Skip to main content

Votes in A Divided Singapore Iceberg

From the intercultural communication point of view, it may be difficult for some groups of Singaporeans understand and communicate with another group of Singaporeans. The fast changing social and economic landscape has created three groups of  Singaporeans: Traditional, pro-PAP and Western co-culture.

The Presidential Election 2011 showed such a trend. The recent Pink Dot event and the NLB books ban further indicate and confirm this divide. Of course, the debate on Public Trust, CPF, MediSheild Plus are other proofs too.   Pro-PAP Singaporeans will certain claim the government public trust is high. Western co-culture will say no and Traditional may say yes or no.      

Professor Mira Bergelson of Higher School of Economics, Russia explains there are three types of Russians: Tradition, Soviet and Western co-culture.  In the past 20-30 years, from Soviet Union to  Russia, Russia has experienced big political as well as economic  changes. The development until now has divided Russians into three groups of people.  For communication viewpoint, it may be difficult for Russians to understand each others.  Further complications arise when we think of geography, rural or urban, Europe or Far East.

To understand a Russian or to do business in Russia, one may have to  under their background.  Perhaps, the same thing is going to happen in Singapore.    

Russians first experience big political changes and then economic changes. Singapore first experiences big economic changes and now politically normality.

Singapore Divide

Big political and economic changes result to 3 groups

Russia experiences big political (and later economic) changes in the recent past, so do Singapore in economic (and later political) front.  We claim we only take  one generation from third world to first world.  Singapore is now one of the wealthiest countries in the world. However, we also have higher rich-poor gap. Comparing to Russian's tradition, Soviet, and Western co-culture, a similar trend is emerging in Singapore. We have people want to keep the tradition (e.g. preserving Asian values or conservatives). Another group like the Soviet memory, these Singaporeans strongly believe in everything from the People's Action Party(PAP). They believe only PAP can keep Singapore's glory and prosperity in the long run. The last group obviously belongs to co-western thinking and behaviours. A clear evidence is the 2011 Presidential Election and its result shows 3 groups of voters. No single candidate scored more than 36% of the total votes.

We can briefly define them:

Traditional: Conservatives,  strong values (religion or culture), for example, wear-white, or in some degrees Chinese educated.
Pro-PAP: Believe everything reported in the mainstream,  everything in PAP, for example, grassroot leaders, businesses etc.
Western co-culture: Modern and social justice, pro-Western and critical of the government policies, for example, Pink Dot, #Return My CPF, anti-ISA etc.    

Reactions on social  topics

Let’s take three headlines of TODAY (Saturday, 12 July) to see how the three groups react to them:

1. NLB’s decision ‘guided by community norms’ (page 1):  Clearly,  here the community norms are referred to the support from Traditional and Pro-PAP not the Western co-culture. Can we considered this a ‘community norm’?

2. New Video rejects MDA’s self-regulation scheme (page 2): Here, we see the strong reaction from Western co-culture. Pro-PAP will, of course, stand with the PAP and believe MDA is doing the right thing. How will Traditional react? Side with the PAP government or believe in the right value of creativity and no self-control?

3. PM Lee applies for summary judgement in blogger case (page 4): Similar to the MDA’s case, will more Traditionalists stand away in supporting Lee or agree with his action, especially summary judgement without knowing the details?

By the definition of the PAP’s high public trust and ‘community norms’, the PAP will win the three social topics with more than 50% of the votes.  However, we don’t know the latest approving of the government and Lee.  How strong is the pro-PAP group’s support? Will the 36% support for Tony Tan for President still hold? How is the growth rate of Western co-culture as well as the possible decline of Traditional and pro-PAP groups?

What will happen if we add all the social, political and economic issues together and make a final vote? The picture will not be so clear but rather complicated. We cannot rule out Traditional and Western co-culture work together and vote against the pro-PAP. The Traditional may also break into two, one section like the senior citizens, Chinese educated, assets rich-cash poor, supporting the Western co-culture and the other section of wear-white supporters supporting the PAP.  The result then become not so clear cut and the quality of candidates can be a decisive factor in the end.

Iceberg - below water activities    

Since 2011, we have seen few changes in economic front but there are more political challenges, year after year. The social disorders (Little India Riot and SMRT strike etc.) and social protests in Hong Lim Park  add more uncertainties to Singapore society.  All these will affect the interrelationship of the three groups.  The result of PE2011 may not be a correct indicator anymore. One group may have more members and another group sees declining membership.

So, the iceberg of 2011 we saw will be quite different from the coming general election. The undercurrent changes and below water activities cannot base on the assumption of PAP’s public trust and SG Conversation.  Certainly, the ‘PAP to mark its 60th year with series of events’ (page 15) is just an iceberg in the surface.  It will never give Singaporeans a full and clear picture of the current situation.      

Even the iceberg’s shape may change. It can reform. It may melt down. It may break into smaller icebergs.

The vote outcome in a divided Singapore may surprise ourselves, Singaporeans.  With climate change, we cannot predict the movement and shape of Singapore iceberg like before.


Popular posts from this blog






行动党和李显龙总理,就是看准了,看透了新加坡人的心理,表明这是司法程序,在法庭、在法律上,行动党政府都不会被打败。那些敢于挑战法律的人,在新加坡的短短50多年的建国历史中,下场都是以悲剧结束。最近的一个例子, 就是新加坡最年轻的政治犯余澎杉在美国的遭遇。同样一个人,不同的国情,命运也不一样。
今年的总统选举,基本上已经是没戏看了。大家大约都可以估算到结局。反而是三、四年后的大选,存在变数。 行动党也了解,要重获2015大选的佳绩,在没有造神运动的条件下,似乎是不可能。因此,要维持一个高得票率,就必须出一些怪招。把非选区议员人数增加到12位,就是给人民一个小甜头。如果真的上当,新加坡就清一色没有非行动党的市镇理事会了。

李显龙的幻象:新加坡人对他的 dishonorable 行为无动于衷。

李显龙当然有焦虑,正如他的妹妹和弟弟对他的指责:Dishonorable son。李显龙害怕人们对他的诚信起疑心,因此,在国会搞了一个自辩。既然国会没有提出相关资料证明他的诚信有问题,那李显龙就是清白了。
李显龙的确有焦虑,但是,他却认为新加坡人很乖,很听话: 给你们什么总统候选人,你们就会认命接受; 想提告什么人,就提告,法律面前人人平等,没有人有意见; 给什么议长人选,国会就认命接受; 地铁误点误事,任何解释,人民都会接受; 无现金就是无限金,跟不上是你的错; 糖尿病就少吃白饭,多吃糙米饭;。。。。
这是一种李显龙独特的焦虑幻象。他很焦虑,自己无法做得比老爸好,甚至连吴作栋都不如。他也焦虑在后工业时代,新加坡无法创造高薪职位给年轻人;新加坡无法照顾贫穷老弱,无法为他们提供医药服务; 接班人无法胜任挑战; 新加坡人在无限金时代,成了乡下佬; 地铁和教育服务提不上来; 。。。
陈川仁自愿减薪出任国会议长,不论是升职还是降职,已经充分说明,他在国会外,在行动党的职业保护伞外,无法找到一份比国会议长,还要高薪水的工作。 这点显示他不如海军出身的吕德耀。吕德耀即使找不到高薪职位,也毅然离开内阁和国会。 陈川仁,为李显龙成川成仁,却也凸显接班人的素质问题和骨气问题。他们离开了行动党的大树,如何面对现实生活?李显龙能…