2 oppositions, and why in the long run, they may not matter at all, part 2 - Alex Au

[SNAblog]

A continuation from part 1.
Certainly thought-provoking whether you agree with his analysis or not. I think it is worthwhile for the various opposition parties to reflect on his points.

http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2009/yax-1091.htm
29 Dec 2009

2 oppositions, and why in the long run, they may not matter at all, part 2

In my previous article, I presented a diagram showing the ruling People's Action Party's (PAP's) credo, and the chief baskets of grievances behind dissent. Readers may therefore expect that the next step in this analysis would be to identify which opposition party represents which basket, and how.

But that would be to miss the big picture, for the chief driver of opposition politics today is a dislike, a visceral dislike, of the PAP's style. They hate the PAP more than they disagree with its policies. This is unlike, say, 40 years ago, when the differences were primarily programmatic, even ideological.

Having a visceral dislike of style as the main driving force has pros and cons. On the one hand, it means that there is little the PAP can realistically do to win over the opposition's core base. Hate, once engendered, is hard to dispel. On the other hand, it is difficult to grow opposition support so long as the rest of the voters do not share, as strongly, the same dislike. This probably accounts for the fact that vote-share for opposition parties tends to be stuck in the 25 – 40 percent range.

Opposition parties deal with this problem in two, not mutually exclusive, ways. The first is to try to fan hate, and hope more people come on board. The second is to sheath its emotive impulses, and work at selling reasonable-sounding criticisms of the PAP's policies, with the aim of convincing middle-of-the-road voters.

The problem with the latter is that it is hard work, and when one's chief motive in being in the opposition is visceral dislike, such work feels like a chore. It is made all the harder when policy think-tanks are virtually unheard of in opposition parties' ranks, making it nearly impossible to come up with coherent platforms that can withstand criticism.......

To read the whole article, please go to:

http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2009/yax-1091.htm

 

[scroobal]

Re: 2 oppositions, and why in the long run, they may not matter at all, part 2 - Alex

Another great article for discussion and debate by Alex Au. Here are some contrarian observations;

1) Not sure if Alex understands what the term "visceral" means. Essentially a position or feeling that is not based on reason or has intellectual basis. I am sure there are a myriad of reason why some people hate the PAP which are very much sound and reasonable. Here are a couple
- a track record of control via ISA, SPH and other draconian laws including such things as GRC
- ready to bankrupt some to make him politically sterile
- using IRAS to conduct tax raids shortly after elections on 2 candidates
- refusing to give reasons when rejecting permits etc with no explanation or ridiculous explanation
- lack of transparency
The above are examples of conduct and behaviour by an incumbent government that creates a strong opinion in the minds of an average citizen which are not directly tied to policies but which may result in hate. The hate in this case is not without reason. It makes sense for an opposition to make clear that conduct and behaviour of this nature is not acceptable and my guess is that it will resonate with the people. Surely not visceral but well reasoned and clearly well demonstrated by the PAP.

In essence, both policies and the conduct and behaviour of the PAP are important to address where the PAP is concerned. It only becomes visceral when people who hate lightning hate the PAP because the party symbol has a lightning in it. Which has bearing on what they have been doing.

2) I think his analysis is more academic than an academic. People like Milne and Mauzy tend to be overly abstract to avoid censorship. Not sure if the same need is there since we are dealing with the opposition. We need for people to get the message so that they can pressure their favorite opposition party to be better and sharper at this.

3) I actually think that in the SDP's case it was not bad economic analysis but their civil liberties and civil disobedience that had outshone all other efforts.

4) Very right about the WP.

 

[lockeliberal]

Re: 2 oppositions, and why in the long run, they may not matter at all, part 2 - Alex

Dear Scroo

Alex underestimates the emotion of the mob at his peril or the extent that the mob can sway the middle ground and not just the 25 t0 40% he believes will vote opposition anyway Heck the PAP fears emotion and hence the cooling off, he is on the mark though with all other aspects



Locke

 

[kingrant]

Re: 2 oppositions, and why in the long run, they may not matter at all, part 2 - Alex

Another great article for discussion and debate by Alex Au. Here are some contrarian observations;

1) Here are a couple
- a track record of control via ISA, SPH and other draconian laws including such things as GRC
- ready to bankrupt some to make him politically sterile
- using IRAS to conduct tax raids shortly after elections on 2 candidates
- refusing to give reasons when rejecting permits etc with no explanation or ridiculous explanation
- lack of transparency
The above are examples of conduct and behaviour by an incumbent government that creates a strong opinion in the minds of an average citizen which are not directly tied to policies but which may result in hate. The hate in this case is not without reason. It makes sense for an opposition to make clear that conduct and behaviour of this nature is not acceptable and my guess is that it will resonate with the people. Surely not visceral but well reasoned and clearly well demonstrated by the PAP.

