Dear Singapore, vote for freedom
SEPTEMBER 9, 2015 BY ONLINECITIZEN
By Melissa Low
Dear Singapore
I am not an avid politics watcher, nor am I a sociopolitical academic scholar. I am an average Singaporean, who listens to bits and pieces of the rallies and obligatorily watches the Prime Minister’s speech. However, I have a point to make. I studied law and I have an understanding of Singapore politics, and of British politics and American politics – the so-called gridlocked system the PAP flippantly labels. I am not here to endorse any particular candidate, but a brand of candidate.
The PAP rules by a culture of fear. Why did they call elections on 9/11? The day 14 years ago that no one will forget – when the twin towers in America collapsed because of a terrorist attack. Some say it gives us a long weekend. Some say it’s political timing. Political timing is right, but what sort of sensitivity would Singapore, normally a champion in diplomacy, be showing America by calling one of its most important dates on a day of tragedy and remembrance for the Americans?
My theory is that elections are called on this day precisely to invoke the memory of the 9/11 attacks. We fear change, we fear intrusion, we fear destruction. Let’s have our people vote on the day when they are also bombarded on global media with constant reminders of loss, suffering, and shock. Let’s make them scared of change, and embrace the status quo. It’s also no coincidence that George Bush’s (one of America’s worst mistakes) reign lasted during the anti-terrorist years.
Sure, my theory is a mere theory. What about some facts? Lee Hsien Loong has warned us against voting for the opposition thinking that others will vote for the PAP. That warning comes under the presumption that we all want the PAP to continue being the ruling party, and that opposition will continue merely providing a voice of dissent. That type of warning also is the exact example of ruling by the culture of fear. He wants us to fear change so much that those of us who will vote for the opposition for the sake of constructive dissent will think twice.
Not to mention Lee Hsien Loong’s patronising retort to the SDP. The SDP said that we need opposition in the government to make the government work harder. LHL’s reply was that we should vote for the PAP so that we make the opposition work harder. This reply makes no logical sense whatsoever.
The opposition have worked hard to be where they are today. We had a watershed election in 2011. If we don’t have any opposition in the government, how exactly are they going to level up their game to hold the PAP to account? That’s besides the already obvious point that the PAP has a major advantage, being the ruling party for 56 years. LHL wants to talk to us like we’re children. His argument is guilty of the propositional fallacy of affirming the consequent. (The antecedent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true; if A, then B; B, therefore A). But we are smarter than that.
Singapore’s legal system is founded on that of the British. The British common law is founded on that of Dicey’s rule of law. Dicey’s rule of law states that every system of governance must have checks and balances in it, and that rulers must be held accountable to the people.
One way of having checks and balances in governance is to ensure that no party has monopolistic power. Monopolistic power may be seen as efficient and ideal when used in a “benevolent dictatorship”, but who’s there to save the day when this power turns corrupt?
I’m not saying we should vote for opposition parties for the sake of overthrowing the PAP. I’m not saying any of them are ready to take over as the primary ruling party. I’m saying we should at least have a strong opposition voice to hold the government to account, to represent our rights beyond economic goals, to ensure that the ruling party does not become complacent.
The PAP has neglected our freedoms on the path to economic progress. Economic progress is only one segment of a country’s growth and well-being. Chee Soon Juan fought for our rights to freedom of speech. It is because of him we have Hong Lim Park, a miserly 2.3 acres of land in a relatively unpopulated area, where we can organise protests. Still, that’s progress in the face of the PAP’s consistent clamp down on our freedom of speech and expression.
Lee Hsien Loong is not Lee Kuan Yew. Lee Kuan Yew was a visionary, even if we might not agree with his methods. He had the vision of putting Singapore on the map, and bringing us from third world to first. Lee Hsien Loong is an acquiescent follower, who’s simply carrying on the momentum of his father and having no grand plan for significant change in Singapore, other than continuing economic progress.
A modern LKY would look more like someone who realises that what is sorely lacking in national discourse is the talk on human rights, and our freedoms. A modern LKY would be concerned with championing the protection of our rights against the harsh bid for economic progress. LKY shouted, “Merdeka, Singapore!” Merdeka means freedom. Translated to our current context, freedom means the freedom to question our government without fear of being thrown in jail.
The PAP creates a culture of fear by reminding us of the progress they have made. Well done, but this does not mean that status quo will create the same results. Nor does it mean that the same goals (economic progress) are the citizens’ priorities. What about our freedom of expression? What about a balanced government with checks and balances? The PAP annoyingly reminds us of all the free goodies they give us. Babies get gifts! Newly married couples get cheaper houses! Yay!
My fellow Singaporeans, don’t be afraid. Voting for a viable opposition (if you deem them viable in your constituency) would be a wise move at this stage. We are nowhere close to any party overthrowing the PAP. All we want is enough people in there to make some noise.
Let’s show the world that Singapore is full of intelligent people who value culture, expression and intellectual discourse, and not just people who are proud to have a high-ranking GDP. The PAP is trying to make us feel that voting for them would be the honourable thing to do, to show gratitude for what they have done in the past. But make no mistake. There is no honour in politics. There are only people. And people have to be held accountable. Merdeka, Singapore.
