Thursday, 28 August 2014

People learn best when there are fewer or no mental and physical restrictions

[Reproduced from pijitailaiX] Do Internet and social media create social division as claimed by PM Lee? Nevertheless, learning and sharing do need diversification. Perhaps, he is still in the mode of hierarchical  learning and sharing. 


People learn best when there are fewer or no mental and physical restrictions, especially in country like Singapore.


My mode of learning shows that I am at the Distributed Individual Quadrant#0. When I first enroll in this course, I just want to learn to be a good learner not leader. I am a motivated learner and have never thought of a leadership role in learning.

What can I share and initiate changes in learning? This is in particular that I am not living in a western environment that 'political right' plays less influencing role in sharing and learning.

Singapore is a country that practices market economy and capitalist system. However, when we come to learning, political right and wrong will make a huge difference. If you are at the wrong side, it is hard to share your knowledge not to mention becoming the promoter of your knowledge.

Even in institutions of higher learning, free sharing and learning is not a right and privilege. Political discussions and debates are restricted in Singapore universities as shown in the following headline:

[Yale-NUS slammed for ban on political protests, groups]#1


Even Yale University has to adjust her academic freedom in Singapore.

Human factors
Hence, the human factors of physical, cognitive, social, cultural and emotional experiences are very different from the standard GSE2x Leaders of Learning.

How can I design a learning environment in Singapore where restrictions and limitations are the fact of life?

My Quadrant is a digital world. The ideal environment is of course an environment of free expression. Without this pre-condition, sharing and learning will not reach their full potential. There is no restriction on MOOC learning in Singapore. Facebook and other internet uses are also free. But one will have to be careful about his or her comments as there is a culture of defamation suits#2 in Singapore.

Nevertheless, if I were to engage in Leaders of Learning activities in Singapore, the ideal environment is to expand the horizon to other quadrants.

Physical: To encourage face to face sharing and learning, ideally, we can expand and share the digital experience and knowledge to physical environment. Some publics places, for example, museums, libraries or community clubs are suitable environments. However, to overcome the obstacles, the leaders of learning will need to solve the political right and wrong issues first. The government will not allow citizens to promote ideas, thoughts, learning experience and knowledge different from their standard mode of learning and national agenda.

Physical expansion to Hierarchical Individual and Collective environment is very difficult. It is an ideal expansion but not feasible in Singapore. Alternatively, the expansion to Distributive Collective is much easier and can be achieved by joining a network or digital community.

Cognitive: We learned above the university offers no independent thinking, hence, cognitive dissonance is highly possible in Singapore. As political right or wrong is predetermined by the government, we may end up learning (or sharing) some things that we don't like or don't enjoy. How to right the cognitive interactive issue between people and experience is very challenging. It will have to come back to the basic question of right of freedom and free expression. Again, it is a difficult question. GSE2x Leaders of Learning provides an ideal western environment for learning. However, adjustments have to be made to
match the local situation, like the case of Yale-NUS College or we have to improve the political environment to create more free spaces for sharing and learning.

Social: How do people interact? Due to the restrictions on public space uses, learning and sharing is a one way traffic. Public facilities, schools and communities are out of bounds to people who hold alternative views and experience. There are few exchanges and interaction between the so-called 'political right' and 'political wrong'. However, as the digital world is a free world, we see more interactions in the social media rather than in the rigid mainstream media of broadcasting and printed media. If social media, digital education is the future trend, then the political development will have to follow this evolution of learning experience.   

Cultural: The social factor affect the cultural factor and behaviours. We are now experience a low public trust#3 and divided Singapore. The rapid economic (high growth, rich-poor gap) and social changes (big inflow of foreigners) have made the once (or developing) shared norms, habits and values unsustainable. One example is fewer public flats are flying Singapore flags during national day#4. How can learning play a role in promoting a social norm? The government is engaging in a national SG Conversation#5 but more people in the social media and digital world see it as a propaganda.

Emotional: The social divide and cultural divide have created different emotional experience for Singaporeans. If you are in the so-called 'political right', your feelings and thoughts of the future Singapore will be very different from those of 'political wrong'. The current state of learning and sharing environment is not conducive in Singapore.

We have seen more protests either legally held at the Speakers' Corner or illegal vandalism like graffiti.

Without political changes, the ideal environment for learning and sharing of knowledge will not take place in Singapore. In fact, in the longer term, a restricted and control environment presenting only one-side learning experience will do more harm to Singapore, economic growth and competitiveness included.


