The Reuban Wang Story & the future of Singapore

[scroobal]

I am sure many did not read fully what his post was but here is an opportunity to read and judge for yourselves the content. I will comment on the next post.

"So on the first real day of PUS, DPM Teo Chee Hean came to have a “conversation” with the participants. Simply put, any little respect I have for him before is now lost. Essentially, he skipped over vital topics the youth are interested in and essentially explained the PAP manifesto- the the audience was visibly and audibly annoyed. You can find a censored version on RazorTV, but it was essentially a roast of DPM Teo. For those not familiar with roasts, Comedy Central occasionally get controversial people to sit in the middle of a stage while comedians rip him apart, all in good fun. Except here, there is no good fun. The participants made it extremely clear they were dissatisfied with DPM Teo- and when we asked about our concerns which we do not know what can be done to solved, he will give the ridiculous reply “What do you think (can be done)?”. Flaming piece of bullshit. We are 17 year old with very little to no life experience and you want us to come up with policies for you? It is exactly because we don’t know what can be done we worry about the country. We seek your opinion. You gave us none. And when someone manned up and replied, “I am 17 years old, I don’t know what to do”, the crowd went berserk in applause. Fuck you, sir. We elected you into office because we believe you held the answers- and in (any other) democracy, if you cannot come up with a solution, we will vote you out. Maybe Low Thia Kiang has an answer. Look at Bush’s Republican party- they cannot come up with an adequate solution for the debt, Iraq, etc. and Obama was voted in- he is now facing the same problem. My point is that this is really ridiculous for DPM Teo to ask for solutions. And even if we gave one, his experience in parliament will allow him to rip it apart and replace it with the vanilla PAP policy. Fuck you.

There is also an epidemic on dodging questions. Whenever a question which hit home was asked, he simply asked for the next question. To the point where he skipped 7-8 question in a row on freedom of speech and other topics the PAP is scared of. He also maneuvered as a politician would- when asked about freedom of press, he diverted into the problems of the US press and not mention about the state of Singapore- fearing cooperate interests in free press, championing “responsible press”, forgetting the it is only responsible to the government’s view on issues. And when the term “without censorship” came in third in the data collected from us prior to the talk in “ideal attributes for Singapore”, he did not even mention it and just talk about other things. And when faced with a tough question, he turned to anecdotes and stupid analogies, including his dead grandparents, escalators breaking down, mountains and mountain ranges, before coming back to mention the problem and moving on. Fuck you, sir.

It was fun to watch his face when the most upvoted comment in the miniforum we used via smartphones which was projected on the board mentioned “I will fight for true democracy” and “I will fight for Hougang Teochew Porridge.”

 

[steffychun]

I wonder when he apologised did he have to rescind all his believes in press freedom?

 

[kingrant]

A candid blogger, an evasive DPM, what the fuck?

Has a ring of deja vu.

''I merely asked a few questions; if there's an integrity problem, it's already with WP"

"I merely asked a few questions; if there was an inherent instinct to evade, it's with the MIWs".

If the picture was as painted by Reuben, what is there to apologise for?

Shouldnt the DPM apologise to the people for not answering directly the questions posed by the students which would have been asked by us?

And if he only evades, then isnt it right for us to fuck him? He's lucky he's getting direct feedback. Or does he prefer a big FUCK YOU at GE2016?

So at the end of the day, we got a retraction and an apology. But still no answers. And it is OK, life goes on.

 

[steffychun]

Or does he prefer a big FUCK YOU at GE2016?

Well that would mean a heated campaign in his GRC to knock him and his buddies out.

 

[deepblue0911]

The main grouses seem to be dodging questions (or at least perceived to be), giving non-answers to questions or responding to questions with questions.

TCH do not need to spoon-feed the students with answers. There's nothing wrong with questioning those who come up with problems and challenging them to present their thoughts on the issues.

But the purpose of this approach must be to challenge their thinking, help them think through the issues, guide them so that they can explore possible solutions, the various pros and cons, etc. In other words, help the students develop critical thinking and analytical skills. It would appear that some students like Reuben were frustrated because:

1. Dodging of questions on freedom of speech and press, skipping them - Frustrating, and justified in my opinion. Reuben and others probably also felt quite helpless that they could not press on and pursue these issues relentlessly. Perhaps the engagement was moderated by someone. Might be good to find out who is the moderator.

2. Dodging of questions by replying in anecdotes and analogies - Frustrating, but this is normal for difficult questions. Reuben must learn that in the real world, this happens.

3. Dellberate omission of question on censorship - Frustrating, and justified

4. Answering a question with "what do you think?" - Frustrating, but not justified. Not sure whether the students only asked questions, or they also state their opinions. If they had not at the point when the questions were asked, TCH was right to pose this question back to the student. At JC/Pre-U level, students are expected to think critically. You need to develop your own ideas, positions, principles, values, etc. You must have an opinion of the question you pose.

