Skip to main content

New Equilibrium vs. New Era Good Opposition Good Government vs. Democracy with more diverse views

 New Equilibrium vs. New Era

Good Opposition Good Government vs.  Democracy with more diverse views


The two presidential hopefuls who are closer to the establishment try to provide two different views of independence.   One asks you to forget about history and the other says he is just performing the job as a civil servant and is not a ruling party member. 


They also talk about the future and what they hope to achieve if elected.   

First new equilibrium versus new era.      

New equilibrium means good opposition makes good government.  It seems to refer to the 5th generation, not the 4th generation. 

New and challenging era seems to suggest the challenges the 4th generation will face.  It is a present tense against future tense of new equilibrium.


As the president cannot check on the government, what really can the new era president do to help Singapore?  If there is a policy failure, what does the president do to correct it?


It could be an empty hope.  You cannot change the government's decisions.   

 

When coming to democracy, one agrees with diverse views and warns of a divided society. It is inevitable that Singaporeans want more freedom and democracy in expression.  There is an absence of checks and balances, accountability in this hopeful view.


‘Good opposition makes good government’ clearly defines there is a check and balance. It is different from diverse views which can still operate under a one-party rule democracy as in the past and future(?).   


Are we talking about two types of democracy? One with check and balance and the other without it, a status quo.   

Both presidential hopefuls provide hope and encouragement but with two different outcomes.  One remains the same.  One is a trend that is inevitable. However, there is a time gap or time lag. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...
275 comments
Read more

EBRC objectives: Stop “Out of Aljunied”, Stop SDP Breakthrough and “Negative-Asset” Ministers.

First of all, we have to congratulate the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee for creating more competitions, especially, multi-cornered competitions in the East. When making changes, EBRC aims to achieve 3 goals: To prevent “Out of Aljunied” for Workers’ Party.  This is the most important objective. To prevent Singapore Democratic Party making any breakthrough in the North and Central.   To look for a solution to retire “negative-asset” ministers or reduce PAP damages. From the reported claims from different political parties, we will expect multi-cornered contests not only in single constituencies but also in group representative constituencies. The PAP hopes to have a repeat of 2011 Presidential Election. Then Tony Tan won the Presidency when he got only 35% of the votes, a narrow win.However, a win is still a win. He did in even in the very last minute, after recounts of votes.    How to achieve multi-cornered contests? By i...
65 comments
Read more

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...
50 comments
Read more