Skip to main content

The PAP Reality: Political Commitment and Consensus


The reality of the PAP is that they prefer the old way of consensus in the past 50 years. However, they are short of the political will and commitment as before. Hence, they do not have the necessary fighting spirit to gain back the consensus that they have lost.

Political commitment and fighting spirit are required under the new political norm.  Unfortunately, the more they need it, the less they have it.  This is the reality of the PAP and the sad story of this powerful party of the past.

Despite these negative factors, PM Lee still maintains his optimistic of retiring at age 70 and is this the consensus of the people or the PAP or only himself?  

And the only political commitment that he can offer to Singaporeans is National Conversation.    

There is no free lunch as the PAP always claims.  If you don’t pay the price of commitment and fight to win in general election, how can you get your consensus and your mandate?  Through National Conversation, may be. But this is far from the political will and commitment.

The past consensus is still the type of consensus that PM Lee still cries high and low.  And the mainstream media continuously stresses highly about this type of consensus that is the ‘only’ solution for future Singapore:

PM Lee: Consensus, not the PAP, is bigger question
Without consensus on direction of society, Singapore could be caught in divisive politics(ST, 28 Sept 2012)

If consensus is the real question in future, then the political commitment (and fighting spirit) of the PAP is even a bigger question. Members and leaders of the PAP have not only lost their political commitment, so do their fighting spirit to win in election.

If the PAP believes that they are fighting for a consensus for the people; for the workers; and for the low incomers; then they should fight for it in an inclusive way. A consensus is to respect others – their views, their lifestyle and even their continuous rejection of the PAP.  

A consensus cannot be 100% pro-PAP and it must have the elements of yes and no.

Today’s PAP is a party without political commitment and fighting spirit.  Life is too comfortable for their leaders and certain members and so when things are not smooth, they quite. When they cannot get consensus, they blame the critics.

By now, we all know that Ong Ye Kung is leaving NTUC. He is the last losing PAP Aljunied GRC candidate to do so after GE2011. All the losing PAP candidates in Aljunied GRC have now kept a distance from politics.  They have forgotten that failures are the mothers of successes.

However, even losing the election, Ong is given a respectable job with respectable salary to help the labor movements. With such a comfortable environment, he should take the opportunity to learn from the people and workers and strengthen further his political belief and commitment – the PAP way. Unfortunately, we see none. 

If he wants to fight for the workers, he should stay within the NTUC.  Unless, the NTUC itself is another ‘wayang’ – nothing to learn in terms of politics, nothing to help in terms of assistance, and of course, nothing to commit as there is no political belief, only a ‘do nothing’ so-called union movements.

The PAP is in the decline. Without the political commitment and the fighting spirit, they can only use the soft and easy approach of National Conversation to get consensus. And of course, this consensus is a chosen one with a selected theme. 

They hope, perhaps, for a consensus like the past so that they can have an easy and comfortable job waiting for them.  With this in mind, the PM can help a sweet dream and can plan to retire at 70.

But he has his reservation and hesitation as he is not sure whether the PAP will still have the majority in Parliament in 20 years’ time:
If there is a consensus, then having one party with a strong mandate would be possible. If not, it might mean Singapore being mired in the sort of divisive politics that has held up lawmaking in the United States and India, said Mr Lee Hsien Loong.
As such, he did not know whether or not Parliament would be dominated by the PAP in 20 years' time. "I don't know. The question is, will there be a stable consensus in the society on the direction we want to go?(ST, 28 Sept 2012)

He is still dreaming to have a consensus with one-party with strong mandate.  He claims that more than one party is bad and it will lead to divisive politics.

Why must consensus have to do with one-party – the PAP?

What consensus are we looking for? The PAP suggested national conversation or others.

Even PM has admitted that the consensus may not be the one proposed by the PAP:  
The important question regarding Singapore's political future is not whether the People's Action Party (PAP) will remain dominant, but whether society can maintain a consensus about what the country should be, said the Prime Minister. (ST, 28 Sept 2012)

Is he saying that the PAP is irrelevant in future as far as Singaporeans have a consensus of rejecting the PAP?  
Labels:

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 ...
277 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...
51 comments
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more