Friday, 13 October 2017

李显龙鼓励不劳而获。别人的忧不如自己的乐。


    原来这个世界上真的有不劳而获这回事。不需要出钱,不需要出力,大把赞助人等着排队津贴圈定的候选人,这就是新加坡今年总统选举的戏码。

李光耀所谓没有免费的午餐,原来不是那一回事。在李显龙的导演下,免费午餐,不单可能可行,更是活生生在新加坡上演。

只要政治正确,站在人民行动党的预订方向,所谓的总统选举,真的是不劳而获。所有可以预见的风险,困难,阻力,行动党都可以一一替候选人解决。甚至,候选人还可以预先购买好屋子,演一回坚持住在组屋的闹剧。

Untitled drawing(4).jpg

李显龙塑造的新加坡,竟然是这幅光景: 选举可以随意炒作,赞助费的津贴高过开支,草草了事的就完成总统选举的程序。对于选举造成的族群分裂,社会不和谐,只是懂得呼吁人民团结。

不过,真正威胁新加坡生存的大问题是国会辩论,竟然沦落到是非黑白不分,论据前后矛盾,说过的话,可以否认。并且,以另一种论据来推翻之前说过的话。这意味着在行动党的严格控制下,不单没有制衡这回事,还可以自由变更游戏规则,只要是自己人,免费午餐到处有,不是自己人,出头的机会难上加难。

【有识之士,应该作何打算?】

新加坡每一年放弃公民权人数有1200人。这个数目和想成为新加坡公民和永久居民的人数相比,少了很多。因此,很多人要进来,出去的很少。这是物以稀为贵的现象。

作为一个有识之士,看到行动党政府过去50年来的记录,政治正确和不正确之间,代价很高。甚至,政治正确,如果不为所用,那么,就算才高八斗,表现的机会也是有限的。因此,有办法的人,就会想到出走。因为,在新加坡,如果对手有免费午餐,又有津贴,竞争当然就是不公平,反而,在西方民主国家,在相对民主的机制下,本身又掌握英文,机会反而多些。

看到这幅光景,社会精英会作何打算?先天下之忧而忧,后天下之乐而乐?还是刚好相反。既然斗不过人民行动党,又考虑到新加坡的前途,捞了一笔后,选择离开,很可能是最好的选择。资深律师,明明最懂新加坡法律,却要让孩子逃兵役。这代表了什么?难道,他不知道出走的代价吗?

一个专业人士在新加坡,生活的好好,事业也好,为何会让孩子知法犯法?难道只是身体不适,这么简单的原因吗?还是看到新加坡的前途,这种津贴式的政治,这种免费午餐式的竞争,如果孩子(在体力,智力上)斗不过其他孩子,倒不如到国外享受人生,更加写意。反正,老子赚的新元,到国外还是坚挺,受到欢迎的。

免费午餐,津贴式竞争的政治,就是造就一批不劳而获的人。这些人并不一定局限在政治圈,在社会上,在商场,在非政府组织,在宗教团体里,都会出现一大批不劳而获的人。

李光耀或许能够控制不劳而获的人数,只是针对少数有利用价值的人开放。但是,李显龙在能力不如老子的背景下,就只有开放和扩大不劳而获人群,来稳定政局。

这种结果,当然就不会出现: 先天下之忧而忧,后天下之乐而乐。既然以不劳而获为前提,当然就是乐先于忧。从直通车总统,早早就买好房子,考虑的不是人民的忧,而是自己的乐。所谓的选举,根本就不需要担心钱的问题,有心人会站出来作为赞助人。这就是为何开支22万元,收到的捐款却有80万元。

资深律师的情形也是如此。孩子出走,他根本没有考虑对国家社会的义务,即使他懂得国家的法律,他还是乐见孩子前往他国,寻求乐园。他没有考虑到这个国家让他有机会发财,而他有机会让孩子快乐出走的基础,其实是建立在新加坡其他的人身上的。

李显龙倡导的“不劳而获”精神,的确无法考虑“先天下之忧而忧,后天下之乐而乐”。李显龙鼓励的是政治正确,就能够不劳而获,人民的忧虑排在个人利益之后。

上面的两个例子,时间上有先后。逃兵役在先,而玩弄、操弄总统选举在后。这意味着新加坡的高级知识分子,在很早之前,已经看到行动党治理下的新加坡的前途。如果能够选择离开,最好在服兵役前就离开,这样就可以先两年完成大学教育。而不用服兵役的女孩,就更加没有这个顾虑了。

李光耀辛苦建立起来的刻苦耐劳的美德,能者多劳的精神,在李显龙鼓励不劳而获的破坏下,还能维持多久?事实上,李显龙弟妹在控诉李显龙不光彩的一面时,就清楚的点出这一点。他们认为李显龙干涉政府的运作太多,破坏了李光耀精神。我们从李显龙鼓励不劳而获的实际例子,也应证也这个不光彩的事实。

Friday, 6 October 2017

Counting presidential term is not a ‘chicken or egg’ question.


