In the recent 12th Parliament session, the Mandarin-speaking strategy was evident. The PAP responded through its slate of Chinese-educated MPs.

The trend prompted a writer to observe that he had heard so many speeches in Mandarin that it made him wonder if “there had been a new language direction in Parliament?”

By far the most impressive oratorical skill came from WP’s new find, Chen Show Mao, which evoked much public excitement, especially the Chinese-educated.

After listening to him, one of them said that he had reversed his poor opinion of him. “I think he is probably the best Mandarin speaker among Singapore’s entire political elite.”

When state TV made short work of his maiden speech, the Chinese-educated reacted strongly.

A former woman journalist of the pro-government Lianhe Zaobao wrote in a current affairs column: “It was a grave error for Media Corp to refrain from reporting Mr Chen’s epoch-making speech.”

Because of that, she said, Singaporeans were disappointed that they were “deprived of the opportunity of watching Chen’s wisdom and intelligence in action.”

Another writer said that by showing low standard productions, television has kept our peoples intellectually shallow, demanding: “Are you proud of yourselves?”

What was the crux of Chen’s speech? He had used an analogy from the Tang Dynasty to portray an ideal relationship between Singapore’s two main parties.

It centred on famous courtier Wei Zheng, known for speaking the truth without fear of offending Emperor Tang Tai Zong, and the latter instead of removing him, had worked with him.

Benefiting from Wei’s fearless criticisms, the emperor then ushered in a golden era that would serve as a model for China’s future rulers.

He hoped that Parliament could work together in the same way to usher in a peaceful, prosperous way.

It is while people are plunging more into the social media for political news, the major parties have not lost sight of the large important Chinese-speaking community.

The PAP has been winning elections since the 1950s because it has commanded the support of many Chinese-speaking middle-class Singaporeans.

Unlike their children, most do not frequent Internet websites. Their preoccupation often differs from the English-educated society.

From the WP’s point of view, concentrating on the Chinese-speaking heartland – rather than the Western-educated social networks – is imperative for the next election.

Its likely rationale is that the English-educated, especially young Netizens, remain as important now as during the election, but as most are already supporters, they need no special push.

The same, however, cannot be said of heartlanders who form the bulk of the PAP’s political base.

Many are senior citizens and housewives, Chinese businessmen and teachers who still feel beholden to the PAP for bringing their parents out of squalid poverty in the earlier decades.

Some 85% of the population live in public housing. Many have responded well to the PAP’s community bonding activities, especially during festivals.

Worse for its rivals is the older generation had the idea drummed into them that opposition politicians are “trouble-makers”.

Right from the start one of our objectives is to convince these citizens that opposition politicians are nothing of the sort, but capable, serious-thinking people.

In the past the WP had adopted a poor strategy of banking its election hopes almost entirely on the poorer class.

For a long time it stuck to it even though a better economy had shrunk the lower class, decimating its voter base.

The PAP worked hard to win and keep the support of the large middle class, especially the non-English-speaking.

It looks like the current resurging WP leadership doesn’t intend to make the same mistake again.
© 1995-2011 Star Publications (Malaysia) Bhd (Co No 10894-D)
 
there some truth in the article. pap vote bank are always the ignorant housewifes. these ppl only watch news churn out the the 154th or mediacorpse. By trying to interact with aunties, wp can at least erode some of the pap votes.
 
HOWEVER much the government may dislike the idea, a two-party system is already a reality in Singapore’s Parliament, although a very lop-sided one.

hope every1 can get it and move on .....

the rest of OPP are all deadweights... holding WP and democracy back backward and proping PAP up
 
You guys think the strategy will work?

bro,

our populace is just getting a bit more sophisticated these days.

those folks who have truly benefitted from the PAP from the 70s and early 80s would be in their late 50s & above, they are also the same group who are currently looking at how their children & grandchildren are struggling. would say that these folks had seen the best and the worst of the incumbent & thus most suitable of making the most enlightened choice if we eliminate the following factors: blind loyalty & disgruntle.

the second group consists of folks are the crowd puller, mainly of folks in their 30s & 40s. this group grew up whilst benefitting from the fruits of the old vanguards and struggling under the pressure of the changing paradigm. having high aspirations and yet being unable to reconcile idealism with realism. with a growing family in tow, they probably expected more assistance from the government but sets lousy precedents for the future.