But I understand Reuben's frustration. If 17-year-old students have all the answers to the problems, they're genius and would have been at Harvard or Oxford and not still in JC/Pre-U.

I'm speculating that the session was not properly facilitated/moderated. A skilled facilitator would know how to get participants and TCH engaged, through effective open-ended questions and to-the-point answers. TCH won't be able to dodge straight questions without giving a straight answer.

 

[nanana1]

Read his lips carefully : He apologised for the dirty language and vulgarities used in his comment and post.

 

[Simbian]

At the end of the day, the problem is of differing expectations. Students like Reuben go into these events expecting a frank dialogue, the organisers just want the glory, and the establishment peeps like TCH think it is just another wayang.

Personally, I do not see how a good moderator would have helped. The gap is so large that it cannot be crossed unless one side make the effort to bridge it. And I can tell you it is not going to happen from the end of Singaporean students like Reuben, etc.

 

[deepblue0911]

At the end of the day, the problem is of differing expectations. Students like Reuben go into these events expecting a frank dialogue, the organisers just want the glory, and the establishment peeps like TCH think it is just another wayang.

Personally, I do not see how a good moderator would have helped. The gap is so large that it cannot be crossed unless one side make the effort to bridge it. And I can tell you it is not going to happen from the end of Singaporean students like Reuben, etc.

Agree with you that there's huge gulf in expectations and interests of different parties involved. A good moderator (apart from skills, more importantly is impartiality) would help to ensure that issues are dealt with as objectively and clearly as possible, and no one tries to dodge issues, mislead, confuse, etc. Of course, there's no guarantee that all students will leave the seminar feeling enriched.

 

[scroobal]

Delighted with many of the observations that you guys have made. I agree as well. To me he enters the list of a rare few like Ken Kwek, Jamie Han, Melanie Lee and a female journalist whose name slips me into a Hall of Fame for the young, bold and promising. All 5 of these individuals were exceptional in the way that they say thru the haze of bullshit and called it as they saw it. I am proud that we have such young ones in our midst. Where we have failed, these guys will step forward.

Now back to Reuban......

1) This is 17 year Pre-U student who attended a formal Pre University Seminar dressed in formal suits to engage and learn from Deputy Prime Minister of Singapore. So we are not looking at some flippant comments coming from a passerby who witnessed an event and made some comments out of context.
2) The post is very well written and the style compelling, highly informative and cogent and very relevant. His observations are many and they are not trivial. The use of expletives is powerful and not gratuitous. It makes the point where the engagement missed the expectation of an attendee a mile off.
3) Note his observation of others who participated. Also note the most popular comment that flashed from the attendees on to the screen. None of these observations made the local brothel press. Fucking disgrace by our usual prostitutes. (do go back and read this part as it telling what transpired and what the general audience thought)

I am sure there was tremendous pressure of the Reuban, his family and the school to bow and I think they all the right thing to diffuse the situation and allow the valve to blow open. I am also absolutely sure that all involved in diffusing the situation are proud of Reuban and what he stood by.

 

[angbin]

This is an annual seminar for selected JC kids. Kids coming here do not come back again next year for the same seminar as seats should be limited and given to new students.

So when TCH said he is giving the kids time to think deep and send them home without providing an answer or at lease a hint of the answer what is he really saying? "go think deep deep and maybe if you have a chance to come back to this seminar next year, and maybe if I can remember I still not answer I will answer you"? Dodging is dodging. Don't know is don't know. Skiving is skiving. Getting fucked is getting fucked simple as that.

 

[scroobal]

Now for the DPM Teo Chee Hian.......

1) He took the students for granted and expected an Asian approach where Confucian ethics of deference would overcome any bullshit that PAP had to deliver - wrong
2) He thought that by sidestepping questions he would not be noticed - wrong again
3) He thought that it would a one way street - very wrong

Now for the Brothel Press.....

Disgraceful for failing to disclose what actually transpired and what the audience flashed on the board. You guys are a disgrace to your families and sincerely hope you do look into your conduct in this sordid affairs.

Now for the Porlumpars........

And there are many like Abraham Rajadurai, Ex- NMP Zulkifli etc who commented on the issue. If you though the use of the expletives was the central issue, think again.

Now for Reuban's Parents ....

Thank for bringing up a son like Reuban . We are all proud of him. It is not easy to bring up a young boy in a country noted for its conditioning, auto censorship and mind management. This country owes a debt to you for delivering a bold young man who was prepared to share his thoughts in frank and honest manner. As you know the Singapore Press has been extremely successful in launching and running STOMP. It is a testimony to the depth that this country has fallen where citizen journalism is STOMP and where the highlight of the day is when someone post a picture of an FT putting his feet on the seat on front of him in a public transport. Mind you SPH is helmed by a President Scholar. What does that tell you?

