Monday, 24 November 2014

缅怀过去,PAP60做不到公平,公正和民主的新加坡。


往事只能回味,人民行动党已经创党60年了。这比SG50早了11年。SG50要怀旧,要缅怀过去的好日子,回想政治上没有人竞争的日子,这是多么美好的一党独大!哪里需要害怕网民的无中生有,处处提防社交媒体的暗箭。


时代改变了,所以行动党只能回想往事,害怕将来。心理上越是调整不过来,越是难过,越是害怕。归根结底,就是行动党60年来,根本就没有心把新加坡发展成为一个公平,公正,和民主的国家。


因此,很讽刺的在60周年纪念会上,竟然提出要与时并进的主张。在去年12月8日的党大会上推出“2013年人民行动党决议”,让宗旨与价值观更加与时并进?


【2013年决议的六大重点是加强新加坡人的认同感、为所有新加坡人创造机会、维持开放又具同情心的任人唯贤制度、建设一个公平公正的社会、制定以行动为主的民主机制,以及成为应对得当并负责任的政府。】#1


这六大旧膏药,难道不是一个有责任感的政党的理想吗?


这六大重点,不是SG50的工作吗?不是新加坡信约的内容吗?这难道不是行动党这50,60年来的拼搏目标吗?现在,行动党把这六大重点决议纳入党的行动目标,这意味了什么?往事只能回味?六十年一甲子,行动党希望回到从前,再来过,再重新出发,再拼经济,创造更多财富与人民分享?


时不与我,就像新的体育城,它能够带回加冷怒孔,加冷的气氛,加冷的拼搏吗?


1976年加冷国家体育场首次成为国庆检阅的会场。明年的SG50的活动很多很多,但是怒孔,气氛,拼搏会是一样吗?人事已非,行动党很难再像以前,利用一党独大的优势,凝聚国人。相反的,在务实的管理下,新加坡人已经没有像以前那样团结。因为,行动党做不到公平,公正,和民主。国人对行动党的失望一直在增加,因为,行动党的一党独大已经让公平公正民主,变得越来越遥远了。



PAP60重提公平,公正和民主,SG50人民会给予配合,发出加冷怒孔吗?

{图http://www.straitstimes.com/sites/straitstimes.com/files/20141117/kallang171114.jpg}


这里举出一个没有相关联的的例子。1964年,日本东京举办奥运会,那正是日本经济开始向上升爬的年代,全国充满朝气,团结起来把奥运办好,把经济搞好。2020年,东京再度主办奥运会,在经济低迷了20年后,日本想借这次机会,再提升国力和经济。这个难度和1964年相比,是不是难了很多。(伦敦奥运会就是一个例子,英国经济还是老样子)日本的信心可否像1960年代那样呢?事实上,安倍晋三,提早举行闪电大选,不就是有着一种害怕心理,早选举好过迟选举,胜算较高。(或许,行动党也会如此,把大选提前举行。)


【安倍晋三的自由民主党在日本长期执政,类似行动党的独霸日本政治。因此,过去几十年日本经济的功过,成功失败,和现在的困境,自民党都很难摆脱责任。同样的,新加坡目前面对的住屋,公积金,就业,教育,社会和收入不均,行动党都难逃其咎。】

同样的,1973年落成的旧国家体育场,在同一时期,和新加坡经济一起成长,跟着我国经济快速起飞。今天,我们的经济增长率的确比日本来得高,看起来也比较有活力。但是,增长率已经不再是双位数了。2014年,新的体育场建成,行动党希望再续前缘,加冷怒孔又再回来。再提公平,公正和民主的议决,并且纳入行动党的新方向,其实,是旧瓶装新酒,换汤不换药的伎俩。原本就是政治领袖的责任工作,却迟迟不给于进行。


SG50就是为寻找过去的好梦,往事只能回味,把过去的怒孔,气氛,和拼搏找回来。行动党很可能忘了立国的信约,在追求经济,务实施政,牺牲民主,公平和公正后,再来重提,再来决议,那不正是自欺欺人吗?


