Skip to main content

Politics of Changes

Memory of Deyi 3                               

Politics of Changes

No, I am not talking about the breakthrough of Aljunied GRC. Rather, I would like to say some things about how the returned opposition candidates react to changes and in particular Chen Show Mao and Kenneth Jeyaretnam.

Perhaps, in a small way using the Book of Changes (Yi Jing) to explain the ‘timing’ (时) and ‘positioning’ (位)of how different two of them react to the situation.

It seems that all went wrong for Kenneth.  It is very sad that I have to use him as a contrast to explain why Chen is successful in positioning and timing.  Kenneth achieved good academic results and graduated from top university and has the advantage of carrying the brand mark of JBJ. 

Timing

The date of General Election is always a “change” factor as this is fixed by the ruling party in our parliamentary system. So, you have to prepare for the “time” change, i.e. date of nomination and voting.

Kenneth came back to Singapore much earlier than Chen and also announced his interest to contest in GE2011 earlier.  He even wanted to contest with Chiam See Tong in a GRC.

Then, he entered negotiation with Chiam and in the mean time, having 2 scholars joining him.  He exposed himself too early and created rooms for people to attack him. 物极必反(Wujibifan, things will turn bad once they reach the maximum (good).  The highest rating of Reform Party was at the beginning of the year and after that, it dropped.   

It was not sure whether Kenneth expected all these fallouts or not.  Anyway, by the time, the GE2011 was announced; it was too late for him to make any corrections.  Even today, I still doubt that he knows the real meaning of the politics of changes (see below).  

Chen only returned and entered the fray early this year. Lianhe Zaobao did a very good write-up for him and the articles caught many Chinese readers’ hearts.  The Straits Times did a follow up but not as impressive as the one in Zaobao. However, it still projected a positive image for Chen.

While in the meantime, all negative news about RP were reported. Kenneth appeared to be a ‘headless’ leader with all good quality candidates leaving RP.  Even Alex Toh, another returned candidate after appearing in the TV on RP ticket also left to join SDP.

While timing is an uncertain factor but the reactions from both of them clearly make a different to the voters and the general public.

Positioning


A team player wants to be a captain – this is my opinion of Kenneth. There were several “ifs” when he positioned himself:

1.           If he could join Chiam to be a teammate at Toa Payoh GRC, rather than a team leader.
2.           If he did not insist to stand in West Coast GRC.
3.           If he chose to step down as Secretary-General of RP to save the party.
4.           If he chose to miss the GE2011.

Kenneth was given an opportunity to speak in the Channel News Asia talking point program but even that he did not score well.

Chen at Deyi Nomination Centre
Chen never wanted to be highlighted and played his role as a team member well. He did not say a single word when WP Aljunied team spoke to the supporters after the confirmation of candidates at Deyi Nomination Centre.  If you observed careful, he was always standing behind party leaders. 

Chen kept low profile through GE2011 and spoke clearly but in short sentences. His rally speeches were not the most outstanding ones as compared to other WP candidates. He projected himself as man with a vision and mission to help to build the First World Parliament.

In all the news events, rallies, walkabouts, campaigns, he never wanted to outshine his party secretary-general and chairperson. He was always playing his supporting role, i.e. he knew his position even though LKY described him as a celebrity.

Kenneth seemed to choose a wrong position and Chen cleverly positioned himself as a supporter who wanted to help the team to win. 

A westerner in an Asian land 

Kenneth is like a westerner returning to Asia. He spent many years in London working in the financial industry.  Not sure because of the financial figures, he sees things in a ‘straight’ line.  But politics is not a straight forward thing.
 
Even with family history of opposition politics in Singapore, Kenneth seems to need to learn everything from the beginning.
  
He needs a guardian to coach him. In fact, Chiam is the best person to coach him.  But, unfortunately, he did not continue his partnership and relationship with Chiam. 

The advantage of Chen is he is bilingual in English and Chinese.  He can easily adapt to the Singapore political environment.  Although LKY questioned his intention, however, not the voters, they saw him as a hope to change, to have a breakthrough in the GRC.

Kenneth did not complete the National Pledge at the last rally of RP. This was another sign that he was not familiar with the local politics.    

Politics of changes

Politic is a change game.  There is no permanent enemy or permanent arrangement. When forming government, political parties need to consider the wishes of the people and its consequence to the country.

RP was sad to learn about the possibility of WP forming a coalition government with the PAP in future elections in stead of other opposition parties.  RP seems to suggest that since all opposition parties dislike the PAP, they should join force to work against the PAP even without considering the wishes of the people and the good of the country. 

Kenneth has failed to see the multiple changes of politics. For example, we change our position from a country against the communist China to a country that likes the communist China; children of former opposition leaders joining the PAP; and DAP working with PAS in Malaysia.

In reality, even the PAP loses the majority to form the government, still voters want to see a stable government or an experience government in place. WP-PAP government may be the best option for the benefits of Singapore. Who know with the combined two-third majority in parliament, WP can force the PAP to have an immediate electoral reform, and does not have to wait for Referendum# like the one in the United Kingdom (the first coalition government since Second World War) last year?

# you can find some important changes in the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition Agreement here.    

Comments

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 ...

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...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...