Yours in democracy,
http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/09/dear-singapore-vote-for-freedom/
SEPTEMBER 9, 2015 BY ONLINECITIZEN
By Melissa Low
Dear Singapore
I am not an avid politics watcher, nor am I a sociopolitical academic scholar. I am an average Singaporean, who listens to bits and pieces of the rallies and obligatorily watches the Prime Minister’s speech. However, I have a point to make. I studied law and I have an understanding of Singapore politics, and of British politics and American politics – the so-called gridlocked system the PAP flippantly labels. I am not here to endorse any particular candidate, but a brand of candidate.
The PAP rules by a culture of fear. Why did they call elections on 9/11? The day 14 years ago that no one will forget – when the twin towers in America collapsed because of a terrorist attack. Some say it gives us a long weekend. Some say it’s political timing. Political timing is right, but what sort of sensitivity would Singapore, normally a champion in diplomacy, be showing America by calling one of its most important dates on a day of tragedy and remembrance for the Americans?
My theory is that elections are called on this day precisely to invoke the memory of the 9/11 attacks. We fear change, we fear intrusion, we fear destruction. Let’s have our people vote on the day when they are also bombarded on global media with constant reminders of loss, suffering, and shock. Let’s make them scared of change, and embrace the status quo. It’s also no coincidence that George Bush’s (one of America’s worst mistakes) reign lasted during the anti-terrorist years.
Sure, my theory is a mere theory. What about some facts? Lee Hsien Loong has warned us against voting for the opposition thinking that others will vote for the PAP. That warning comes under the presumption that we all want the PAP to continue being the ruling party, and that opposition will continue merely providing a voice of dissent. That type of warning also is the exact example of ruling by the culture of fear. He wants us to fear change so much that those of us who will vote for the opposition for the sake of constructive dissent will think twice.
Not to mention Lee Hsien Loong’s patronising retort to the SDP. The SDP said that we need opposition in the government to make the government work harder. LHL’s reply was that we should vote for the PAP so that we make the opposition work harder. This reply makes no logical sense whatsoever.
The opposition have worked hard to be where they are today. We had a watershed election in 2011. If we don’t have any opposition in the government, how exactly are they going to level up their game to hold the PAP to account? That’s besides the already obvious point that the PAP has a major advantage, being the ruling party for 56 years. LHL wants to talk to us like we’re children. His argument is guilty of the propositional fallacy of affirming the consequent. (The antecedent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true; if A, then B; B, therefore A). But we are smarter than that.
Singapore’s legal system is founded on that of the British. The British common law is founded on that of Dicey’s rule of law. Dicey’s rule of law states that every system of governance must have checks and balances in it, and that rulers must be held accountable to the people.
One way of having checks and balances in governance is to ensure that no party has monopolistic power. Monopolistic power may be seen as efficient and ideal when used in a “benevolent dictatorship”, but who’s there to save the day when this power turns corrupt?
I’m not saying we should vote for opposition parties for the sake of overthrowing the PAP. I’m not saying any of them are ready to take over as the primary ruling party. I’m saying we should at least have a strong opposition voice to hold the government to account, to represent our rights beyond economic goals, to ensure that the ruling party does not become complacent.
The PAP has neglected our freedoms on the path to economic progress. Economic progress is only one segment of a country’s growth and well-being. Chee Soon Juan fought for our rights to freedom of speech. It is because of him we have Hong Lim Park, a miserly 2.3 acres of land in a relatively unpopulated area, where we can organise protests. Still, that’s progress in the face of the PAP’s consistent clamp down on our freedom of speech and expression.
Lee Hsien Loong is not Lee Kuan Yew. Lee Kuan Yew was a visionary, even if we might not agree with his methods. He had the vision of putting Singapore on the map, and bringing us from third world to first. Lee Hsien Loong is an acquiescent follower, who’s simply carrying on the momentum of his father and having no grand plan for significant change in Singapore, other than continuing economic progress.
A modern LKY would look more like someone who realises that what is sorely lacking in national discourse is the talk on human rights, and our freedoms. A modern LKY would be concerned with championing the protection of our rights against the harsh bid for economic progress. LKY shouted, “Merdeka, Singapore!” Merdeka means freedom. Translated to our current context, freedom means the freedom to question our government without fear of being thrown in jail.
The PAP creates a culture of fear by reminding us of the progress they have made. Well done, but this does not mean that status quo will create the same results. Nor does it mean that the same goals (economic progress) are the citizens’ priorities. What about our freedom of expression? What about a balanced government with checks and balances? The PAP annoyingly reminds us of all the free goodies they give us. Babies get gifts! Newly married couples get cheaper houses! Yay!
My fellow Singaporeans, don’t be afraid. Voting for a viable opposition (if you deem them viable in your constituency) would be a wise move at this stage. We are nowhere close to any party overthrowing the PAP. All we want is enough people in there to make some noise.
Let’s show the world that Singapore is full of intelligent people who value culture, expression and intellectual discourse, and not just people who are proud to have a high-ranking GDP. The PAP is trying to make us feel that voting for them would be the honourable thing to do, to show gratitude for what they have done in the past. But make no mistake. There is no honour in politics. There are only people. And people have to be held accountable. Merdeka, Singapore.
Yours in democracy,
http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/09/dear-singapore-vote-for-freedom/
