"vote-for-any-except-pap-because-I-hate-pap"

[dredd]

Burma, until very recently was an oppressive state. Syu-Kii won an election many years ago, only to be arrested by the military Junta. There were no elections again until just a few weeks ago.

Cheers!

Not interested to discuss Burma. Only that you mentioned elections HERE is fair which I disagree totally because gerrymandering in politics is never fair. Oppression comes in many forms. When the ruling party controls the state media, judiciary...etc... it is oppression however way you look at it. They are not Gods, they are merely the gahment of the day. And neither is it "political prowess" like you said. It is oppression plain and simple.

 

[Sideswipe]

Lee is not an easy adversary if one chose to confront him. Like I said earlier, no one in Singapore comes close to the political might he wields. However, he does all these legally - through the courts, not via thugs and/or hired goons with guns who resort to violence, intimidation and thuggery. One is allowed to form a political party and stand for elections (within the law of course.)

like it or not. Lau Lee is a well respected statesman worldwide. i don't like him but he is definitely not in the Kim Jong II and Saddam Hussein league. i don't think forummers here are serious when they compared him to those two.

 

[HTOLAS]

This is a repeat from another thread, but I think it bears repeating.

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely (Lord Acton). In a democracy (even a flawed one like ours) absolute power translates into an absolute majority in parliament (2/3 of the seats or 58 seats in our case). We must do our best to bring this absolute majority to an end, and this means voting opposition by default until the PAPzis hold less than 58 seats.

 

[dredd]

I agree with all that.

Lee is not an easy adversary if one chose to confront him. Like I said earlier, no one in Singapore comes close to the political might he wields. However, he does all these legally - through the courts, not via thugs and/or hired goons with guns who resort to violence, intimidation and thuggery. One is allowed to form a political party and stand for elections (within the law of course.)


Cheers!

Tyrants do everything "legally" because they say it to be "legal". When you control everything, you can do everything. Thugs, hired goons with guns, violence, intimidation, thuggery?... obviously you are not well read enough to know otherwise (Ref: Singapore's dissidents - their accounts). Or maybe because the media is so tightly controlled, you don't know. But thanks for making my point about an oppressive state.

 

[dredd]

This is a repeat from another thread, but I think it bears repeating.

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely (Lord Acton). In a democracy (even a flawed one like ours) absolute power translates into an absolute majority in parliament (2/3 of the seats or 58 seats in our case). We must do our best to bring this absolute majority to an end, and this means voting opposition by default until the PAPzis hold less than 58 seats.

You are absolutely right. But never underestimate the desire to hold on to power.... Should and when a "freak" result occurs, don't be too sure you won't see something bad happening.

 

[Sideswipe]

Not interested to discuss Burma. Only that you mentioned elections HERE is fair which I disagree totally because gerrymandering in politics is never fair. Oppression comes in many forms. When the ruling party controls the state media, judiciary...etc... it is oppression however way you look at it. They are not Gods, they are merely the gahment of the day. And neither is it "political prowess" like you said. It is oppression plain and simple.

if you are in power, will you gerrymander without taking into consideration the geographical and racial context?

i will definitely gerrymander. have to protect the party interests to achieve the desired election result and give the MP candidates their best chances of winning the election. it's political reality. all ruling party in power will gerrymander the electoral districts.

 

[rodent2005]

if you are in power, will you gerrymander without taking into consideration the geographical and racial context?

i will definitely gerrymander. have to protect the party interests to achieve the desired election result and give the MP candidates their best chances of winning the election. it's political reality. all ruling party in power will gerrymander the electoral districts.

I'm surprised you can say such childish thing and try to use it as an argument. Who gives a damn what PAP does for its self-interest and why should anyone? It's like a kidnapper telling his victim "I gotta kill you so that I won't be caught. You must see it from my point of view and so you must not mind dying for my sake."

 

[dredd]

if you are in power, will you gerrymander without taking into consideration the geographical and racial context?

i will definitely gerrymander. have to protect the party interests to achieve the desired election result and give the MP candidates their best chances of winning the election. it's political reality. all ruling party in power will gerrymander the electoral districts.