Untitled drawing(2).jpg

    The counting of presidential term is a serious business as it is so difficult to get it debated in the Parliament.  However, it can also become a ‘chicken or egg’  question as reported by Lianhe Zaobao:

    This is not a fake news, perhaps the most it is only 50% right.

[林瑞莲问了“先有鸡还是先有蛋”的问题]

http://www.zaobao.com.sg/znews/singapore/story20171004-800189

    By naming the debate as a ‘chicken or egg’ question, Zaobao is directly admitting that the whole issue can go either way - policy decision or legal advice.  It means Lee Hsien Loong and the People’s Action Party government is 50% right in misleading the Parliament and so the people of Singapore.    

    However, as the way the mainstream media reports, it is clearly we should give the benefit of doubt to Lee Hsien Loong and the PAP government.  They have 50% chance of not misleading the Parliament, like the ‘chicken or egg’ question.,  

    The ‘chicken or egg’ can be a good excuse for Lee Hsien Loong and his government not directly answering the question. Terry Xu of The Online Citizens has clearly pointed out: Did Minister K Shanmugam deflect responsibility for PM Lee, DPM Teo and Minister Chan? https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2017/10/04/did-minister-k-shanmugam-deflect-responsibility-for-pm-lee-dpm-teo-and-minister-chan/

    Judge for yourself whether it is a ‘chicken or egg’ debate?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KxkMD7QzFA

[50% Malay]

    By the same ‘chicken or egg’ analogy, it is nothing right or wrong to classify an Indian-Malay mixed blood as a Malay candidate. It can go either way. If someone decides to be a Malay, so be it.

Yes. Even the identity card states clearly the race is Indian, one can still legally choose to be a Malay under the amended Singapore Constitutions.

 

 
[50% dishonorable son]

    In the ‘Dishonorable son’ debate in Parliament, Lee Hsien Loong was given the benefit of doubt - another ‘chicken or egg’ question where 50% right or 50% wrong.

    Like the ‘chicken or egg’ debate of presidential term, many documents or references are clearly not presented, for example the secret behind the legal advice from Attorney-General’s Chamber, the secret behind the setting up of ministerial committee on 38 Oxley Road.    

    When there is doubt, ‘chicken or egg’, Lee Hsien Loong and the PAP government can, the best, claim 50% accuracy. They may be 50% wrong by not providing additional supporting proofs to get the fact right.

[50% Fake news]

    The ‘chicken or egg’ headline shows Zaobao is not sure about its reporting. By giving the confusing headline, it is producing fake
news. It misled readers to believe Lee Hsien Loong and the PAP government is 50% right.  At the same time, it also admits Lee and the government is 50% wrong.  By manipulating news report, Zaobao and other mainstream media can easily omit the 50% wrong.

    The Yahoo news gives the following headline:

    Government used ‘distraction’ of AGC’s advice on Elected Presidency: Sylvia Lim

    Even the Straits Times dares not give a ‘chicken or egg’ fake headline: Parliament: Shanmugam, Sylvia Lim debate reason for Govt's decision on counting of presidential terms

    However, they all focus on the 50% right and ignoring the 50% wrong. So, an incomplete reporting is even worst than a fake news.

[0% Court decision]

    The only state institution that does not give a ‘chicken or egg’ answer is the Court of Appeal. The Courts can not give 50% right 50% wrong answer. So, the Courts make no decision and let the Parliament decides.  

{“It was evident from reading Art 19B together with Art 164 that it was open to Parliament, for the purpose of determining when the reserved election scheme would take effect, to select as the first of the five most recent terms, a term of office that predated the coming into force of the recent amendments to the Constitution,” }
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/presidential-election-2017-tan-cheng-bocks-appeal-dismissed-061418908.html

Ultimately, the Courts believes this is a people’s decision and the Parliament, representing the citizens of Singapore, is the agent of change.