Notes

#0
INTRODUCTION/CONCLUSION MOLA RESULTS
In the Hierarchical Individual Quadrant you scored 15.87%/1.59%
In the Hierarchical Collective Quadrant you scored 22.22%/23.81%
In the Distributed Individual Quadrant you scored 85.71%/100%
In the Distributed Collective Quadrant you scored 31.75%/30.16%

#1
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/sdp-criticises-yale-nus-college-ban-on-partisan-politics.html

#2


#3
http://catherinelim.sg/2014/06/07/an-open-letter-to-the-prime-minster/
http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/tharman-three-things-will-retain-public-trust

#4

#5
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/themes-identified-spore-conversation-could-continue

Friday, 22 August 2014

只是津贴卡,不是信用卡的卡中之王。


【卡中之王说穿了,不过是一项行动工程,形象改造工程,建国前辈们会被这些工程打动吗?推而广之,总理在国庆群众大会所建议的各项工程,能够打动选民的心吗?或者说,能否留住60%选民的心?】

总理在国庆群众大会上说,建国前辈现在人人手中有了一张卡中之王。这张卡说白了,就是一张优待卡,根本就不是信用卡,行动党政府没有给人民免费的午餐,只不过给前辈们打个折而已。

总理在国庆群众大会说:“因为你有了这张红卡,你就能享有更多的津贴。例如,你到社保计划CHAS私人诊所和牙科诊所看病时,比其他用蓝卡的病人少付$10。如果你到综合诊疗所、政府牙科诊所、政府医院专科诊所看病,都有补助。加上,这张卡没有限期,终身都可以使用。所以说,这张是卡中之王”

卡中之王不是信用卡,政府是不会跟人民买单的。前辈们到邻里的医疗所,牙科门诊,还是要给钱的。卡中之王只是政府的一张津贴卡。如果诊疗所,牙医的收费超过津贴的数目,这张卡中之王就没有用了。前辈们还是要掏腰包,没有信用可言,政府没有担保前辈们的信用,诊疗所,牙医也不会承认这是一张信用卡,可以挂单,之后向政府收高出津贴之外的钱。

因此,卡中之王不是让你高枕无忧,到邻里看医生,牙医,还是要准备现金的。除非医生和牙医另外给病人津贴,填补不足的门诊费,这样一来,前辈们就不需要带钱包出门了。

什么叫做信用?到诊疗所,牙医看诊,到医院看病,工作人员,医务人员,医生们对前辈有信心,一旦出示卡中之王,就会获得尊贵的服务。就犹如黑卡一样:

(黑卡被称为卡中之王,不是一般人能够得到的,因为它处在财富金字塔的顶端。世界上20%的人掌握着80%的财富,但是持有黑卡的人可能还不到0.1%,这就是黑卡的威力。

花旗银行名为“Ultima”的黑色信用卡以及美国运通公司在1999年推出了名为“Centurion”的黑色信用卡,被业内人士称为“卡中之王”。有人说,只有拥有这种黑卡,才可充分显示卡主的“尊贵地位”。因为这种黑卡不接受申请,只有银行主动邀请客户加入。)

http://www.shujucool.com/ultima-and-centurion/

要获得顶级,尊贵的服务,卡中之王的红卡真的是不行。我们的诊疗所,牙医,医院,尤其是政府医院和私人医院顶级病房的病人,使用的是有如黑卡那样的信用卡,才真的获得帝王般的服务。红卡只是胜过蓝卡,想要得到尊贵服务,门都没有。
当然,这是黑卡的传说,网上的消息,正如行动党政府所说的未必可信。但是,黑卡毕竟是一张信用卡,而我们的红卡,所谓的卡中之王,真的不是信用卡,只不过是一张折扣卡,优惠卡而已。