让我们看一下,国家信约怎么说:


【我们是新加坡公民,誓愿不分种族、言语、宗教,团结一致,建设公正平等的民主社会,并为实现国家之幸福、繁荣与进步,共同努力。】


我们在50年前,不是为了追求[建设公正平等的民主社会]而努力吗?如果不是,那我们在做什么?我们是不是上了行动党的当,而仍然没有醒悟?


而正当国人开始觉悟,行动党50,60年来,根本就不是建设一个公正平等的民主社会后,不满的声音就开始出现。互联网,社交媒体的出现,更为这些不同的声音提供一个管道,这就让行动党部长,政务部长,议员很不爽。他们认为网上的言论是不正确,造谣生事,胡说八道。可见,这些部长和议员的逻辑思维,水准实在是高不到哪里,而这些人将如何带领新加坡,找回加冷怒孔,拼搏精神,认同感和凝聚力?


明智的做法,就是把这批行动党人换掉。新加坡人要摆脱没有行动党不行,没有行动党,我们将何去何从的心态。越早明白这个道理,我们就能越快的找到公平公正和民主。


人类的进展,进化,演变。不是一成不变的。即使是很喜欢的东西或者运动,也会出现变化。国人对加冷怒孔时代的足球热忱,在70年代的热衷后,事实上,已经出现变化了。这是一个事实,即使在巴西,人们这么喜爱足球,但是,依然有人对世界杯的主办不满,甚至出现暴力冲突。因为,巴西人认为公正平等出现问题。


看回本地,明年的S联赛将从12支球队裁至10支,丹戎巴葛联因财政问题退出,而后港联和兀兰威灵顿将合并成为一支队伍。丹戎巴葛可是行动党的起点,现在连以它为名的球队,竟然都没有人要在财务上给与支持。看来丹戎巴葛集选区的末日也将要来临了。


这真的是,有人欢喜有人愁,行动党大小通吃的时代已经是过去式,往事只能回味。


#1
http://www.zaobao.com.sg/realtime/singapore/story20141122-415102#sthash.UBhCpVVJ.dpuf

Tuesday, 18 November 2014

The Coming of Humble, HDB-type Prime Minister in Singapore?


Despite high economic growth in the past 50 years, the PAP has yet to find solutions for housing and inequality problems#1.  In future, when our economy enters sustainable growth,  it will be even more difficult to solve these problems, especially from the past record of the PAP. Not only that, it seems that they are either not willing or unable to solve these hot election topics.

Perhaps, the PAP intentionally does not want to solve the problems because problems like these are to their advantages.  They say they give housing grants, income vouchers, subsidies, and benefits to lower income and HDB residents.  They even give out more when election is near.     
   
However, past record shows that the PAP’s high growth is through inflated housing prices and enlarged rich-poor gap. Without these inflation and enlargement, the PAP will not be able to achieve and sustain high economic growth.  

Mr. Ho Kwon Ping’s proposal to solve these two problems will limit  the economic growth in Singapore as housing price cannot be inflated  by market force and Gini Coefficient will have to go down to a level, perhaps, like the welfare states in Europe.  Maybe no political parties in Singapore will buy his ideas as it seems too radical.  Nevertheless, these are alternative solutions and stand at a higher moral point.

The high point, here is, Mr. Ho brings out the key election question and the hot political potatoes.

In future, the potential prime minister and candidates must look humble and show compassion to HDB residents on their housing and income needs.  To project an elite image and showing off their high salaries is a political suicide. 2011 Presidential  Election and Punggol East by-election are two good examples.

On the other hand, in the coming general election, Mr Eugene Tan even predicts that ‘ It will almost certainly be a straight fight between the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) and the Workers' Party (WP). #2 And the government mainstream paper, the Straits Times calls it ‘ On the road to watershed hustings’. It seems to be the upgraded version of 2011 watershed election. Has this got to do with the outstanding and never ending housing and inequality issues? and/or the humble candidates?