Have we learned something from the ‘chicken or egg’ wayang? How can we expose and inform citizens about the 50% wrong fake news or misleading reporting?  

The ‘chicken or egg’ drama provides ‘50% right 50% wrong’ confusion.  The real purpose is to provide a playing field for an institutionalised One-Party Rule, with or without AG advice, with or without Courts. Hence, even the Parliament cannot really check and balance the wrong doing of the PAP government.


#####

For those who like Chinese dramas, here is a video to enlighten your understanding of historical facts and wayang.






Friday, 29 September 2017

李显龙黑白脸,行动党双簧戏:一手搞族群分裂,一手呼社会团结。


Untitled drawing(1).jpg

    李显龙在总统直通车选举前,利用保留选举,国会/法庭推诿责任的方式,撕裂新加坡各种族间的和谐。直通车一过,李显龙就变脸,高声呼吁国人团结一致。这种迷惑新加坡人的套数,已经是一种惯例,屡见不鲜。

    当然,演戏也要演全套。李显龙除了落力演出外,人民行动党的要员也要参加,一起唱双簧,这样才能取得最佳效果。因此,除了李显龙外,吴作栋和达曼也一起呼吁国人,团结的重要性。即使直通车上任总统,虽然有争议,但是新加坡人应该抛弃成见,我们现在和以前比较,有更多自由,害怕也减少。

    这套双簧的黑白脸,表面上告诉国人,行动党是具有自我监督的能力。行动党党内,不是只有一种声音,因为,有些领袖也承认,总统选举制度的不完美,有争议。达曼说他并不认同,他同僚的每一个策略。更有部长说,这有风险和政治代价。

【假自我监督,真集体迷思】

    但是, 他们只有一个目的 --- 一党独大。正如吴作栋说的,告不告,取决于是否有兄弟情。既然大家都是行动党同志,目标当然一致。什么自我监督,其实就是建立在集体思维上。不论,意见是否同步,大家的目的,就是要维护和继续一党独大。

    而表面的自我监督,就是要迷惑选民,误导新加坡人,双簧戏里,行动党内部的确具有制衡的力量:最高领袖,也要听取其他领袖的不同意见。但是,说白了,所有的领袖,不论赞成还是反对,还是有些意见,最后,同志们还是集体迷失,集体迷思,有时唱双簧,有时扮演黑白脸,迷惑国人。

    偏偏新加坡人看了双簧,见了变脸,还是依然相信,行动党精彩的一党独大演出。甚至,也跟主流媒体一样,参与演出。

【真强化,假转型】

    要看穿行动党的双簧和李显龙的变脸,我们就要从真强化和假转型入手。

    真强化比较明显,如修改宪法,利用国会的绝对优势,来强化行动党的一党独大。每一次大选的选区划分,就不用说了。而一向来的媒体管制,独立以来就是行动党的王牌。组屋翻新,继续强化行动党的基层。

    假转型就比较难分辨。社会民主主义的提出,就是行动党试图告诉国人,行动党会照顾低下层人民。而月入1000元,可以买到组屋;芳林公园开放演说,有限度的示威;推出全民健保;父母孩子公积金存款可以互通有无,等等。

    尚达曼:新加坡主流媒体扮演负责任角色   联合早报.png
        这是达曼的双簧戏,还是白脸戏?

    行动党口口声声说,自己会监督自己,会自我检讨,自我管制,并且,在必要时,转型正义。但是,我们看到了改变吗?李显龙的修宪行为,不只是走向专制,更加是分裂族群的举动。达曼说品格,诚信和真诚是行动党坚持的标志,那么李显龙的Dishonorable son 又作何解?

【双簧戏,黑白脸被揭穿的国际笑话】

    或许有30%,40%新加坡人看得出行动党迷惑国人的双簧戏,以及李显龙的黑白脸。但是,对于老谋深算的中国共产党来说,这种戏码只不过是小儿科。

    李显龙在中美之间,唱双簧。在南海问题上,也扮演黑白脸。在东盟扮演老大,在TPP上,也落力演出。然后,又把错误的外交政策,归咎于一个学者。这种表演,看在中共眼里,只能被当成笑话。

