Skip to main content

Is USA 2012 a mirror of Singapore Wikicity 2022?


Are four more years enough for Obama to fix the divided USA?  And will LHL’s ten more years develop Singapore into a Wikicity as described by IPS?   

There is always a time lag in development. USA has the most open immigration policy among developed countries. So do Singapore among the newly industrialising countries or Asian dragons.  The open immigration policy has not only contributed to divisions in a society but also affected the outcome of the elections.  In a closely contested election, immigrant voters are king makers.  Their preference and favour can influence the election results.

Like it or not, we may see this coming in Singapore.  And like it or not, the PAP seems to benefit from the immigration policy even though its pro big business policy looking more like the Republican.  

Nevertheless, like the Democratic Party, the PAP is more open to immigration.  Ten years later, it may give big advantage to the PAP, especially in hotly contested parliament seats.   

 

Obama win shows demographic shifts working against RepublicansFirst-time voters, including many young people and immigrants, favored the president by large margins, while older voters leaned to Republican Mitt Romney, Reuters/Ipsos Election Day polling showed.
Obama won an estimated 66 percent of the Hispanic vote, according to Reuters/Ipsos election day polling, at a time when the Latino population is growing rapidly in states such as Florida, one of eight or so politically divided states that were crucial in the presidential race. Other estimates put Obama's share of the Hispanic vote above 70 percent.http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/08/us-usa-campaign-diversity-idUSBRE8A62MO20121108


Another great invention after GRC

Singapore voters who prefer two-party or multi-party political system may be disappointed by the above news.  The open immigration policy is just another great political invention after the GRC system. GRC has prolonged the life of the PAP and now with the new citizens, its life of one-party state will most likely be extended beyond 2022.  Who say the PAP does not have a long-term political planning?

And a divided Singapore may not necessarily work against the PAP as what they have always claimed.

But this development will deepen the political divide in Singapore, as seen many times in social media.  Here is an example from the USA about the divide:

The 2012 presidential election likely will be remembered as marking the end of long-standing coalitions, as voters regroup in cultural, ethnic and economic patterns that challenge both parties—but especially Republicans. Older voters and white working-class voters, once core elements of the Democratic Party, have drifted into the Republican column. Rural and small-town voters, whose grandparents backed the New Deal, now fill the swath of the U.S. that leans reliably GOP.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324073504578105360833569352.html?mod=WSJ_hp_us_mostpop_read
Election Day indicates nation’s political divide is deepeningThis was another paradoxical election. An increasingly conservative Republican Party held onto the majority of seats in the House, while Democrats retained the White House and Senate, Wisconsin elected a gay senator, Maine and Maryland approved same-sex marriage, and Washington state and Colorado legalized marijuana.http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/election-day-indicates-nations-political-divide-is-deepening/2012/11/07/94a306c6-28e9-11e2-96b6-8e6a7524553f_story.html?hpid=z3
  
We know the PAP is losing traditional supporters – the old, the lower income, the heart-landers etc. like the Democratic Party.  However, its gain from the minority and new immigrants are well enough to offset the decline in older workers and white working class.

You can see more of the political divide in The Washington Post:  (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/2012-exit-polls/table.html)


Democracy is noisy, messy and complicated

If we will really end up a Wikicity in 2022 and a multi-party political system, the future political leaders must accept the choice of the people.  Like Obama in his wining speech acknowledge the democracy principles and the liberty to select:  

“Democracy in a nation of 300 million can be noisy and messy and complicated,” he said. “We have our own opinions. Each of us has deeply held beliefs. And when we go through tough times, when we make big decisions as a country, it necessarily stirs passions, stirs up controversy.“That won’t change after tonight, and it shouldn’t. These arguments we have are a mark of our liberty. We can never forget that, as we speak, people in distant nations are risking their lives right now just for a chance to argue about the issues that matter, the chance to cast their ballots like we did today.”http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/election-day-indicates-nations-political-divide-is-deepening/2012/11/07/94a306c6-28e9-11e2-96b6-8e6a7524553f_story.html?hpid=z3

The PAP has always stressed that we are a small country and cannot afford the Western-style democracy and liberty. But we are an international city and well educated, don’t we?

We have yet to see the PAP showing respect to democracy and liberty, especially to alternative views.  It is time they accept the noisy, messy and complicated democracy.  And at the same they should respect the passions and controversy of other people.  

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...