Skip to main content

There is always a need to have people like Jee Say and Kin Lian to maintain the ‘biodiversity’ in Singapore



I voted with my heart and has no regret even Jee Say did not win the race. In Singapore, we really need people like Jee Say and Kin Lian to act differently from the main stream and provide alternative ideas and views.

Biodiversity is the degree of variation of life forms within a given ecosystem, biome, or an entire planet. Biodiversity is a measure of the health of ecosystems. (Source: Wikipedia)

Hence, biodiversity of ideas and views is the measurement of the health of our politics and society. 

If there is no biodiversity in our society, in Singapore, sooner or later we will be extinct because we will be too homogeneous and lack of anti-body mechanism.  However, political diversity under the government propaganda has always become a bad word, likes confrontational, anti-unity, and of course, anti-establishment.

Contributions or sacrifices

If not because of Jee Say and Kin Lian, voters will not be aware (and concern) of moral, value, and responsibility.  Their contributions in PE2011 have helped to push the pro-PAP voters towards the central; this is why Cheng Bock is getting so many votes, a surprise not only to himself and also to the PAP.

However, I am always uncomfortable with Cheng Bock even he is the second best and only lost by 0.3%. This is because some academics have suggested that the PAP had in fact achieved 70% of the total votes when the two Dr Tans combined their votes in this PE. If this is true, then we have to re-examine whether the 65% voted against Dr Tony Tan is a real discontent of the people.  No wonder, Dr Tony Tan said the vote was decisive.

Two whites, one white or market testing

If this is true, how independence can Cheng Bock be? So, voters were voting two whites, one is pure white and the other is not so pure.

The PAP is testing the market with a new right to central product – Cheng Bock.  It seems they have achieved their aim.  Voters like and prefer this new product and in the next election, more Cheng Bock type of PAP candidates will appear. And they will recruit more ‘independent’ minded candidates rather than pro-establishment candidates in the next GE.

No chance for Jee Say in next GE

I feel sorry for Jee Say. Being a Mohism (Mozi) type of person, he would have to do more sacrifices for Singapore.  He may not even be elected as an MP in the next GE because of his negative image published in the main stream media.

Bad name

Bad name a candidate is always a strategy for the PAP. They have systematically been doing so since independence. JBJ, Francis Seow, Chee Soon Juan, Tang Liang Hong, and now Tan Jee Say.  Besides JBJ, have any one of them being elected before?

It will be hard for Jee Say to change his ‘bad’ name to ‘good’ name under the present circumstances. As Jee Say said one of the reasons that he failed in PE2011 was he could not reach out to the old voters.  I have mentioned in my post on the non-English speaking voters as king makers in this PE.

I believe most of Dr Tony Tan’s votes are from this group of voters (who should also include new citizens). And those English speaking, better educated PAP supporters were supporting Cheng Bock.

Always maintain 35% die-hard supporters

When the PAP realises the non-English speaking voters are declining, they quickly replace the drop by increasing the number of new citizens. Therefore, they can continue to maintain 35% of die-hard supporters.
    
However, for Jee Say, it will be very hard to get 50.1% in a one-to-one parliament contest. The other 25% moderate pro-PAP supporters will not vote for him.  In addition, there is another 10% pro-opposition voters will not choose Jee Say even he tries to change his image.

Quite sad but this is a political reality in Singapore.  Perhaps, Jee Say is ahead of his time in political idealism in Singapore. This has to take time, may be after 2 or 3 more GEs later, then Singapore voters can accept Jee Say.  Otherwise, to change the mindset of people in Singapore, some big changes in the PAP something like the Jasmine revolution will need to take place.

As far as Jee Say is happy with what he is doing even being projected as a confrontational figure and face with unfair treatment in the main stream media, he should continue to pursue his cause as there are a quarter of population supporting him.

Good luck for Jee Say and Kin Lian.  Thank you we know you have already tried your best.

  

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...