行动工程,形象工程能否改造成功?
行动党对于基础建设,硬件管理,还是有一套的。因此,经常获得国际上的赞美之声。例如,要开赌场,行动很快,不需要经过全民投票,夹着国会的大多数,一下子赌场就建起来了。国外的形象工程也做得很好,不贪污,清廉更是获得国际认同,对于跨国大公司的投资,更是犹如黑卡那样,给予尊贵的服务。
偏偏对于新加坡人,就是没有表现出尊贵的服务。因此,可以死,不可以病就成了名言。钱不够用,有资产没有现金,也是另一个名言。当然,如果加上公积金,淡马锡,政府投资公司,外汇储备的管理不透明,那何止服务,简直就是,关起门来,请你吃闭门糕,不理不睬。
大选的脚步越来越近了,行动党不能不做些‘红卡’工程给选民看。因此,公积金做出一些改变,终身健保,建国一代红卡的推出,组屋的抵押等等,这些都是些行动工程。除了行动工程,行动党也搞形象工程,全国对话,建国50年纪念,甚至连民主社会主义的字眼也出现。有意无意的告诉选民,行动党从右走向左,考虑人民的生活需要。
这些行动工程,的确看到一些津贴,看到一些优惠,一些改变,而选民是否会真的会认为并且相信,这些工程能够持续下去呢!至于形象工程,那就更加困难,新加坡社会正如吴作栋所说的已经出现裂缝,而行动党政府最担心的是裂缝的继续扩大。
国人对行动党的行动工程和形象工程产生怀疑是有根据的。建国以来,行动党一直在搞基建,工业区,组屋,金融区,地铁,机场,港口。也一直在搞小圈圈的心件工程,控制国会,工会,媒体,人协等等,行动党无时无刻不搞工程。但是,偏偏对于爱护国人,尊贵国人,就以公事公办的态度来对待国人。久而久之,人民对行动党的所谓行动工程和形象工程,出现了错觉,即使真的有改变,一点改变,人民也认为这是假的,这是骗选票的行动。
行动党要以行动工程和形象工程来唤回人民的信心,真的谈何容易?这些工程原本应该在建国初期就开始的,但是,行动党信心满满,以为什么东西都是它可以控制的。工程时间,不是由人民决定,而是行动党决定。既然行动党要做出决定,那就要看人民如何判断了。
时代改变了,人民如何判断也改变了。以前相信行动党的工程,现在即使是同样的工程,人民也会比手画脚,对这些工程怀疑。

因此,到底有多少选民会相信红卡就是一张卡中之王。一张没有信用价值的卡中之王,又如何获得尊贵服务?

Tuesday, 19 August 2014

MISSION IMPOSSIBLE FROM FATHER TO SON

MISSION IMPOSSIBLE FROM FATHER TO SON, there is still no satisfactory solution to retirement, housing and education...


[I don’t trade in people’s miseries. My business is the people’s happiness.] #1

In a speech in the Federal Parliament on 27 May 1965, just before Singapore’s independence, Singapore first prime minister made the above speech and championed for a Malaysian Malaysia. Looking back in history, have we narrowed the concept of the failed Malaysian Malaysia into a Singaporean Singapore? Have we ever traded in people’s miseries?
   
49 years later, we are still discussing the problems of miseries and happiness. We still try to find an answer for CPF retirement, health care, housing, education and services to the people despite our huge economic achievement.  We are a first world country in search for a satisfactory balance between miseries and happiness.   

National Day Rally 2014 proves that after more than 50 years of hard work, our mission of nation building and the promise of better life is still a long shot. In fact, it looks more like an impossible mission as the government is still talking about basic CPF problems, education and services to the people.

From the first prime minister to the third prime minister, CPF despite becoming bigger and bigger still remains an unsatisfactory answer for retirement, medical care and housing.  Despite more education opportunities, better international university ranking, and advanced technology for civil  service, the PAP government is still in the dilemma of balancing people’s miseries and happiness. Why?

Are there any statistics comparing the miseries and happiness then and now?

The second prime minister did not answer the question directly. However, he confirmed the issue of miseries and happiness and worried about the gap between the people and the PAP.

[Loosening ties between people and government could pull Singapore apart unless Singaporeans demand as much of themselves as they do of the Government, Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong warned on Saturday. 
Unrealistic demands and frequent criticism of the Government are straining the cohesiveness of the Singapore family, he said.] #2
ESM Goh seems to link the miseries to unrealistic demands and frequent criticism. On the contrary, happy people have realistic demands and praise the PAP government.

Mission impossible or small stream forever

In his Mandarin speech, PM Lee sang a bit of the famous Xinyao song ‘small stream that flows forever’. There is a business and management practice of controlling the market. If you solve the problems or provide the best solutions in one go, you end up making less profit. This is why a good product like Apple can continue to make  profit after Apple 3, 4, 4S, 5….  or Microsoft after her many series of Windows.