the third group consists of the younger lot, having ample time to spare & no clue of what they want. the rebellious age simply puts them against the grains of the norm. the saving grace is probably their higher perceived IQ but their EQ is simply non existence.

plot these three groups of the population against the age pyramid, it's not hard to see that it is only a matter of time that the PAP would fall out of favor of the populace. what WP has been doing is on the right track, it's more important to put certain things on the back burner and i think it would be this: calculation of the cost effectiveness of every public policy WP intend to dish out. Better, Cheaper and Faster than the PAP and that would seal the deal.

just my 1 cent worth :p:p:p

ps: baby Lara would be voting in another 2 cycles?
 
bro,

our populace is just getting a bit more sophisticated these days.

those folks who have truly benefitted from the PAP from the 70s and early 80s would be in their late 50s & above, they are also the same group who are currently looking at how their children & grandchildren are struggling. would say that these folks had seen the best and the worst of the incumbent & thus most suitable of making the most enlightened choice if we eliminate the following factors: blind loyalty & disgruntle.

the second group consists of folks are the crowd puller, mainly of folks in their 30s & 40s. this group grew up whilst benefitting from the fruits of the old vanguards and struggling under the pressure of the changing paradigm. having high aspirations and yet being unable to reconcile idealism with realism. with a growing family in tow, they probably expected more assistance from the government but sets lousy precedents for the future.

the third group consists of the younger lot, having ample time to spare & no clue of what they want. the rebellious age simply puts them against the grains of the norm. the saving grace is probably their higher perceived IQ but their EQ is simply non existence.

plot these three groups of the population against the age pyramid, it's not hard to see that it is only a matter of time that the PAP would fall out of favor of the populace. what WP has been doing is on the right track, it's more important to put certain things on the back burner and i think it would be this: calculation of the cost effectiveness of every public policy WP intend to dish out. Better, Cheaper and Faster than the PAP and that would seal the deal.

just my 1 cent worth :p:p:p

ps: baby Lara would be voting in another 2 cycles?

babylara is 6 years old liao
 
[video=youtube;_t6iW5FjrWs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_t6iW5FjrWs[/video]

[video=youtube;tezhzB5kon8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tezhzB5kon8[/video]
 
Last edited:
Language will always play significant role in politics for a country that is racially divided and deliberately kept racially divided. The PAP has itself to blame. It went on the Mandarin bandwagon and most students think are thought along Mandarin centric themes except for the elite schools. The new voters are however not elite in majority.

Now WP has decided to play in the same pond.
 
Will the MIWs resort to fielding mainlander new citizens as candidates?
 
CSM might also be appealing to the new immigrants. He is, after all, eloquent both in English and mandarin, something which is quite lacking in most of the parliament in general...until now.
 
One question I have to ask, and I apologize in advance if it comes across as silly: does anyone think this strategy will marginalize the minority races and indeed, the English-speaking, English-educated Chinese? Or, is the so-called Chinese middle-class vote bank so large that one can afford to ignore the former?
 
Wow, Chen's Mandarin is even better then my Hunan accent one. Blush, blush.

He's preparing Singapore for the eventual Reunification with China.

Good work comrade Chen!
 
Last edited:
Parliamentarians should speak only English in Parliment. What's the point of speaking in Chinese (Malay or Tamil) when the laws are finally to be written in English?
 
Parliamentarians should speak only English in Parliment. What's the point of speaking in Chinese (Malay or Tamil) when the laws are finally to be written in English?

But the Sinophiles have been arguing China's pre-eminence in the world economy is inevitable, speaking Mandarin is being practical.
 
For this approach to work, they need the entire vote bank of the biggest minority segment - the malays. They had it until I suppose the last GE. The Malay community has been courted and pressured to such an extent that it is a block vote. When the Malay professionals attempted to break away, the govt intervened in the early 90s. The Deal is they run their own show and have a say about who they leaders are . One of the 90s rebel is President of MUIS. You seldom see Malays queuing up at meet the people session. They have a special channel.
One question I have to ask, and I apologize in advance if it comes across as silly: does anyone think this strategy will marginalize the minority races and indeed, the English-speaking, English-educated Chinese? Or, is the so-called Chinese middle-class vote bank so large that one can afford to ignore the former?
 
Back
Top