The past 50 years of development has moved the PAP leadership away from the HDB and become self-centred.  They are no more humble about their background and seem to be anti-85% HDB population. If the current leadership work like their pioneers, housing and inequality will be less of the problems for the PAP now.

Therefore, humble and HDB-type prime minister and candidates will have competitive advantages.  When we look at Indonesian President Jokowi, Indian Prime Minister Modi, and even US President Obama, all have humble background and are closer to the people when they got elected.  Even in Hong Kong, the Chief Executive C Y Leung was seen less ‘elite’ than Henry Tang - his main opponent in 2012 CE election. In Taiwan, KMT candidates, like the PAP, are considered elites and face huge challenges in the coming mayorship elections, especially in Taipei and Taichung.  

When Goh Chok Tong became  prime minister in 1990,  he had an image of  humble and HDB-type background.  However, when the PAP made Lee Hsien Loong the third prime minister of Singapore, do you think he carries a HDB-type of image?   

The PAP under Lee Hsien Loong never promises Singaporeans a Swiss standard of living. In fact, PM Lee wants higher economic growth by inflating the housing price and enlarging the rich-poor gap.  Some may argue high economic growth is a good justification for high salaries. Rich becomes richer and rich can afford bigger and expensive houses and other luxuries.  This is good for high growth.

More and more Singaporeans realise the story behind the high growth.  It is built on the inflated housing prices and rich-poor gap. They doubt the PAP is willing to solve these problems.

The PAP not only created the rich-poor gap, it also created a situation of rich against poor. Way back in 2000 in Goh Chok Tong’s National Day Rally speech, he said, ‘We must not envy those who have made it rich. Rather, we must provide the opportunities for more to be like them. It means operating on the basis of meritocracy.’

The PAP’s meritocracy principle cannot solve  housing and inequality problems. They can only urge Singaporeans not to ‘red-eye’ the rich, the talents and the foreigners.  Without these people, including PAP leaders,  Singapore will have no growth and no visitors.

However, if you are one of the 85% HDB residents, your feeling and analysis will be very different. You want humble and pro-HDB candidates, not to mention a pro-HDB prime minister.

Has the third prime minister of Singapore given you the pro-HDB image and confidence? Will you want the fourth to be the same or let the current third to continued his (self -defined) meritocracy principle?

#1
http://www.singapolitics.sg/news/singapore-must-get-creative-housing-income-inequality-ho-kwon-ping

#2
http://www.straitstimes.com/news/opinion/more-opinion-stories/story/the-road-watershed-hustings-20141112

Monday, 10 November 2014

行动党的优质领导:在小红点种冬天的草,备用电力无力。


【由于顶棚存在,国家体育场内日照时间较短,草皮内目前的主要草种是对日照需求不高的寒季草种。然而在新加坡的高温下,寒季草种的存活率不高。】#1


走了60年的路,行动党连草皮都种不好,何来优秀的领导素质?何来心系新加坡人民?


总理说创党60年,行动党将会继续推出优质的领导团队?站在人民的一边?

这将会是一个什么样的团队呢?他们的素质和以前的团队相比,会不会就像种草那样,出现水土不服,不单看不到本身的问题,甚至根本就没有清楚了解新加坡的气候和风土人情,端出来治国方针,务实的令国人受不了。

因此,行动党是渐行渐远,离人民越来越远。它怎么会不知道新加坡是热带国家,务实的把冬天的草拿来种,难怪体育场一盖好,草皮问题就成了笑话。前几天,股票市场的电力出现问题,连备用电力都无法运作。这对作为国际金融中心的新加坡来说,领导素质表现在哪里?行动党有没有站在股民那一边呢?