Perhaps, the PAP is thinking the same way as they are a good brand and offer a good product. Solving problems in one go will not maximize their election winning opportunities.  By tactically positions the miseries and happiness, they can profit from the imbalance. So, the PAP wants to keep the small stream flowing forever.

In this case, the PAP is trading people’s miseries as well as people’s happiness. We cannot deny there are people really happy about the PAP’s policies of  CPF, housing and education.  Some are really happy as they can take away all their CPF money, capital gains from housing and education if they quite Singapore at the right time right place.

A stream, a trade-off, a business to trade miseries and happiness always exists under the PAP government. They are happily manipulating and controlling the situation. They think they can forever make the stream bigger (up the minimum sum) or smaller (small lump-sum withdrawal), simple (Medisave) or complicated (Medishield) , decentralise (e.g town councils) or centralise (new municipal services).

In NDR 2014, the PAP government is honouring pioneer generation, honouring the first president of the Republic, relaxing the CPF lump-sum withdrawal and increasing the minimum sum, even shifting cultural values. This looks more like a business deal. Are they trading people’s miseries and happiness for a truly Singaporean Singapore?
   
To stop the trading between miseries and happiness, power to the people is the answer. Honouring our pioneers, returning the basic concept of CPF, and Singaporean culture are not tradable.  Long before our independence,  we know these are non-tradable. However, when Singapore concentrates more and more on economic growth, the PAP maximizes, rather than minimizes, the difference between people’s miseries and happiness.
 
Trading people’s miseries and happiness has become the business of the PAP. By making the business problems into a stream, the PAP wants to capitalise it forever. Can a Singaporean Singapore stop them?
#1
http://drm.a2o.nas.sg/DJVUServer/PdfStampServlet?app=stars&filepath=pdfdoc/lky19650527.pdf

#2
http://www.singapolitics.sg/news/loosening-ties-between-people-and-government-worrying-esm

Saturday, 16 August 2014

政治前途茫然 两行乒乓泪下


李美花不再寻求连任乒乓总会会长一职,泪晒记者会。她是为自己的政治前途感到茫然,还是不舍得乒乓总会?

行动党在每次大选前,都会淘汰一些旧议员,人数可以高达百分之20或30,算起来也有20多人。即使面对候选人难找,一些负资产的议员,还是一定要换掉的。

李美花很可能就是其中之一。因此,她在记者会的两行乒乓泪,的确是有感而发。因为,失去了乒乓总会这个平台,对于行动党的后座议员来说,就是失去了一个立功的机会。没有立功机会,下次大选就不需考虑,下课的时间就是总理宣布解散国会的时候。想到这里,也很难怪她不感性的留下乒乓泪。看到乒乓队在多次国际大赛得奖,自己却没有得到连任的机会,政治前途也应该算到了。

这就是政治的现实,人民行动党更是如此。每次大选,行动党都要每个选区都参加,候选人的人数当然就是集选区和单选区加起来的数目。为了给选民一个自我更新的印象,推出新候选人淘汰旧议员的动作,每次大选回回发生,即将到来的大选当然也不例外。负资产的部长在2011年大选后,已经退出部长队伍,下次大选当然就不用上阵。现在,就轮到现任议员了,谁应该退出,谁留下的时候了。谁无法连任或者委以新任务,谁的政治命运就将结束。

李美花不连任乒乓总会会长,已经暗示行动党已经启动淘汰议员的运动了。几个月前,黄永宏已经说行动党新人已经走进基层。既然新人准备进,当然旧人就要准备退出,李美花只不过是一个预告,接下来,陆续我们会看到更多现任行动党议员不连任,或者退出一些公职。间接的告诉选民,这些人下次大选下课了。

负资产行动党议员,以前可以通过集选区这个制度,顺利过关,然后,就被安排霸位,出任社会公职。很不幸的,负资产议员现在不只无法鱼目混珠,很可能还会把主子拉下。2011年的马林百列集选区就是一个例子。

行动党部长,行动党议员的霸位行为,已经是几十年如一日。李显龙做了10年的总理,也没有丝毫的改变。因此,这种政治传承的霸位行为,李显龙也是继续下去,他即跳不出,也不愿改变。

后座议员霸不了部长的位,社会上,社团里,体育活动,就是他们霸位的,搏出位的地方。除了长控职总,人民协会,体育总会之外,通商中国,消费人协会,足球总会,羽毛球总会,乒乓总会,等等都是后座议员做出贡献的地方。如果连这些位子都保不住,那也就是间接的告诉这位议员,下次大选,不用出来了。