Scro, Of all the Opp parties, I find only the SDP takes after the issues you listed. They are hammering away at them by way of street struggles that too often alarms the average voter who has been conditioned by the PAP to look at them as if they are a bunch of street hooligans and law-breakers e.g. shouting at GCT did not go down well, no matter how CSJ explained it. The Barisan Sosialis abandoned Parliament and took their struggle to the streets and that spelled the start of their decline. SDP has the targets in their sights but they should modify or mold their tactics to assuage voters' uneasiness besides the feeling real or imaginary of being used (as Alex Au puts it).

If SDP can put all that illegitimacy, unconstitutionality, unjust laws and courts, etc into plain lingo that the common man can relate and resonate with his personal freedom and daily living, then it may be able to gain more sympathy votes. If e.g. he can champion real causes for the real citizen, the way Chin Siong championed causes in the trade unions, representing real people and not things like TBT with his own kakis in the brush with the law. Does Chee really undertake any grassroots work I wonder? If so, he shld have tons of causes, real causes.

 

[scroobal]

Re: 2 oppositions, and why in the long run, they may not matter at all, part 2 - Alex

Agree on your first observation.

Not sure on the SDP aspect though. Its common knowledge that compared to other political parties that tend to be lukewarm and reticent in the presence of Alex, SDP and its fans have been very "sociable". He mentions how successfully people associate SDP ( which is right) with the "civil liberties" brand but stops short of saying if it is the brand that works for the voters. He conveniently dissects SDP economic analysis piece. I could understand if he did it with KJ and RP because of KJ's bent on it. But I am sure SDP is not keen to portray themselves as the custodian of economic solutions. This is one part where Alex has taken the approach of "Car Review journalists" - who become familiar with car distributors and after a while spend more time talking about the colour of dashboard (SDP's economic piece) and any negative is compared with a supreme car such as the Ferrari. I guess we are all human after all.

Dear Scroo
Alex underestimates the emotion of the mob at his peril or the extent that the mob can sway the middle ground and not just the 25 t0 40% he believes will vote opposition anyway Heck the PAP fears emotion and hence the cooling off, he is on the mark though with all other aspects
Locke

 

[scroobal]

Re: 2 oppositions, and why in the long run, they may not matter at all, part 2 - Alex

There is certainly conditioning involved and SDP has to be mindful of it. We have been conditioned to look at politicies. We are also conditoned that there are mechanisms such as the Feedback Unit and that there are grassroots leaders toiling night and day to pass that feedback on and therefore opposition is more or less redundant.

SDP either does not know how to re-invent itself or the conviction of the chosen path is just too strong. It is also path of those that are too passionate ie the Barisan mob and those soaked in revolutionary zeal. No longer fashionable nor convincing when any Singaporean can get a cheap flight to an overseas tourist spot at anytime of the year. The climate just does not exist.

Look at Chiam and LTK, note their dressing and tone. Thats why Chee was such a massive draw when he first appeared on the scene.

Scro, Of all the Opp parties, I find only the SDP takes after the issues you listed. They are hammering away at them by way of street struggles that too often alarms the average voter who has been conditioned by the PAP to look at them as if they are a bunch of street hooligans and law-breakers e.g. shouting at GCT did not go down well, no matter how CSJ explained it. The Barisan Sosialis abandoned Parliament and took their struggle to the streets and that spelled the start of their decline. SDP has the targets in their sights but they should modify or mold their tactics to assuage voters' uneasiness besides the feeling real or imaginary of being used (as Alex Au puts it).

Spot on bro. Unfortunately there has not been one iota of change in that direction despite the drubbing in Jurong which put paid to that strategy. This is where I think Chee became fatalistic and ratched up the strategy even more with a string on incidents leading to court convictions. It has also given rise to suspicion that a different agenda associated with foreigners and funding is in play.

If SDP can put all that illegitimacy, unconstitutionality, unjust laws and courts, etc into plain lingo that the common man can relate and resonate with his personal freedom and daily living, then it may be able to gain more sympathy votes. If e.g. he can champion real causes for the real citizen, the way Chin Siong championed causes in the trade unions, representing real people and not things like TBT with his own kakis in the brush with the law. Does Chee really undertake any grassroots work I wonder? If so, he shld have tons of causes, real causes.