Why? Because power is so difficult to give up? I wouldn't want to live in a state, or bring up my children in a state where greedy politicians cling on to power whatever it takes to continue to enrich themselves and their cronies at the expense of its citizens. Would you? That is why we want to aspire to do better. First world countries don't gerrymander. Their lives are not much worse. And please don't compare us to worse-off countries.

 

[soIsee]

like it or not. Lau Lee is a well respected statesman worldwide. i don't like him but he is definitely not in the Kim Jong II and Saddam Hussein league. i don't think forummers here are serious when they compared him to those two.

Bums like you can say this becos you were not the ones you kenna like Lim Hock Siew, who 'bo ta bo chee' kenna locked up for 19 years!

Now you say to compare to KJ II or Saddm got what fucking different?

KJ II and Saddam at least kill you rather than crucify and not kill you and then later let you out to be mocked by a bunch of dogs who have taken over the running of the place!

 

[Agoraphobic]

Not interested to discuss Burma. Only that you mentioned elections HERE is fair which I disagree totally because gerrymandering in politics is never fair. Oppression comes in many forms. When the ruling party controls the state media, judiciary...etc... it is oppression however way you look at it. They are not Gods, they are merely the gahment of the day. And neither is it "political prowess" like you said. It is oppression plain and simple.

Gerrymandering in politics is never fair? I think gerrymandering is a part of politics. Although one does not need to.

In primary school I remember some boys used to say, "He ask you to eat shit, you listen to him ah?"

Cheers!

 

[Agoraphobic]

Tyrants do everything "legally" because they say it to be "legal". When you control everything, you can do everything. Thugs, hired goons with guns, violence, intimidation, thuggery?... obviously you are not well read enough to know otherwise (Ref: Singapore's dissidents - their accounts). Or maybe because the media is so tightly controlled, you don't know. But thanks for making my point about an oppressive state.

Lau Lee isn't a tyrant. When he wants something implemented, he puts it out to Parliament, they vote on it, and then it becomes policy "if" there is a majority who support it. That's democratic. He wants to sue you, he takes you to court, battle over it, proves you have defamed him, and then the judge sentences you. The way I see it, it is not wrong. Just a damn smart guy who is able to garner support.

Cheers!

 

[dredd]

Lau Lee isn't a tyrant. When he wants something implemented, he puts it out to Parliament, they vote on it, and then it becomes policy "if" there is a majority who support it. That's democratic. He wants to sue you, he takes you to court, battle over it, proves you have defamed him, and then the judge sentences you. The way I see it, it is not wrong. Just a damn smart guy who is able to garner support.

Cheers!

What do you call someone who wants to punish you simply because you don't share his views, tells you to prove your ideas to a circle of his own people and then orders them to pass judgement saying you are a danger to everyone and then locks you away and throws away the key? Smart? Above board? Maybe to you. Not me. You don't need to have brains to be top dog in this instance, only a greater measure of evil than the rest. This is something that the Al Capones, Robert Mubages, Kim Il Sungs, Saddam Husseins, Gadhaffis... all possess, that greater evil.

 

[dredd]

Gerrymandering in politics is never fair? I think gerrymandering is a part of politics. Although one does not need to.

In primary school I remember some boys used to say, "He ask you to eat shit, you listen to him ah?"

Cheers!

Sorry. Don't quite follow your thoughts. What has eating shit got to do with political gerrymandering, buying votes, fixing oppositions, jailing activists and dissidents, banishing people to small indescript places after they have served more than two decades in a prison cell, milking the land for all its worth, enriching themselves with millions and millions of state funds, denying people the right to practice their profession and earning an income, bankrupting adversaries, social engineering, denying people their rights, banning foreign publications, chasing anyone you don't like out of their country...

