Open letter to Low Thia Kiang re: comments made in TODAY

[Avantas]

To:

Mr Low Thia Kiang
Secretary-General of The Workers’ Party
Member of Parliament for Hougang SMC



RE: Interview with TODAY on 1 October 2008



Dear Mr Low,

We refer to the comments allegedly made by you during an interview with TODAY on 1 October 2008.

You are quoted as saying the following words:

“So, Mr Jeyaretnam is no armchair critic, even though he doesn’t know very much about the Internet or political discourse with the Internet. He put his words into action.”

We may be wrong and we hope you can clarify what you meant exactly. Are you implying through the use of Mr Jeyaretnam as an example that the converse is true: that arm-chair critics are those who engage in political discourse with the internet without putting their words into actions ?

What are your views on the growing importance of the alternative media in politics and do you have any plans to utilize it ?

Prominent social activist Emmeline Pankhurst once said: “We are here, not because we are law-breakers; we are here in our efforts to become law-makers“. In a similar fashion, some of the arm-chair critics of today may become the lawmakers of tomorrow.

In today’s conservative political landscape where university students are refused permission to meet an opposition politican on their school campus, how many Singaporeans are genuinely aware or concerned about politics ?


Read rest of article here:

http://wayangparty.wordpress.com/20...ia-kiang-re-his-comments-in-todays-interview/

 

[kakowi]

.....the PAP’s rhetoric that Singaporeans who wish to comment on local politics should do so in Parliament....

Is that what the PAP said? I do not know the context in which they said it.

However:

(1) politics is something voters should be concerned about. We lived and breathe the effects of politics each day. When we switch on the lights; when we drink water from the tap; when we buy food to eat. These are the outcome of our political decisions when we vote;

(2) there is a confusion with comments made by politicians and comments made by the electorate. Politicians seek to further their office by their comments. Electorate expressed how the politicians' decisions affect them with their comments.

I suppose you can call them armchair critics in that they do not stand for election.

On the other hand, does it mean that anyone who commented on policies that affect them, day in day out, must stand for election?

 

[Avantas]

I guess that is what the PAP has been trying to say all along.

 

[friskygambit]

I think Low was simply trying to say that Mr Jeyaretnam was someone who didn't just talk and criticise ("armchair critic") without doing anything. He actually transformed his words into actions.

While it is true that alot of the critics on the internet are very concerned for the well-being of the country, and while it is also true that discussions on politics are part and parcel of political participation, only a small percentage online critics such as bloggers actually participate actively in the political process (canvassing, campaigning, doing walkabouts, attending forums etc). JBJ did all of these.

So I think there is some point to what Low is saying.

Except maybe he shouldn't be so harsh on those "armchair critics" because some participation is better than none.

More should be done to encourage the totally apathetic Singaporeans who are only concerned with shopping, clubbing, and eating, to take an active interest in politics. Online participation is a start.