    不只是中国如此,在美国,新加坡小孩余澎杉,现在终于获得政治庇护。这当然是美国人的权利,他们要收留余澎杉,这是他们的权利。但是,这真的如行动党政府说的:“接纳发表冒犯性言论的人,是美国的特权“吗?事实上,美国法庭的判决,考虑到,以及关乎到一个人的人身自由和安全,人权保障的问题,而不是冒犯性言论。这当然就是黑白脸的问题,李显龙关注冒犯性,要国人把重点放在这里,因为在新加坡冒犯性言论会吃上官司的。一方面这是李显龙一党独大的法理依据,另一方面,则可以起到恐吓作用。行动党政府不愿意解开(美国法庭)人权保障,言论自由的枷锁。对于行动党这不是笑话,在国际上,余澎杉成为最年轻的政治犯,不单不是笑话,而是一个讽刺。

    说到最后,行动党的双簧戏和李显龙的黑白脸,只适用于新加坡。放到国外,就变了样了。

Saturday, 23 September 2017

More liberal, Less Fear, and so, Accept the Controversies.


Untitled drawing.jpg


   
The aftermath of the walkover Presidential election shows the true color of “Black and White Face” (黑白脸) strategy of the People’s Action Party government.  

    Before the “election”, the PAP uses hard and harsh tactics to push through the reserved PE - using the Parliament to change the Constitutions, making the walkover, even change the race identity.

After the “election”, the PAP is aware of political price and so they need to do damage control. First, Goh Chok Tong said the PE is controversy. Then, Tharman followed up by projecting a “liberal and less fear” Singapore as compared to the past. Singaporeans also feel less constrained.     

Now, the PAP is projecting a moderate, liberal, open and reasonable image. Goh Chok Tong agreed there are controversies. Tharman also said the same and ‘did not agree with every tactic by his colleagues’.     


Once again, Singaporeans suffer a backstabbing.  Instead of the PAP saying sorry to us, we have to say sorry to the PAP. Look at Tharman’s reply:

[“Singaporeans judge. … Singaporeans judge at each election, and they will judge the PAP in the next election.”

“I do not think Singaporeans are fools.”]
  • The new Paper, 22 September 2017.
     
It is quite clear that the “Black and White Face” tactic work very well for the PAP - past, present and future?.

Singaporeans are not fools but why they can’t see the clearer and bigger picture. The controversial PE may lead to some pro-PAP supporters to feel unhappy.  The PAP hardliners know the political price. But when the moderate PAP leaders call for unity, understanding, rational choices, majority of the unhappiness will disappear.     

This is the reality of Singaporeans, who judge the PAP under the “Black and White Face” wayang.  And they are too happy to be fooled. 

Friday, 15 September 2017

一个人的Dishonorable选举,一个人的Dishonorable决定。败国之象,民主之哀。


    一个人的选举 - 总统。
    一个人的决定 - 总理。

    无论选举还是决定,都是Dishonorable.

    Dishonorable son 形容没有诚信的人子,没有荣耀的儿子。延伸开来,也可以是败家子,不孝子。

李显龙就是这样被弟妹冠名。几个月前,他在处理李光耀遗属的所作所为已经被弟妹认定为没有一点诚信,没有一点荣耀。弟妹们也暗示这种行为可能导致败家败国。

现在,从民选总统的一个人的选举中,一个人的决定,Dishonorable son又再一次被落实。

    不过,这一次,却是从家庭延伸到国家。从失信于家人,家族蒙羞到失信于国人,让国人蒙羞。从败家到败国,李显龙的一意孤行,不但害了李氏家族,也把国家给害了。因此,人们形容新加坡是第一世界的经济体,第三流的政治体制。

    想一想,如果李显龙继续败家败国下去,新加坡还可能成为第一经济体吗?一个人的选举,就是完全的垄断,没有竞争,不管做什么生意,只要一家公司提供服务就可以了。在政治上,就是一党独大,不需要制衡。

【一个人的决定,还是集体迷失、迷思】

    不论在总统选举修宪辩论上,还是国会辩论李显龙弟妹的指控事件上,行动党的一些资深领袖和内阁部长,都冷漠对待,没有发声,没有给意见。到底他们是沉默的认同,还是不敢发声?