在社会上霸位,在体育活动上霸位,难怪我们的活动如此缺乏创意。一党独大的思维,一党独大的教条,深深的植入这些活动中,行动党深怕这些活动离开他们的中心思想,离开他们的控制范围。深深的害怕这些民间活动,离开它的视线,就会有人会作怪。正因为如此,行动党把自己锁在这些范围里,与人民隔绝,离人民越来越远。当然,这样的结局,肯定是社会活动缺少生意,无法获得人民的参与,认同。

在国会霸位,在社会霸位,无所不在的霸位,看起来是把整个国家,整个社会,控制在行动党手中,事实上,却是把行动党自己孤立起来。行动党只有在自己的小圈圈里活动,只能控制自己的小圈圈,离开了这个小圈圈,行动党不知所措,不知道如何面对人民,不晓得如何与人民相处。

霸位是静态的,人类的发展是动态的。国家,社会的发展更是如此。行动党如何面对人民的动态活动,行动党在自己圈定的小圈圈里,做得如何的好,都是无用的。而这个小圈圈,只有变得越来越小,不可能变得越来越大。

或许,行动党永远不能了解小圈圈以外的活动,他们只能霸位,霸位小圈圈。但是,真的有这么多为位好霸吗?一旦政权失去了,霸位还霸得起码?对于李美花来说,提早预告下课,未必是坏事,反而多了准备下课的时间。

Thursday, 14 August 2014

If SIA can make silly mistake, so do the government, Temasek, GIC, …

In many ways, Singapore Airlines has the same management philosophy of the PAP government.


SIA is the image of Singapore that the PAP government wants to show to the world.  Indirectly, it is a mini PAP as the major shareholder of SIA is Singapore government through Temasek Holdings.    


SIA is a symbol of Singapore. It represents the quality of Singapore in a competitive international airlines market.  It is a listed company subject to quality check of internal and external auditors. However, it still made a silly public relationship mistake on the issue of flying over the Ukraine airspace.


Parliament was told that ‘SIA plane (was) about 90 km from MH17 when it was shot down’.#1 In another report, we know ‘SIA used same MH17 flight path 75 times in past week’. #2 It seems there is a quality control problem at SIA.  How come a company statement can be issued without proper checking? Or is the statement used to cover up a bigger potential mistake and lie?   We don’t know as SIA only says sorry for the insensitive remark.


Few international corporations or organisation will issue statements without proper internal check and balance. The problem is not whether SIA plane was 25 or 90 km from MH17 as explained by the Transport Minister in Parliament.  It is a question of whether SIA did fly over Ukraine airspace or not. It is also a question of ethics: taking advantage of the situation and telling a lie.  


So, SIA with her good reputation, always providing good quality products and services, still can make silly mistake  and not telling the truth, same things can happen to the government, CPF, Temasek and GIC. We cannot rule out the possibility just like we cannot imagine SIA would issue insensitive remark on MH 17.


The government has explained that Temasek and GIC are subjected to very strict auditing and they even have top rating from international credit agencies. In fact, SIA too is (more so as they need to publish quarterly report) having even more stringent controls and supervisions under SGX. Investors can buy and sell SIA shares in open market.  Public confidence and investors’ confidence are extremely important to SIA.


Anyway, a silly mistake has already been made. A truth has been discovered. It proves that everyone of us can make silly mistake. But how we tackle and solve the problem, correct the mistake and gain back public confidence is a question of wisdom and honesty.


Without transparency, the government always maintains there is high standard of governance in Temasek and GIC as well the management of reserve. They believe public trust is still with them and a ‘sorry’ (for the insensitive) statement like the one put up in SIA Facebook will be sufficient. The sorry can gain back public confidence.


Perhaps the PAP is right. What if they are wrong and public trust is indeed much lower than 10 years ago?   


#1
http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/transport/story/parliament-sia-plane-about-90km-mh17-when-it-was-shot-down-lui-says-2#sthash.ZzUusm6j.dpuf


#2
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/sia-used-same-mh17-flight-path-75-times-065907006.html

Friday, 8 August 2014

为国家庆生,行动党专利不再。



【新加坡生日快乐,不再是挂国旗,这么简单了。为国家庆生,已经从行动党的的表面形式,走向更加多样化,多元化的诠释,不再是一党独大的表面表演和作秀。】

新加坡生日快乐,走向多样化,多元化。

和几年前相比,为国家庆生,增加了好多方式,好多诠释,好多演绎。看惯了过去的一党独大,只有行动党大旗队在国庆日庆典中出现的场面后,新加坡人开始反思,难道只有行动党的大旗,才算够是爱国,难道只有在行动党的大旗下,新加坡人才算爱国吗?