滨海的大花园,可以种温带的花草树木,让国人和游客享受。为何国家体育场不能如愿以偿呢?同样的封闭,为何出现问题?在大花园里行走,是不出汗的。在体育场看球,如果球赛不精彩,你就会一直喊热, 热,热。出现这样的落差,是因为大花园有空调,有如金马伦高原,清迈那样的天气,温带的花草树木才可以茂盛的生长。而可怜的体育场的冬天草,却要忍受热带的天气,怎么可能茂盛的生长,难怪草皮无法顺利生长,为国争光。不单无法为国争光,还给国内外的人留下负面印象。


草皮长不出来,就怪行动党,什么事情错了,就怪行动党。这是否公平?问题是领着世界第一的高薪,又说自己是优质领导,人民就要货比货,一样一样跟你计较。因为行动党说领导体育城是人才,领导股票市场的是优质人才,同时这些人又领着高薪,人民就要看结果,看你拿出什么成绩来。结果是连草皮都无法种好,还误判了新加坡了天气。而急需的备用电力也无法及时为股票市场提供电力。

从体育城和股票市场的管理,人民就会联想到其他的公共管理效率,公共措施的实行效率。这几年下来,或许说自从有了社交媒体,网民就会拿行动党的政绩来做比较。比较现在和以前,现在和10,20。。60年前比较,李总理和李资政的比较,李总理和吴作栋的比较。还有国内和国外领导人的比较。

货比货,就像小贩中心那样,行动党说我们卖的是优质领导,快来买,一定香香,又好吃。不过,价钱要高出许多。你和其他的小贩买,行动党还不高兴呢!说你傻,低价是不可能出好货的。偏偏你不相信,试了一下其他小贩的食物,不单价廉物美,服务周到,口感也不比行动党的食物差。

一比较,就会发现,原来不是这么一回事。所谓的优质领导,除了高薪外,好像都不比以前强,都不比国外强。因此,我们不能不对这个所谓的优质领导,优秀团队来一个大检讨。我们也不能不对行动党所谓的永远站在人民的一边,起疑心。到底行动党的领导素质好在哪里?而口头的民主社会主义,是不是站在人民的一边?

备用电力都无法操作,如果是医院,这可是人命关天的事。

从草皮到备用电力失效,事情似乎越来越严重,体育运动在新加坡经济比重太小,影响的是面子问题。股票市场关系到国际金融,而金融又是新加坡经济的重心。行动党可以说不善于体育管理,但是金融管理,却是行动党自认的专长,偏偏就出了问题。当然,这只是硬件问题,电力问题。但是,地铁出现问题,不也是硬件先出现问题,后来在调查后,才知道是管理出现问题,把重心放在盈利上,不再站在人民一边来考虑问题。

因此,行动党的经济管理已经出现问题,领导素质出现很多盲点,他们看问题,甚至可以不按照自然天气的运行,硬是要拿冬天的草种在新加坡这块热带的小红点。离开了自然规律,想到的是自己的高薪,怎么可能是和人民站在一起?


#1

http://www.redotnews.com/sports/show/56648.html

Monday, 3 November 2014

Hong Lim = Public Nuisance, Occupy Central = Public Disobedience, Which is the Asian Way?


Singapore government has decided to call #ReturnOurCPF protest at Hong Lim Park a public nuisance.  And yet over in Hong Kong, protesters claim their movement is a public or civil disobedience. Can these two represent Asian ways of democracy mentioned by PM Lee?  

PM Lee has made his point clear enough,  presuming the whole cabinet also agrees with this Way (of charging protesters at Hong Lim  Park).  What about Singaporeans?  Do you agree?

In a Forbes Conference, PM Lee said, "If you look at the countries in Asia, you'll know these are complicated countries and they work in different ways.”#1

Asian democracy gets complicated when bad examples are used.

Perhaps, we can look at the most successful Way in Asia - Japan. Meiji Reform started at 1868, less than 200 years ago. The reformation transforms Japan into a modern and democratic country.  Historians argue the modernization process has two important components work in parallel: militarism and democracy. Education, health care, technology, society, political and legal system etc. were all subjects to change under the Reform.  