    如果这些最后的决定,都是集体决定的话;那么,总理的决定,政府最后的方案,决策,就是集体的责任。沉默不出声,甚至反对,但又不表态,并不表示,作为内阁成员和资深领袖,就可以逃过责任这一关。最少在道义上,也要负起责任。

    当然,在政治上,也有两边吃的现象。不表态,就是等待机会,万一李显龙出了大问题,越来越不受欢迎;那么,这些保持沉默的领袖,就可以名正言顺,挺身而出,捞好处,行动党就可以“拨乱反正”,以改革的新形象出现,再一次骗得选票。

    两边吃的机会,似乎不太可能。内阁部长,高级官员的家底,都需要向总理报告,这些人的背景对外人是秘密,对于总理来说,却是公开的资料。而在一党独大和一个人的决定下,两边吃的情形,微乎其微。事实证明,过去50多年来却是如此。

    既然两边都吃不到,那么,就是一个人的决定。而这个决定就是建立在集体迷失、迷思的基础上。整个内阁里,就像一党独大一样,总理的权力大到让内阁迷失方向,失去思维能力,放纵总理为所欲为,依照自己的意愿行事、决定。

【一个人的决定和只有一家公司招标】

    行动党喜欢玩一个人的决定,因此,在很多政府的决策上,也变得只有一种选择,一种供给,一种人选。在委任新议长时,也是一种选择。在组屋翻新问题上,国家发展部是“一个人的决定”。公积金如何借款给政府,也是一个人的决定。储备金如何投资,结果如何,也是一个人的决定,连总统都管不了。

    人们似乎习惯了一个人的决定,久而久之,就依赖,过度依赖一个人的决定。新加坡人认为,没有总理人一个人的决定,他们就会失去方向,不知所措。

(新加坡民主,国外开花?)  

最可怕的是,这种过度依赖还延伸到国外去。

一位在欧洲砖石店工作的朋友,最近反应,他被投诉。因为,他在服务新加坡客人的时候,对于李氏父子的所作所为有所不满,对新加坡政治做出评判。他原本认为新加坡人到了国外,和在国内会有所不同,思维上也会比较开放。哪里知道,这种过度依赖一个人的决定的思维,依旧留在新加坡身上。

新加坡人出国也不忘行动党的集体迷失、迷思。甚至在欧洲民主国家,也要求新加坡式的民主。难怪,李显龙可以我行我素决定,一个人的选举。他当然也认为一个人的选举代价不高。

但是,新加坡真的是小虾米。欧洲砖石店的生意,如果只靠新加坡客人,就只有关门大吉。一个中国客人或者一个俄罗斯客人的购买力,就能够轻易的超过一团新加坡游客。

新加坡人在行动党集体迷惑、迷思下,如何看清自己小虾米式的所谓民主?

    在行动党的集体迷失、迷思、迷惑下,还直接造成没有人敢投标,没有公司敢投标的怪现象。当我们仔细研究阿裕尼-后港市镇会和工人党议员的司法纠纷时,为什么会出现一家公司投标的问题?这是否和一个人的决定有关,为什么没有公司要投标?

    新加坡独特的“一个人的决定”的民主方式,造就了一家公司敢投标的怪现象?在一个人的决定下,政府关联的管理公司,却步反对党的市镇会。而在迷思、迷惑下,新加坡人的印象中,就是工人党议员失职,没有担任好管理员的角色。

【一家公司投标和总统、总理失职】

    说到责任问题,失职问题,如果拿相同的标准来衡量,我们是否可以拿市镇会管理和总统、总理的管理国家来评论。事实上,总统、总理的责任更加大,反而似乎不需要负什么责任。

    在正常的选举制度下,做得不好,或者失职,下一次连任的机会就降低了。但是,在一个人的选举下,在一个人的决定下,那丹,陈庆炎是否失职,没有人问?或者,在具体迷思下,没有人敢问,敢看清楚。

    这就回归到制衡的问题。总统没有问储备金的管理问题,是不是失职?淡马锡,政府投资公司到底如何管理新加坡人的钱,有没有失职,没有人敢问?偏偏一个反对党管理的市镇会,就百般刁难,迷惑国人,反对党照顾自己人,没有尽责。

    新加坡的民主悲哀,问题不在民主,而是人民一直被行动党迷惑,迷失方向,走向入迷思不解的死角。而看清楚迷局的知识分子,就像行动党的沉默派一样,明哲保身,忘记了在民主制度下的个人责任问题。当然,这也是一个牺牲自我的问题。

Sunday, 10 September 2017

Mid-life Challenge: Job Market is Bad. Chuan Jin Accepts Pay Cut.