难道,只有行动党才有资格,为新加坡庆祝生日吗?普通老百姓,和不同政治意见的人,难道,不可以以自己的方式为国家庆生,为新加坡唱一曲生日快乐吗?

组屋区的国旗减少,表面看来,就像是行动党的大旗减少了,爱国的气氛减少了,生日快乐和蛋糕减少了。是否如此,我们倒是要认真的想一想,看一看,是不是,有人以不同于行动党的方式,庆祝国庆。我们有必要看另一方面。表面作秀的确是减少,但是却被另外的爱国行为,行动所取代。

人们可以在选择自己的方法庆祝国庆。芳林公园的集会是一种。国庆当天,分派国旗给国人,也是一种。当然,现在,社交媒体这么发达,这么方便,你也可以在网上留言,为国家,为新加坡庆生,留下祝福。希望,新加坡更加透明,更加包容,容忍和公开,进步。

当然,出国休息一下,不论出国学习,还是工作,只要心系新加坡,关心新加坡,祝福新加坡,这其实也是爱国的表现,不一定要高挂国旗,好像在国旗下宣誓那样,作作秀。爱国是表现在内心,而不是挂国旗这么简单。

组屋区国旗少了,也不一定和爱国有关。因为,新加坡人已经懂得区分行动党和国家是两回事。以前是党国不分,一切都是一个等号:行动党=政府=新加坡。因此,行动党不好=政府不好=新加坡不好。以前,新加坡人没有看清楚,就把行动党党旗,当成是国旗。对国旗效忠,就等于对行动党党旗效忠。或者,对行动党党旗效忠,就犹如对新加坡国旗效忠一样。

当新加坡在明年步入建国50周年的当儿,新加坡人开始反思,启蒙,认清现实,行动党党旗不能代表新加坡国旗。而新加坡政府这个概念,不一定就是行动党政府。决定权在人民。还政于民,人民拥有更换政府的权利。因此,党旗是可以换掉的。行动党政府是可以被更换掉的。而国旗就不可以。

我们想想看,如果行动党不再是政府,行动党党旗,还可以在国庆庆典上,游街示众吗?行动党党旗还好意思,大白旗高高挂,在庆典上出现吗?

组屋区国旗减少,也可以解读为行动党的基层工作做得不好,他们没有像以前那样拼搏,厚脸皮的硬硬要居民,把国旗挂上。或许,他们也自己觉得,新加坡国旗和行动党党旗是不一样的,而他们心中原本就是要居民挂上党旗,不是国旗。所以,连他们也困扰了,心中要居民挂党旗,但是,挂的却是国旗。因为,他们以前党国不分,现在,明白了什么回事,就不这么用心。行动党党工迷惑了,从前是国旗和党旗一体,现在却要面对竞争。因此,他们开始失去信心,面对竞争,使到他们高举行动党大旗的手,一下子,失去平衡。

在新加坡国旗下,在欢庆国家生日的当儿,行动党党人,和党工,迷失了方向。他们突然觉得,行动党=政府=新加坡,这个概念的严重错误,而也只有他们相信这个说法,醒悟了的新加坡人,不是这种想法。行动党党工认为行动党一切都是对的,因此,行动党政府也是绝对的对。当然,行动党的新加坡也是绝对,正确的对。但是,他们反思一下,觉得身边的人,不是这么想。当他们走访组屋时,居民却不是这么想。他们能够不迷惑吗?一迷惑,连自己都没有信心,怎么叫人挂国旗呢!

其他的人,其他新加坡人,要以不同的方式为国家祝福,为国家庆生,行动党党工也看到,只是不完全理解,而党领袖也无法成功说服他们。基层领袖呢!也拿不出好办法,说服党工,行动党=政府=新加坡。这个信心纽带,开始开始出现裂缝,演变下去就是我们现在看到的人民对政府公信的下降。

或许,今日报的两条标题,也显示出行动党的另一种迷惑 一种无法说服党工,人民的说法。

新加坡需要克服不同(逆境),才能生存:行动党领袖,党工如何准备,面对和克服逆境呢!当居民不要以行动党的方式庆祝国庆时,他们的对策是什么?

