Thursday, 31 March 2016

信约精神、宪法精神凌驾于李光耀精神之上


http://www.65singapore.com/uploads/allimg/140730/25-140I0093301K1.jpg

李光耀逝世一周年活动草草了事,其中人民行动党在活动中一直强调《李光耀精神》。何谓《李光耀精神》?它可以凌驾于新加坡信约和新加坡宪法之上吗?

孩子们从入学开始,就一直在背诵新加坡信约,白纸黑字写得很清楚。潜移默化,就是要建立一个公正平等的民主社会。

不过,新加坡人对于宪法,很可能了解不多。这和美国很不一样,宪法精神在美国已经成为治国精神,政府执行民意,企业做生意的指导原则。在新加坡,我们很少听到行动党政府说,它是根据宪法的精神来做事。

难怪,两年前,新加坡管理大学法学院的学生认为有必要推出《新加坡宪法简介》。在第九页中,宪法被认为是所有法律的‘母亲’。

viewcontent.cgi.png
【推出简介的目的,就是要让读者客观,简易和全面的了解宪法。并指出误解和解释政府行政机构的功用,其中包括一些额·人们普遍误解的地方。
The primer seeks to present the Constitution in an objective, easy-to-understand, and comprehensive manner.  It also debunks misconceptions and explains the roles of government institutions, some of which are commonly misunderstood.  】

所以,当我们看到总理部长们大谈李光耀精神的时候,不论是彩虹,还是不断追求,我们都要以信约精神,宪法精神来衡量他们说的内容。

【李光耀生前以“追逐彩虹”鼓励国人逐梦,本身也倾注一生打造卓越的新加坡,但他也深知无法亲自掌控一切,也理解另一位的总理必须用不同的方式治国。他关心新加坡的方方面面,包括经济和外交状况、新加坡河,乃至东海岸公园大道的树木。他在给年轻部长提建议时引述毛泽东的话:“十个手指按住了十个跳蚤,一个也抓不住”,必须要懂得把握核心问题,并建立一个团队共同作战。】http://www.zaobao.com.sg/special/report/supplement/rememberinglky2016/news/story20160324-596207#sthash.eSSzDeSj.dpuf

【副总理兼经济及社会政策统筹部长尚达曼昨早在纪念李光耀的植树活动上说,国人应承继李光耀的精神、延续李光耀开始的旅程,不断追求更上一层楼。他说:“诚如李先生谈绿化运动时所言,坚持不懈是关键。若你认为这是个仅一两年的旅途,你不会有任何成就。我们如今取得的成果源自50多年的持之以恒。我们不断进步,不断进行试验,引进各种赤道一带的植物,看它们能否在新加坡生长。”】http://www.zaobao.com.sg/special/report/supplement/rememberinglky2016/news/story20160324-596235#sthash.3mr6gm7n.dpuf


什么是彩虹?什么是不断追求?他们背离宪法和信约精神,很明显的就是背离建立一个公正平等民主的新加坡。看明白了这点,我们就很容易了解为什么行动党要搞个人崇拜,拜神运动了。

行动党根本不愿意发扬宪法精神、信约精神。如果依照这两个精神来办事,来治理新加坡,行动党政府将会处处受到限制,受到制衡。因此,只有通过李光耀精神来取代信约精神和宪法精神。

一个凌驾于信约和宪法精神的李光耀精神,无形中将会给行动党带来不少好处。当新加坡人忘记了公正平等民主,只是注重李光耀的务实和行动党的GDP数字,在投票时当然会考虑李光耀精神,而不是宪法和信约精神。

行动党在年初设立了一个宪法委员会,检讨民选总统制度。由大法官梅达顺领导的宪法委员将负责从三方面检讨民选总统制,包括制定更严格的参选标准;强化总统顾问理事会的职能和权力;确保少数种族有机会定期获选为总统。宪法委员会的建议,是否纳入李光耀精神,还是保留和维护信约和(原本)宪法精神?

