Wrong to say Yale resolution is wrong

[Confuseous]

Dear Straits Times,

I refer to the 14 Apr 2012 letter by Mr Michael Rebaczonok-Padulo [1].

Mr Padulo questioned the correctness of the Yale resolution’s concern for Singapore’s lack of respect for civil and political rights [2] by pointing to the fact that he has made Singapore his home. Does Mr Padulo’s making Singapore his home demonstrate that Singapore respects civil and political rights? Civil rights comprises amongst other things the right to a free press. Do we have press freedom? Singapore is ranked No. 135 on press freedom by Reporters Without Borders. All of Singapore’s paid newspapers are owned by one company the ownership of which is largely by government linked companies and whose chairperson has always been important ex-ministers. Even the free newspaper Today is owned by MediaCorp which is in turn owned by the government too.

Political rights include amongst other things, the right to assemble, the right to vote and the right to a fair trial. Singaporeans don’t have the right to assemble beyond five persons. Hougang citizens’ right to a by-election remains in doubt. Countless political detainees in Singapore history were never given a fair trial but were simply locked away under the Internal Security Act. Some were locked away for periods longer than Nelson Mandela had been. Therefore, Mr Padulo’s making Singapore his home doesn’t show that civil and political rights in Singapore are fully respected and doesn’t prove that the Yale resolution is wrong.

Mr Padulo claimed that Singapore is doing something right that is worthy of emulation because we have genuine respect and guarantee for the right to walk safely in the streets without fear of gunshots, we do not have overt racial or religious intolerance, we do not have grinding poverty unlike his birthplace, we have good governance and good public service unlike so-called ‘democratic’ countries which are so polarised nothing gets done to help the less fortunate.

- http://trulysingapore.wordpress.com/2012/04/14/wrong-to-say-yale-resolution-is-wrong/

 

[Cruxx]

we do not have grinding poverty unlike his birthplace, we have good governance and good public service unlike so-called ‘democratic’ countries which are so polarised nothing gets done to help the less fortunate.

LOL What? Like democratic Canada? Democratic Netherlands? Democratic Sweden? Democratic Denmark? Democratic Australia? Democratic Switzerland? Democratic Norway? All democracies with higher GDP per capita than Sinkieland with greater civil liberties and welfare benefits for the poor.

 

[kingrant]

The guy is an idiot. We are talking only about a Yale-NUS tie up. Yale academics have every right to express their reservations based on the poor record of the PAP govt. Recall in early years when the University of Singapore started its first Philosophy dept we had a DJ Enright who was driven out of Singapore for "meddling in domestic affairs". So how does recognising the stance of the Yale faculty going to lead to dangerous streets, racial and cultural intolerance, grinding poverty (as if we dont already have it), good governance (sic) and good public service (is he serious?).

This kind of slippery slope argument is not new. He might as well move to China or North Korea where crime is definitely zero, there is no religious or racial intolerance, and he can be sure of a strong central authority.

Mr Padulo claimed that Singapore is doing something right that is worthy of emulation because we have genuine respect and guarantee for the right to walk safely in the streets without fear of gunshots, we do not have overt racial or religious intolerance, we do not have grinding poverty unlike his birthplace, we have good governance and good public service unlike so-called ‘democratic’ countries which are so polarised nothing gets done to help the less fortunate.