Skip to main content

A Divided PAP under Democratic Socialism

Still remember in 1961, there was a split in the People’s Action Party (PAP) and the breakaway group founded Barisan Sosialis (Socialist Front) #1, a party carrying the name of Socialist.  Since then, the socialist ideology and movements have already left the PAP.  This was also the reason that the PAP was forced to leave Socialist International in 1976. #1

[In 1976, however, the PAP resigned from the Socialist International after the Dutch Labour Party had proposed to expel the party,[17] accusing it of suppressing freedom of speech.]#1 
To be fair to the PAP, no political party in Singapore is a member of Socialist International, after a check in their webpage.  Historically, ‘socialist’ is a negative word in Singapore politics.  It is so close to the word ‘communist’.  Perhaps, this tells us why no Singapore political party wants to join Socialist International and carries the ‘socialism liability’.

However, in the Wikipedia, the PAP and WP are in the list of democratic socialist parties and organisations. But in term of political position, the PAP is centre-right and WP is centre-left.

If the PAP’s new resolution does not mention ‘democratic socialist’, many Singaporeans will not think of the link between socialism and the PAP. In particular, the PAP has always rejected the European-style of democratic socialism or social democracy – the so-called welfare state. 

Will socialism win votes for the PAP?

The word ‘socialist’ was a heavy name to the PAP. Two years after the split, in the 1963 election, its share of votes dropped to 46.9% from 54.1% in 1959.  Will history repeat itself? Will there be a split in the PAP after the re-focus of democratic socialism?

Considering 1961, the split costs the PAP votes to go down. So, in simple mathematics, the PAP will win more votes by re-introduction the term ‘socialist’.  This means they want to take back the breakaway votes. Is this so simple? Or, will it result to the opposite effect?  PAP members confuse and so they reject the ideology of democratic socialist.  They then leave the party to form a new conservative right wing party.

I wonder how many PAP members can associate themselves to the democratic socialist movements. After so many years of PAP education (see below), democratic socialism is really out of sight, ‘no free lunch’ is the only capitalist word we know.

[…most analysts of Singapore have discerned four major "ideologies" of the PAP: pragmatism, meritocracy, multiracialism, and Asian values or communitarianism.]#1 
[It has since considered itself a social democratic party, though in recent decades it has moved towards neoliberal and free-market economy reforms.] #1

A confused Democratic Socialism

PAP members are not the only ones confuse about the meaning of democratic socialism. Even among political scientists, there is no consensus. Wikipedia provides a brief explanation:   
[Democratic socialism is a name given to trends of socialism that emphasizes democratic principles as inalienable from their political project. Some forms of democratic socialism overlap with social democracy, while other forms reject social democratic reformism in its entirety.]
But it also adds the following: 
[Democratic socialism is difficult to define, and groups of political scientists have radically different definitions for the term.]

Will a confused definition of democratic socialism work for the PAP? As a consequence, the PAP can claim that they are everything, from left to right. They can be the Democratic as well as the Republican in the USA. They can also be the Conservative, Liberal as well as Labour Party in the UK. They can also be a combination of Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat in Malaysia.

In fact, this is what the PAP has been doing since 1959.  They can shift side as they like.  

Confused democratic socialism = discounted lunch?

A confused definition can also benefit the PAP as it can sometimes claim to be in the left side of politics when facing new popular demand and want to gain votes. However, when talking to investors, promoting business, creating jobs, they want to stand at the right side of the politics.

It is just like PAP MP Baey Yam Keng and his $3 lunch.  Some lunches have discounts, some have discounted drinks, some without. Only the PAP is capable to provide so many different pricing for a lunch.   

In the past 50 years, the PAP has shown its capability in shifting side from left to right, right to left, and now with the new resolution, it is offering a lunch package with some discounts to Singaporeans, but some of them, like Baey Yam Keng, may not even notice the special discount.  

It is now moving away from ‘expensive lunch’ to ‘discounted’ lunch as stated and claimed in the PAP resolution.  But still there is no ‘free lunch’.   

#1

Comments

  1. Could it be that Singapore is the most successful or only successful "socialist" model?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting

因为有比较, 才知道做得不够, 才明白什么叫做易通。

  因为有比较, 才知道做得不够, 才明白什么叫做易通。 如果只有一套解决方法,很难看出好坏,方便还是不方便,易通还是不容易通。用新方法代替旧的系统,人们当然会做比较,尤其是科技产品,使用的人很多,一用就马上看到结果。 这是一个竞争的世界,即使一党独大,也要考虑到便民。当人民觉得不方便,不好用,不易通,就会反映,发声,不满。为什么没有预先想到,最可怕的是测试时,已经接到反应,还是不加改善。或许,行动党还抱着“令伯”最大,用者自行解决问题。 易通公交收费系统的整合,似乎缺少一种人文,沟通,反而更加多表现出政府的独断独行。尤其重要的是,如果只有一套系统,我们是看不出问题,做不出好坏的评价。 这其实证明国会里不可以只有一把声音,没有比较,没有进步。

EBRC objectives: Stop “Out of Aljunied”, Stop SDP Breakthrough and “Negative-Asset” Ministers.

First of all, we have to congratulate the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee for creating more competitions, especially, multi-cornered competitions in the East. When making changes, EBRC aims to achieve 3 goals: To prevent “Out of Aljunied” for Workers’ Party.  This is the most important objective. To prevent Singapore Democratic Party making any breakthrough in the North and Central.   To look for a solution to retire “negative-asset” ministers or reduce PAP damages. From the reported claims from different political parties, we will expect multi-cornered contests not only in single constituencies but also in group representative constituencies. The PAP hopes to have a repeat of 2011 Presidential Election. Then Tony Tan won the Presidency when he got only 35% of the votes, a narrow win.However, a win is still a win. He did in even in the very last minute, after recounts of votes.    How to achieve multi-cornered contests? By inserting a single c