新加坡建国初期的宪法和信约是第一代行动党领袖的集体创作。这是他们集思广益的精神结晶。想不到50年后,我们竟然从集体走向个人,注重李光耀精神,而忽略了宪法和信约精神。可想而知,我们的宪法在个人主义,个人崇拜下,已经变了样。而信约呢!则形同虚设,它的真正的内容与精神,已经和我们渐行渐远了。

Wednesday, 23 March 2016

A Reluctant Candidate vs. A Committed Candidate


Judging from the quick announcement of the PAP candidate, the by-election in Bukit Batok single member constituency will be called sooner than expected.

This will be a contest between a reluctant candidate from the PAP, Mr. Murali Pillai and a committed candidate, Dr Chee Soon Juan of SDP.  

Being a Paya Lebar voter, I see Mr. Pillai as a reluctant candidate and certainly not a committed candidate. In politics, I have great doubt he is as committed as his father, former ISA detained unionist, P.K. Pillai.

pillai 1.png
Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/


Cynthia Phua, his predecessor in Paya Lebar, was really a committed and hardworking person. And I also believe what she said below is true:

[If she were still an MP, Madam Cynthia Phua would have been absent from her father's side when he died. 
"So I'm glad I was able to take care of him in his last days, after doctors diagnosed him with stomach cancer in late December. 
"If I had been working as an MP, I would not be able to care for him," she said.]http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest+News/Singapore/Story/A1Story20120510-345111.html

Why I say Mr. Pillai is a reluctant candidate?

The PAP claims he is a ‘very strong’ candidate and yet he is not the team leader of the Aljunied PAP team. He came to Paya Lebar just because the PAP wanted to form a GRC team. He did not show his leadership quality in GE2015.

As a professional lawyer, commanding more than 100 lawyers as claimed by Lim Boon Heng, he knew in advance his chance of winning in GE2015.  If he were standing in Bukit Batok in 2015, like in this by-election, his winning chance was definitely higher.  His winning percentage will also be higher than David Ong as he is more credible and qualified than Ong.

I wonder why he came to Paya Lebar as a candidate in 2015. Mr Pillai must be a reluctant candidate. He came here just because the party needed him to put up a show in Aljunied GRC. Now, the party needs him to put up another show in Bukit Batok.

Bukit Batok voters need to think twice before supporting such a reluctant candidate - not because of his race, but his political commitment.

You are now given a chance to vote in a committed Dr. Chee who will certainly give alternative views in Parliament. While a reluctant candidate, like Mr.Paillai, will be the usual PAP yes-man in the Chambers.

It may be hard to accept Dr. Chee for most of BB voters as he is not a perfect man, so do all of us. However, his commitment to democracy, checks and balances, transparency and accountability is beyond doubt. Mr. Pillai will listen to his party instruction if he is elected.  

SDP contested in Paya Lebar and Bukit Batok in 1988 and obtained 47.64% and 44.06% of the votes respectively.  In 1991, SDP even obtained 48.18% of votes in Bukit Batok. If not because of the GRC system, boundary re-drawing and internal problems, ...

Voters in Bukit Batok can make a change, just like the voters in Aljunied.

Mr. Paillai seems to be more comfortable in Bukit Batok than in Paya Lebar as he has started his grassroots activities long ago in BB.  He must feel very reluctant to be sent to Paya Lebar.  No wonder I never met him during his house visit.  I only saw him at Kovan MRT station and the hawker centre.

Oh! He also organised $1 tea and coffee sessions.  To be fair to him, he did visit funeral wakes.

But as a Paya Lebar voter, I will never give my vote to a reluctant candidate whose heart is at Bukit Batok. With due respect, Cynthia had her roots in Paya Lebar.

Despite commitment, Dr Chee has a very high mountain to climb. The active PAP grassroots activities, the state machinery and the friendly (and very important) Chinese media will prevent Dr Chee to have a successful inroad in the 95% HDB flats.