 

[MightyMouse]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2QUpp67OtIU

It is indeed encouraging to see the kinds of questions being raised by our pre-U students. The long queue behind the mike to raise questions is not usual, going by the norms.

 

[Fook Seng]

Reuban is right to use the term "roasting". Otherwise, why was there so much call for the young people to show more respect to the leaders.

Asking for solutions from the students at the first instance questions are asked, to be followed by grilling the students on their solutions, will leave the audience still at a loss what the govt's official stand is, a very unsatisfactory outcome.

The DPM in this instance looked upon the students in a condescending way and did not prepare well for the occasion, the same way he had insulted the intelligence of the electorate at Hougang with his allegations. In both cases he had underestimated his audience.

 

[Satyr]

Second that message to Reuban's parents. Unless politicians are prepared to be forthright they should not appear for dialogues. As a politician in a democracy you have to answer to the people. I agree these are hard questions. But our leaders are chosen for their exceptional qualities and rewarded accordingly. You may not have the answers but you must win respect. I have seen Tony Blair (who is paid a fraction of what our junior ministers get) conduct himself with great poise in similar circumstances. LKY himself was prepared to say what he thought and defend it to anyone. True, not everyone liked what he said but they respected him.

 

[scroobal]

Answering a question with another question is to avoid the issue and it was the favourite tactic of the old man. He did it with Jamie, Ken Kwek and Melanie Lee. All three gave him back 3 bags full. He asked Ken Kwek do you want me to step down and Ken said a firm "yes". Did the old prick step down - no. Why the fuck did he ask the question then.

We need to tell the youth of Singapore that we are behind them. They need to read widely and avoid the MSM as it has misled 2 generations. The quid pro quo arrangement was Singaporeans to remain quiet and the PAP in return will provide excellent infrastructure, a steady growth path and a future brighter than any other 3rd world country. We kept our end of the bargain by selling our souls and the PAP delivered admirably with 25 years of pioneering work. We kept quiet and led a couple to rot in prison.

That arrangement has broken down. Singaporeans are being kicked out of our jobs relying on HDB rent and hand-outs and watching FTs mow down our people, behave badly and bringing all kinds of social ills. We also have to endure a whole generation of PAP ministers and MPs who can't even hold an audience of teenagers with their conviction, passion and leadership. Forget about charisma and class.

The Reuban factor is not going to disappear, it not going to go away - its a sign of more things to come. You cannot buy the Reubans of Singapore with books, fast food vouchers and an emasculated MSM.

The PAP was given a golden opportunity to address the Sear Hock Rong case. An imbecile that could not even get thru probation as a clerk in the civil service. Instead they recently recognised him as a promising youth. What kind of imbecile is proud to sell funeral blankets and relies on grassroots business.

 

[scroobal]

Thank you for an excellent precise on the issue.

The main grouses seem to be dodging questions (or at least perceived to be), giving non-answers to questions or responding to questions with questions.

I'm speculating that the session was not properly facilitated/moderated. A skilled facilitator would know how to get participants and TCH engaged, through effective open-ended questions and to-the-point answers. TCH won't be able to dodge straight questions without giving a straight answer.

 

[Cruxx]

The PAP was given a golden opportunity to address the Sear Hock Rong case. An imbecile that could not even get thru probation as a clerk in the civil service. Instead they recently recognised him as a promising youth. What kind of imbecile is proud to sell funeral blankets and relies on grassroots business.

That's enough. Leave RonRon alone!

 

[deepblue0911]

Thank you for an excellent precise on the issue.

Thanks Scroobal.

I admire Reuben's guts. At his age, I would not have done what he did, even if I had the opportunity to go to the PUS. Not that there's FaceBook at that time.

It's a sad day for Singapore if our present leaders are dismissive, and our future generations end up feeling disengaged and disenfranchised. If our youths feel disconnected from Singapore, then the problem is severe and it's not just about petty partisan politics.

It threatens our survival.

 

[jw5]

Now for the DPM Teo Chee Hian.......

1) He took the students for granted and expected an Asian approach where Confucian ethics of deference would overcome any bullshit that PAP had to deliver - wrong
2) He thought that by sidestepping questions he would not be noticed - wrong again
3) He thought that it would a one way street - very wrong

There may have even been certain instances where he really didn't know the answer to the question.

 

[scroobal]

When the leadership hold their meetings at Pyramid Club, they answer questions but also state why they do it. They also reveal the unplesant consequences or the desired results. They also concede where some policies have failed. They have to or else no one of importance or significance will turn up for future meetings. These sessions are essentially marketing and a bit of brainwash but it is done to keep the cream of society engaged. Also an excellent opportunity to recruit cocksuckers.

Obviously DPM took our young teens for granted. Tharman would not have done that. He was in similar position when he was a young undgrad.

There may have even been certain instances where he really didn't know the answer to the question.