We cut it short and jump to Singapore as a comparison.  Over the past 50 years, what are two most important components in Singapore development?

Pragmatism and Pseudo-democracy

Even though we have a very big defence budget, the word ‘militarism’ seems to be too strong.  It is  better to hide the ‘militarism’ under pragmatism as defence force or NS is mainly for self defence.  Pragmatism has inbuilt into  the whole of Singapore, from economic, education, language, birth control, housing,  even CPF. You contribute money to protect your future retirement need. The more you put in, the more you will take out later.  There is no free lunch.

Then, why a pseudo-democracy can also be the other important component?  Not to forget, everything the PAP government does is approved under the Parliament and acts according to Singapore Constitutions.  The government needs a mandate, in Chinese history, this is called ‘heavenly mandate’. In modern democracy or  pseudo-democracy, ‘Bills become Acts’ needs debate in Parliament.This is why the changes in Hong Kong Chief Executive Election need the final mandate from China’s Parliament in Beijing.

So, Singapore’s past success is based on the formula of
Pragmatism > Pseudo-democracy.
Pragmatism is taking the lead, doing 80-90% of the duty. And the parliament, as the supporting role, contributes to only 10-20% of nation building.

This is certainly off balance. But Singapore continues to progress as everyone is happy with this arrangement.  Not only that, Singaporeans also accept that this is the Confucian Way as claimed by the PAP leaders.  But how come an off-balance can be seen as a Doctrine of  the Mean#2.(Zhong Yong) One must in the mid-point then one can claim his/her ‘mean’ position.  The PAP is clearly not.

In a deeper understanding of Zhong Yong, it really does not mean the central position. In this case, the PAP  is right.  Look at the following Chinese weighting tool, the mean point is not necessary at the center.  You can adjust the balance as you wish.

http://www.chinesesinseh.com/toolsoftrade/Liteng/liteng1.jpg

The claim of running Singapore under the Confucian Way under this condition is right. There is no such thing of 50:50 for pragmatism and democracy. It is not necessary to maintain at 50% mark. However, Confucius will disagree with such an extreme off-balance of 80/90% pragmatism. Only Legalists will agree.   

Interestingly, can the future PAP leaders know the real meaning of  Zhong Yong and play it to their advantage in policy making?  Will Singaporeans accept such a big off-balance, such a misinterpretation of Zhong Yong? Why must it always be 90:10 or 80:20 and not 60:40 or 40:60?

The PAP has over used the Pragmatism, from education, health care, HDB, no dialect policy, media control, ISA, GRC, NMP, to the latest public nuisance and ‘To Singapore, with love’. At the same time,  the PAP popular votes are in the decline and more oppositions are in the Parliament.

These trends will continue. The new balance point may not be the mean.  However, it will also different from the past. The hard truth is every single point moving towards the mean point will affect the popularity of the PAP. This is because voters will give more considerations to Democracy or perhaps consider Democracy over Pragmatism.

Democracy and Pragmatism

Singaporeans are luckier than people in Hong Kong. Whether democracy or pragmatism, we don’t need Beijing approval.  But is the assumption of China never change right and for ever? Chinese civilization, over the past 5000 years, is a change and adaptation with new elements, including foreign importations. Look at how they live, dress, dine, educate and entertain!

If Western modernization and postmodernization are the guides, especially for Singapore, then we will shift to a more equal and new balance point between democracy and pragmatism. The PAP of course wants to hold the unrealistic Zhong Yong for another 15 years.  They prefer to continue to use pragmatism as an excuse and want Singaporeans to sacrifice democracy.

PM Lee’s ideal Asian Way of democracy is the Confucian Way. However, the Confucian Way of balancing Zhong Yong is outdated and becoming less pragmatic politically. Perhaps, he is still under the influence of his father.  

 
#1
http://www.singapolitics.sg/news/pm-lee-democracy-asian-states-must-find-own-way

#2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctrine_of_the_Mean