Singaporeans have to be realistic and pragmatic about this by-election. Mr Pillai is not the only reluctant PAP politician, certainly not the last one. But, for sure, his chance of winning is higher unless he makes a big mistake during the campaign.

Sunday, 20 March 2016

‘Long Long Time Ago’ 是什么戏?


前几天到电影院看电影,同伴说想看一部中文片,站在柜台前看不懂片名内容。就问售票员,‘Long Long Time Ago’ 是什么戏?原本还以为是狄龙的爷孙电影,回答说不是。

新加坡的几乎所有电影院,都会出现上述相同的事情。如果没有预先做好功课,售票处显示的电影片名,都是英文。明明一套有正式中文片名的电影,就是看不到中文片名。当然,马来,淡米尔电影,还有其他语言的电影也应该会出现同样的情形。

现代科技已经容易使用’cut and paste’, 即使不懂中文,马来和印度淡米尔文,把电影的正式片名收录在售票处的电脑里应该不是一件难事。但是,为何中文电影却没有出现中文片名呢?而要电影观众自己先做好功课,才来看电影?马来西亚的情形,我们可以理解,但是,新加坡出现这样的情形却令人费解。

或许一点都不需要费解,根据最新的数据,新加坡家里说英语的比率已经第一次高于说华语的家庭。在这样的背景下,一个是市场占有率增加,一个却减少;从商业、务实的角度出发,只提供一种语文选择,也没有策略不正确的地方。

偏偏这不是一个简单的数学题,也不是C+++的逻辑问题。

这是一个文化选项,哲学问题。50年的建国路,我们已经发展到中文电影不需要中文片名的地步。再走下去,这将会是一条什么路?令人不敢想象。

***
同样令人不敢想象的是新加坡华人参加反IS伊斯兰国的举动。正如行动党政府所担心的,在国外的斗争行为和思想,有可能会被带回新加坡来的。这是一把双刃剑,没事大家都不出声,有事真的是惊天动地了。做政府如果只是看到好的一面,拼命的宣传好处,到头来,很可能伤到自己。

立国50年后,大举引进移民后,行动党做梦也没有想到,在移民融入方面,我们真的做得不足。我们已经进入中文电影不需要中文片名的阶段,而有些人未必能够跟得上这个步伐。同样是华人,走的路却很可能是各走各路。

这个课题,我们很难想象。行动党本身,也很可能没有算到。但是,却是越算越害怕,越想脚越软。这个问题,可以超乎想象之外。表面的假象,在潜移默化的过程后,就变样了。。。太可怕了。读者自己去想象。。。

行动党想问题是务实的。但是,这尤其是关关系到文化,思想,哲学方面的问题,行动党想到全是造神运动。他们只有通过造神来团结国人,但是,原住民和外来的移民未必相信,未必欣赏造神的内容和内涵精神。我们在行动党的务实教条下,想到的是务实的回报。

什么我们已经渡过没有李光耀的阶段,后李光耀的过渡工作安排的很好,这些都是行动党的一厢情愿。我们在文化,在哲理方面的过渡,正在面临前所未有的挑战。硬体的问题,当然可以举出恐怖主义对我国的威胁,伊斯兰国在东南亚的可能发动的恐怖活动,以及我们为何必须安装这么多的电眼来烟雾人们。但是,在软体上,我们要如何跟进?难道只有一个造神运动吗?

