Skip to main content

Political Tsunami, the PAP is just another East India Company.


Since 1819, Singapore has been running like a company.  Starting first from the East India Company, then British governors, a short period under Japan in Second World War and finally in 1959 the PAP and Company.  

All wants to make use of Singapore for trading, for business, and for making more money. They have, sadly to say, never regarded Singapore as a nation.   Even in the beginning year of the PAP government, they had great doubt about the survival of Singapore as a nation.   The 1963 Referendum is a good example. 
Things start to change when we have national schools, English or Singlish as a common language, National Day Parade and not to forget the National Service.  The National Identity starts to emerge and in the Population White Paper they call it citizen core.
It is not so easy to pretend to be a Singapore citizen.  The foreign custom officers can recognize us quite easily, so do the foreign hotels, restaurants, shopping centres etc.  And even on the roads and highways, we behave in a “strange” way.  Our behavior whether bad or good, our English whether bad or good, inside and outside Singapore, all these are the DNA of a typical Singaporean.

When we begin to realize that we are different from others, the PAP & Co wants to dilute it by the immigration policy, by injecting more foreigners into Singapore.   The reasons without foreigners, our growth will be limited; we can’t solve ageing problem, labour problem, health care problem etc.

Now think about the East India Company, when they managed Singapore, there were only few hundred or may be few thousand residents here. They need to attract traders and labours to Singapore for economic growth.  They did that. When the British governors took over, they did the same things – importing more people to Singapore. This was stopped for while during the Japanese occupation.

When the WWII ended, more people came to Singapore and this resulted to the baby boom in 1950s and 1960s. The PAP & Co took over and begun to manage Singapore when we had too many babies and so they started to introduce family planning – stop at two.

Credit to the PAP & Co, they also introduce National Pledge; attract foreign investments (any difference from East India Company?); create state owned businesses (East India Company), Temasek, GIC; move Singapore to a first world economy and continue the immigration policy.

American Revolution

Now we look at what the East India Company and British administrators did in the North America. They collected taxes and had monopoly control in businesses. The Parliament in London passed laws regarding the administration of North America without consulting local people.  They treated North America like their colony and all they wanted to do was to make money and take money from local people.

Singapore situation may be different but there are some similarities.   Parliament controlled by the PAP & Co can pass the Population White Paper as they wish. Do they feel about Singaporeans?  Businesses here are controlled by Temasek, GIC & Co (oh no, we also have fully owned PAP co) and MNCs.   We are not surprised foreign chambers of commerce are supporting the White Paper.  All of them want to make money in Singapore and they need manpower both cheap and expensive.

In fact, the thirteen American states had no intention to leave the British Empire. They still recognized the British Crown. Here in Singapore, many still appreciate the contribution of the PAP & Co.  But as the population grows bigger, more money taken away from the people (or people receive lower income), the less respect the parliament given to the locals, more and more Singaporeans will say no and dare to say no even they feel voting may not be secret.

2020 or 2030 Political Tsunami?

The 13 original states of the USA were quite different in political thinking and management of their states and economy.  However, the pressure from the British, sending military to North America, forced them to work together and through the Second Continental Congress (1775) they were able to form the army.

In Singapore, the PAP & Co has already been alerted to such a danger – the possible of a political tsunami. 
<Amid talk of an impending silver tsunami, PAP MP Lim Wee Kiak (Nee Soon GRC) predicted yesterday that the "political tsunami" would come first. 
The results from the 2011 General Election, and the last two by-elections in Hougang and Punggol East - both of which the PAP lost - were "loud and clear warnings" of the shifting of the political tectonic plates, he noted. 
And in the face of a "rising tide of anti-PAP sentiment", he said, some had called the Population White Paper a "suicide paper" for the party. Yet, he stressed that the Workers' Party's (WP's) plan was worse. 
"The feedback I received from my friends was that the alternative plans would kill the economy and this is euthanasia for Singapore. Between suicide for PAP versus euthanasia for the country... my choice is clear, I support the White Paper," he said.> 
http://www.straitstimes.com/microsites/parliament/story/suicide-pap-vs-euthanasia-spore-20130208
Back in the British Parliament during the American Revolution, MPs in the London chambers might have also been alerted of this “breakaway” political tsunami.   But they did the wrong thing by sending army to North America, continuing monopoly in business and taxing local people.

Here in Singapore, a breakaway from the PAP & Co will strengthen Singapore as a nation.  Singapore can no longer be administrated like a company.  We already have our national identity, citizen core and the PAP & Co still wants to see the Lion City as a profit centre.   It is time to say No to the PAP & Co, in the year 2020 or 2030? 

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...