 

[Agoraphobic]

What do you call someone who wants to punish you simply because you don't share his views, tells you to prove your ideas to a circle of his own people and then orders them to pass judgement saying you are a danger to everyone and then locks you away and throws away the key? Smart? Above board? Maybe to you. Not me. You don't need to have brains to be top dog in this instance, only a greater measure of evil than the rest. This is something that the Al Capones, Robert Mubages, Kim Il Sungs, Saddam Husseins, Gadhaffis... all possess, that greater evil.

I do not agree with what LKY's ways, neither do I say what he did is admirable or noble. However, I do acknowledge that politics isn't poetry. He deals with his political opponents drastically. If one challenges him, one better be prepared for his return blow which in the state we live in, is within the law. Like I said earlier, if one fights in heavyweight division, one better be heavyweight. We have all seen what happened to these light and bantam weights who receive a blow from a heavyweight ~ KO! They're not of the same league.

Cheers!

 

[Agoraphobic]

Sorry. Don't quite follow your thoughts. What has eating shit got to do with political gerrymandering, buying votes, fixing oppositions, jailing activists and dissidents, banishing people to small indescript places after they have served more than two decades in a prison cell, milking the land for all its worth, enriching themselves with millions and millions of state funds, denying people the right to practice their profession and earning an income, bankrupting adversaries, social engineering, denying people their rights, banning foreign publications, chasing anyone you don't like out of their country...

What I meant is that one does not have to listen and followo whatever one is told.

Milking the land (and it wealth, through the efforts of others) - that's what politicians do; that's why I don't care for them.

Cheers!

 

[Narong Wongwan]

I do not agree with what LKY's ways, neither do I say what he did is admirable or noble. However, I do acknowledge that politics isn't poetry. He deals with his political opponents drastically. If one challenges him, one better be prepared for his return blow which in the state we live in, is within the law. Like I said earlier, if one fights in heavyweight division, one better be heavyweight. We have all seen what happened to these light and bantam weights who receive a blow from a heavyweight ~ KO! They're not of the same league.

Cheers!

LKY is no heavyweight lah....
He changes the rules to his benefit, plays dirty, kelong with the referees....etc etc

 

[Agoraphobic]

LKY is no heavyweight lah....
He changes the rules to his benefit, plays dirty, kelong with the referees....etc etc

In Singapore, the police, army, main media, unions, various organizations and instituitions all worship the ground he walks on - he is a polical heavywieght here. In politics, nothing is dirty. Those who complain their opponents are "dirty" are not true politicians. "Dirty" is just a strategy.

Cheers!

 

[Cruxx]

I'm surprised you can say such childish thing and try to use it as an argument. Who gives a damn what PAP does for its self-interest and why should anyone? It's like a kidnapper telling his victim "I gotta kill you so that I won't be caught. You must see it from my point of view and so you must not mind dying for my sake."

Childish? I thought it's more Sinkie than childish. Sinkies like to justify their amoral actions with trite terms such as "realistic" and "pragmatic".

 

[laksaboy]

if you are in power, will you gerrymander without taking into consideration the geographical and racial context?

That is what the Constitution is for. If framed right from the start, there wouldn't have been any gerrymandering in the first place, because it would have been against the Constitution and therefore illegal.

Gerrymandering has always been about giving an unfair advantage to the PAP by redrawing borders, absorbing opposition strongholds into GRCs and pushing areas with strong support of the PAP into 'weaker areas' to improve results.

Of course, gerrymandering also results in geographical silliness (Bedok belongs to East Coast GRC? Telok Blangah is part of West Coast GRC?), but who cares about historical/geographical borders as long as the Lightning Clan is in power, right?

 

[dredd]

That is what the Constitution is for. If framed right from the start, there wouldn't have been any gerrymandering in the first place, because it would have been against the Constitution and therefore illegal.

Gerrymandering has always been about giving an unfair advantage to the PAP by redrawing borders, absorbing opposition strongholds into GRCs and pushing areas with strong support of the PAP into 'weaker areas' to improve results.

Of course, gerrymandering also results in geographical silliness (Bedok belongs to East Coast GRC? Telok Blangah is part of West Coast GRC?), but who cares about historical/geographical borders as long as the Lightning Clan is in power, right?

The constitution can be changed, even if framed right.