中文电影不需要中文片名,反伊斯兰国多了一个新加坡华人,我们在50年前想象的到吗?想到的人,或许会被当成华文沙文主义来看待,被内安法伺候。

行动党开出的药方,有时候就像不良制药厂,只是报告医药效果,而不报告药产生的副作用。一时之间,病人好了,但是,过不了多久,副作用发作,病情反而更加严重。

***

在没有中文片可供选择后,最后选了《伦敦倒了》(London has fallen) 来看。’Long Long Time Ago’ 真的太遥远了, 上天了。《伦敦倒了》是一部恐怖份子在伦敦进行恐怖报复行动的电影。

原本想看《美人鱼》,结果却看了《伦敦倒了》。从周星驰的理想国到恐怖攻击报复,人生的选择有时受到很多限制,这种限制选择的情形,往往在造神运动中被完美的遮盖住,让人看不清楚。

看戏,看中文电影,还要先做好功课。难怪,行动党把大选期限定得那么短,就是不让选民做好功课。不只如此,抹黑也是行动党的一绝。就像即将来临的武吉巴督单选区补选,民主党很可能,在造神运动中,被抹黑到和恐怖主义一样的危险,是国家的安全、稳定的一大威胁。

选民可要先做好功课,才去投票。不然,就像看电影那样,在选择受到限制的背景下,不知道中文片名的情形下,看不到自己想要看的电影。

Thursday, 17 March 2016

How To Convince Voters The Importance of Democracy, Transparency and Accountability


GE2015 results clearly shows that democracy, human rights, transparency, and accountability  are not so important as compared to economic achievements.  Many voters believe without the PAP Singapore will not have progressed ‘from third world to first world’ within 50 years. Many middle voters also choose to give the PAP a second chance.  

Will the coming Bukit Batok single member constituency by-election make a difference? How can Singapore Democratic Party effectively change the mind of BB voters in the next few months? What strategies can help to turn the table around?

SDP has a weak starting point, perhaps at 30% or at most 35%.  This will be the main contest between SDP and the PAP even there is a multi-corner by-election.  Even there is one to one contest, bookies will give the ‘win’ to the PAP.

And changing Singaporeans’ attitudes towards democracy, transparency and accountability is a huge challenge. Whether aggressively or passively promoting and engaging the change, the result is not impressive at all.

Interestingly in parliament, PM Lee Hsien Loong  discussed 5 key principles of Singapore political system early this year. In which, he also mentioned about accountability, open, contestable, and political stabilisers (the Presidency).

[“Most political systems have such stabilisers built in - either an upper house, like the Senate in the United States or the House of Lords in United Kingdom.”

“Singapore is too small to have either an upper house, or regional sets of Governments beyond Town Councils. But we too need stabilisers, especially in two areas: Protecting our reserves and safeguarding the integrity of the public service,” Mr Lee said.]

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/5-key-principles-for/2462640.html

Obviously, the PAP does not think ‘the checks and balances in the Parliament’ is a stabiliser. The obvious result of GE2015 seems to support this.

‘Bo chap’ or ‘don’t care’ political attitudes of many Singaporeans have also made the PAP their natural choice.

And SDP has to face an unfriendly press…..

How can SDP break the cycle? Their by-election campaign team has started working, how can they reach the heartlanders and residents in HDB flats?

Working harder than the PAP, perhaps, is the answer.

Look at this situation:
A Bernie Blackout    The New York Times.png
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/17/opinion/campaign-stops/a-bernie-blackout.html?

Bukit Batok by-election is a new learning experience for the oppositions whether there is a breakthrough or not.

This is the lesson not only for SDP but also for other opposition parties.

All the best and good luck, SDP!