    Tan Chuan Jin’s problem is an ordinary Singaporean problem. Job market is bad but as a mid-career, mid-life (PMET) person, he has many personal and family commitments. This is not a political price issue but a bread and butter problem. So, he has to accept a pay cut and re-deployment.

What are the mid-life challenges?
  • Housing loans, may be for second home.
  • Car loans, perhaps a second car.
  • Education fees for children.
  • Parents maintenance expenses.
  • Insurance - life, endowment, investment-linked products, medical etc.
  • Medical expenses (he was once ill)
  • Entertainment and holiday for family.   

    When a PMET is retrenched or redeployed, he will need to adjust his lifestyle and try very hard to maintain his quality of life as before. This is especially when one faces a pay cut.

    Being a former Manpower Minister, Chuan Jin knows too well that ‘CPF money is not your money’. Between age 48 to 55, Chuan Jin cannot withdraw CPF saving for own use even though he has a handsome balance with CPF Board. Only after 55, he can withdraw CPF saving above the required minimum sum.  He also cannot withdraw Medisave as he wishes because there is a limit. This means there is a need of cash top up.

    Luckily for Chuan Jin, his pay cut does not affect his financial commitments so much. He can still afford to have holidays, allowances for children and parents, serving housing and car loans, and paying insurance premiums promptly. His medical is still covered by the government.

    So, his political price or compromise is well taken cared of.

    However, if you are a PMET earning more than $100,000, a pay cut of 50% or same scale as Chuan Jin, you will face a real challenge. Most likely, you will have less entertainment and holidays, giving less allowances to your children and parents, perhaps some problems paying insurance premiums, housing and car loans.

    Now, you can understand why Chuan Jin accepts a deployment and pay cut. You may still recall Lui Tuck Yew, from a minister to our current ambassador to Japan.  Certainly, the pay for ambassador is lower than a Speaker of the House. Luckily, Tuck Yew is above 55, he can withdraw CPF money to meet his personal financial commitments.

    Chuan Jin or Tuck Yew, both scholars, in fact can be better deployed to GLCs like SMRT, Keppel, Singtel, Capitaland, etc to earn million dollars. Why not?

Unfortunately, both may have choose the wrong path. This is their political price. They are not the political materials that Lee Hsien Loong wants.

No matter what, Chuan Jin and Tuck Yew are still drawing handsome salary on tax payers’ money. This is very different from most of the PMETs who have to face the real challenges in life and in career.

Thursday, 7 September 2017

李显龙的幻象:新加坡人对他的 dishonorable 行为无动于衷。


    李显龙的焦虑,最近特别的明显。焦虑后的行动决策,如,总统选举,李光耀孙子李绳武事件,议长人选,都显示他的幻象。他认为,新加坡人对他的所作所为,无动于衷。国人心里虽然不满,但是,在高压和照顾既得利益者的背景下,新加坡依然可以保持稳定,经济继续成长,政治上没有改变。

    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。

    同时,李显龙也明白,自己的清白,只是国会里才站住脚。在国会外,当然有不同的解读。李显龙还不至于把英国广播公司BBC给关掉,因此,英美的广播和新闻,还是,可以对新加坡政治发展做出评论。李绳武在脸书上对纽约时报对新加坡司法的评论文章,就让李显龙焦虑不已。通过私人管道,进入李绳武的私人脸书部分,焦虑的把私人空间,公开化并且告上法庭。李显龙不顾个人隐私,既然为了个人的焦虑,不惜进入别人的个人空间,这简直就是内安法恐吓手段的升级版。

    新加坡人真的如李显龙幻象中的,无动于衷吗?原本上个星期六,在演说者角落,有一场抗议总统选举的活动,由于当局的种种限制,最后不得不叫停,从室外的公开活动,改成日后的室内活动。这不也是李显龙的焦虑吗?

    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?李显龙能够不焦虑吗?问题出在,李显龙越焦虑,他自己就制造出更多幻象。

    因此,李显龙幻想创造自己的幻象: 利用修改宪法,制造司法独立的假象; 利用马来人总统候选人,制造虚假社群和谐; 利用无限金,表示国家进步; 利用李绳武事件,表现大公无私; 利用支持一带一路,表示和中国亲近; 利用5元特价体检,表示关心人民的健康;。。。