S’pore needs to fight odds to survive: Chun Sing



涂鸦支持匿名者组织,男子入狱:当有人以不同的方式,反映心中的不满,不认同行动党的做法时,他们就是不爱国吗?是否每个人都像行动党那样,不能忍受odds的不同,而又要克服它,才能生存下去呢!


Man jailed for spraying graffiti to support Anonymous



难道,不同的意见,不同的逆境,就一定非克服不可,不能共存,共荣吗?这就是行动党党工挂不起这么多国旗,而本身又迷惑,迷失,陷入不知所措的困境。很可能行动党领袖,在行动党脱钩政府,脱钩新加坡,行动党不等于政府不等于新加坡的大环境下,也陷入迷失方向,迷惑,不知所措的地步。

迷惑的行动党和迷惑的新加坡,何者为重?我们要懂得区分,迷惑行动党不同于迷惑新加坡,只有清醒和透明的新加坡,我们的将来才有保障。

Monday, 4 August 2014

WHO IS TO DEFEND THE 10M POPULATION IN SINGAPORE?



This question looks remote. Then how about who are the defenders of the more than 5 million people in Singapore? The automatic and natural answer is the national service personnels, and in a more inclusive way, all under the Total Defence.    

There is no official denial of the 10 million population. It looks like the PAP-led Singapore is getting serious to be a future super city. With a weak or softening property market, it seems to be a good idea to come out with this suggestion.  It will help to push or sustain the property price and stabilize the market.   

We currently have more than 5.3 million residents in Singapore. Of which, more than 1 million are foreign workers and maids. When the population reaches 10 million, we will have 2 million foreign workers and maids. However, citizens serving the National Service is not expected to increase due to low birth rate.  

The citizen army of NSmen will then have to protect 10 million population as well as a bigger economy, several times larger than the current size. This, of course, is a happy picture if the projection is correct: bigger population, bigger economy,  and higher GNP per capita (but necessary a fairer distribution of income).   With such a richness and wealth, who is going to protect Singapore? Foreign talents, foreign workers or maids?

Foreign talents can find opportunities elsewhere. Perhaps, foreign workers and maids will have less choice, either to return to their home countries or move to other places. What if they decide to fight along side with Singaporeans against foreign invasions, will we grant them and reward them with a citizenship for their sacrifice?    

It is easy to increase population by just importing foreigners. Not only for Singapore, people from lower income countries or developing economies are willing to risk their lives to find ways to go to USA, Europe and Australia. If USA is to announce a free entry of 10 million people from any place in world, it can easily reach this target within a few days provided logistics and transportation problem can be solved.

The harder question is who is going to protect Singapore in time of crisis. Who is going to protect the USA, Europe and Australia? Imported foreigners?

Total Defence

www.mindef.gov.sg

In the total defence concept, economic defence is just one of  the five pillars. As explained above, the military defence, even equipped with modern weaponry, is not capable to defend a population of 10 million, perhaps not even 6.9 million.  

In addition, in a state of low public trust and divided Singapore, it is equally challenging to maintain a high level of readiness for civil defence, social defence and psychological defence. What can the PAP promise or assure Singaporeans a bright future with this constraint and without transparency and accountability?

Social media and opposition politics have enlightened Singaporeans. Singaporeans now demands more information, open debates, and don’t believe ‘the PAP is always right’. Even if there is no objection of the Total Defence concept, people will question the rational, the connections, and the effects of the increased population.     

Psychologically, socially, politically and economically are we ready for a 6.9 or 10 million population even if this is a so-called long-term planning? When the Total Defence 2014 Short Film - “Hands” (see below) was released on 1 February 2014, did they have the total population in mind? Is the video projecting a scenario of 6.9 or 10 million population?




Fewer than 9000 people watch this video as at 4 August 2014, what does it mean?  


Defending Singapore, our home?

Who are we defending in a Singapore of 10 million people?  When about half of the population are not Singapore citizens, how do we define ‘our home’?  We really need a re-framing, re-definition of Singapore, our home?

We will have to re-examine the Total Defence in a wider and broader way too.

[Total Defence involves every Singaporean playing a part, individually and collectively, to build a strong, secure and cohesive nation that is prepared and able to deal with any crisis. It is our approach to dealing with threats and challenges that arise.] www.mindef.gov.sg

What is the meaning of 'every Singaporean' in a future city of 10 million people? Will there still be a PAP government in future where this Total Defence is based?