- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 38,563
- Points
- 113
THE watershed 2011 General Election and the recent Punggol East by-election have highlighted growing displeasure among the electorate towards the People's Action Party (PAP). This trend is disconcerting on several counts.
First, Singaporeans, in their overzealousness to point out areas in which the PAP has fallen short, seem to have been remiss in acknowledging its merits.
Many Singaporeans - most of whom do not understand the nuances of policymaking and its attendant trade-offs - have lambasted the PAP, which, to them, has come to represent all that has gone wrong in society.
While unpopular policies engender much disquiet, good policies attract little or no attention.
Singapore is the way it is today - a thriving First World city that has achieved worldwide renown for its education and defence policies, as well as bustling economy - in no small part due to the PAP.
Second, in the absence of substantive evidence to prove the PAP's complacency or venality, it would be best for Singapore to have a one-party system. It is a politically expedient option and allows us to steer clear of the political brinkmanship and filibustering that now characterise the United States and its dysfunctional politics. Surely, we do not want a government stultified by political gridlock.
Third, with a weaker mandate to govern may come a heightened urge to pander to populist sentiments, and the hemmed-in government that this brings about would not augur well for Singapore, not least because longer-term benefits would be compromised.
We would do well to place pragmatic concerns before the philosophical imperatives of democracy, and be driven less by visceral grievances than by fair-minded thinking - where we will go beyond just lamenting the PAP's flaws to asking if the opposition can serve with better distinction, and questioning if its presence would make for better governance.
Ho Yi Jie
If you hate the US, why does your PAP trade with it?