Saturday, 5 March 2016

部长声明避重就轻:目的是要稳住支持者。

满纸荒唐言,一把辛酸泪。
都云作者痴,谁解其中味?《红楼梦》




【满纸荒唐言】
内政和代教育部长的国会声明,依旧是老方法,人民行动党的惯例。主要的目的是做给支持者看的。只要能够说服70%的选民继续相信声明的内容,主流媒体天天继续大篇幅报道声明内容,支持者是很难分辨是非,谁对谁错的。目的就是这么简单。
地铁停驶,巴士司机罢工,小印度暴动,。。。等等,回想一下,是不是避重就轻的报告?而选民继续相信行动党的那一套说服法,继续的支持。
因此,这次林家的不幸事件,当然可以用同样的避重就轻的方法过关。而声明的重点-尤其是网上言论不可信,更是行动党要传达的重中之重。只要能够把支持者的心说服,其他的都不重要。因此,再荒唐,再不人道,也无所谓。
行动党当然相信,支持者不会看重人权。因为,社会上一定要有人牺牲,即使无辜牺牲,但是能够为国家带来进步,也是值得。行动党处处强调TRADE-OFF, 就是这个道理。有人被不幸牺牲,大多数人却进步了,这是值得的。这就是行动党,(其实,只要仔细观察,美国共和党川普的言论似曾相识。)
部长声明当然没有提到如何保护人权,尤其是小孩的权利。这一点,行动党很清楚,支持者也不在意。听惯,看惯荒唐言,又不是第一回,多数人还是会相信行动党的。
【一把辛酸泪】
讲人权是动不了新加坡人的心,或许一把辛酸泪能够激起人性,人的同情心。就像去年三月的造神运动,一把辛酸泪,为行动党带来10%的选票。因此,只要行动党当权,造神运动年年都会进行,报道说,今年三月,新加坡就有100处造神运动。
造神运动,讲的是一把辛酸泪。林家的不幸难道不是一把辛酸泪吗?
  • 作为父母,您会关心孩子吗?
  • 作为祖父母,您会关怀孙子吗?
  • 作为亲戚朋友,亲戚、邻家的孩子怎么样了?您会问一问吗?
或许,行动党支持者什么都不管,但是,自己的孩子,总不能不关心吧?造神是一把辛酸泪,江山是哭出来的。
马房失火,孔子关心的是有没有人受伤。新加坡人可以不关心人权,但是,不可能不理家事。家里的一把辛酸泪,也同样反映出我们是一个怎么样的社会。
因此,在参与造神运动的过程中,我们要反思,反省,行动党倡导的一把辛酸泪,意义何在?为什么行动党的造神才是一把辛酸泪,而普通老百姓的一把辛酸泪就可以轻描淡写的带过?
【都云作者痴】
不要轻视行动党的满纸荒唐言,避重就轻的说服法,看起来像是白痴说梦话。但是,行动党通过控制国会,媒体,这些避重就轻的声明,很容易就成了支持者眼中的神话 - 造神运动的一部分。
什么意思?什么神话?网上的言论不可靠,不可信。网上的报道无中生有,报道错误,验尸庭还没有开庭,就先下结论。因此,将来考虑立法对付。
行动党手握内安法,如果网上的言论真的犯了大错,危害国家安全,早早就对付了。不然,就像对付不同意见的人那样,起诉,控告,就是行动党一贯的做法。为何不早早行动,而要利用国会的保护伞来说痴话?这一点,行动党是不需要向支持者交代的。
【谁解其中味】
谁真的理解一把辛酸泪?行动党朔造的造神运动中的一把辛酸泪,还是个人,国人的一把辛酸泪?
行动党支持者看到只是造神的版本,造神的一把辛酸泪。行动党处心积虑要朔造,要怀念的只是每年的造神运动。个中滋味,个人的一把辛酸泪,如何让行动党支持者体会到呢?
他们不会关心人权,也不希望行动党失去政权,怎么才能唤起人们内心深处的一把辛酸泪?只有从个人,家庭出发。当个人,家庭遇到一把辛酸泪,然后才能理解,作为父母,作为祖父母,作为亲戚朋友的一把辛酸泪。
新加坡人在务实的选择下,在考虑到个人和家庭的不幸时,想到有可能自己会不幸遇到一把辛酸泪的时候,或许,才能惊醒这’一把辛酸泪‘不仅限于造神,它与我们个人,家庭是息息相关的。
如果我们一直认为,只要造神,维护这个造神运动,我们就能相安无事,平平安安的度过一生,这很可能是这个人,这个家庭最大的赌博。这个赌博已经玩了50年,还要继续玩下去吗?