幻象中看不到行政管理赤字 Governance Deficit#

    李显龙在为自己制造的各种假象,幻象中,不忘自我selffie,自我留影,在脸书上炫耀一番。他看到自己,只顾自己,就像国王的新衣,没有理解国人的感受。

    新加坡一向来以行政效率高,生产力高(?),来推动经济发展。政治上也是如此。一旦出现对李显龙,行动党不利的局面,就马上纠正。选举政治的不断改变,经济政策的改变,在一党独大下,可以很快进行,如:集选区,候选人资格认证,官委议员制度,公积金最低存款,媒体管制,假新闻等。

    在李显龙的幻象中,他没有看到行政管理上出现赤字。简单的说,在一直干扰政治、经济、社会等各方面的活动后,往往出现不协调的问题,导致效率和生产力不如从前。从西方的角度看,他们在经历了高度发展后,也觉得本身出现行政赤字 - 低成长,一些行业出现低生产力,低效率,管理失效,错误,冲力不足,等问题。

    在新加坡,我们看到地铁的问题;一些政府部门的浪费,甚至,没有适当授权,也可以将合同合法化; 公共服务跟不上; 补习成风; 突然发现没有理工人才; 突然发现跟不上无现金时代; 突然发现外交无间道; 突然发现南中国海方向不对; 突然发现成了(一马)洗钱中心;。。。

    李显龙连表面的行政赤字,都看不到,或者选择性的看不到, 那么,在他焦虑的幻象中,又如何看到人民的不满,一种内存的爆发力。当然,李显龙假定,这股爆发力不会爆发,因为,新加坡很乖,无动于衷。

    事实上,很多国家就是没有看清这股爆发力。苏联解体,阿拉伯之春,国民党惨败,特兰普上台,英国脱欧,似乎看起来不可能发生。爆发力发生的时候,并不是这些国家政治经济最坏的情形,但是,人们在心理上还是觉得值得一试。

    李显龙焦虑有其道理,他害怕国家败在他的手里。但他在解决焦虑时,充满幻象,他认为可以通过高压手段,限制言论,管制媒体,操控政治,垄断(国营)经济,修改宪法,来达到目的。而他最大的幻象,就是认为,新加坡人,对于他一举一动,无动于衷,没有反对,没有出声。 这就如庄子的【螳螂捕蝉,黄雀在后】,李显龙没有看到幻象后面的危险,他考虑是个人的焦虑问题,把国家面临的挑战,置之不理,考虑的只是个人的焦虑。因此,Dishonorable son (of Singapore) 的称呼,合情合理。

#
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pascal-lamy/addressing-the-global-gov_b_4646573.html




Friday, 1 September 2017

Smart President, Stupid Prime Minister?



As Tony Tan stepped down as President of Singapore, many say he is a ‘do nothing’ useless President. However, he is not stupid. Indeed, he is very smart by being silent and leaves everything to the Prime Minister.

The smartest person, according to Dao De Jing (Laozi), is practicing ‘wu wei’ and leaving all things to nature.  He is just doing this and lets all the things to the Prime Minister.  The PM instead has to worry about the natural and unnatural developments, including how to fix the reserved Elected President issue and find another suitable nothing to do President as Tony Tan’s replacement.    

Dao De Jing Quotes:

“Those who know do not speak. Those who speak do not know.”

“A leader is best When people barely know he exists.Of a good leader, who talks little,
When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,
They will say, “We did this ourselves.”

The only missing point is “we did this ourselves.” Do nothing is ok but without the interventions or disruptions. Here we see the presidential election developments are disrupted by the Prime Minister. Hence, Tony Tan is smart to leave everything and do nothing but the stupid prime minister keeps on changing the rules of the game. It makes “we did this ourselves” impossible.

Tony Tan ‘do nothing’ mistake is he agrees and changes the Constitutions and so everything did change. As a result, Singaporeans miss the opportunity of “we did this ourselves”.  The EP system itself is unnatural and now with the prime minister’s new interventions, the coming EP election will become a man-made beauty - the worst development so far for EP.      

The coming EP is an insult to Singaporeans, especially the Malays. “We did this ourselves” is not only impossible, the Malays have to pretend the reserved election is for their own good.  

When a leader tries to disturb the “we did this ourselves”, the matter will become worst.

The influential Muslim modernist Muhammad Abduh (1849-1905) is known to have expressed his sentiment on his return from a long study trip to Europe, “I went to the West and saw Islam, but no Muslims; I got back to the East and saw Muslims, but not Islam.”

In Singapore, we see election but ourselves. Perhaps, without an election (walk-over) and without ourselves. How to do good and do together.