Skip to main content

Not happy then please leave Singapore


After disagreeing with the Malaysian politics, will the unhappy PAP ask the unhappy Singaporean citizens to leave the country? Some things similar to the newly appointed Malaysian Home Minister suggested to their countrymen.

If you read about this article, “ S’pore cannot afford to import M’sian politics”,  (http://www.todayonline.com/commentary/spore-cannot-afford-import-msian-politics) you will know how unhappy the PAP is. Not only they are unhappy about the political development in Malaysia, they are also afraid of the consequences – the migration of voters, especially Malay voters from BN to PR. 

The ruling BN is under pressure. The pressure is so unbearable that the result is:    
New Malaysian home minister tells unhappy Malaysians to emigrateMalaysia's newly-appointed Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has reportedly said that Malaysians who are unhappy with the country's political system should leave the country, stressing that loyal citizens should respect the rule of law.http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/se-asia/story/new-malaysian-home-minister-tells-unhappy-malaysians-emigrate-20130516

Yes, this is what the PAP hopes to achieve too. Voters are not happy with the political and electoral system can leave Singapore and more new “loyal” citizens who agree with the present system are been encouraged to come here.  With a plus of loyal voters and a minus of unhappy voters, this is long life the PAP.

Lost citizenship  

In fact, the PAP even went further than asking unhappy Singaporeans to leave.  They just simply take away their citizenships.    

[In 1965, Nanyang University faced the expellation of 101 students and 75 staff members in 1964 and had their students union dissolved. Why so? Some say that it was because  had a powerful influence on electoral outcomes. In the 1963 General Elections, founder of Nanyang University, Tan Lark Sye and the students gave tremendous support to these Barisan Sosialis candidates. As a result, BS won 32.9 percent of the seats as a result. This was an impressive feat despite the arrest of popular candidates in BS by PAP before the GE 1963. 
After the elections, the citizenship of Tan Lark Sye was revoked and he was accused for “collaborating with the communist group in nan-tah (nanyang university)”. The PAP also raided the school and used the Preservation of Public Safety Ordinance to arrest a number of students and alumni.]http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/04/untapped-power-youth-activism/

It is not sure whether making a person lost his citizenship is more effective than asking the person to leave Singapore.  Perhaps, it is more civilized to invite people to leave rather than losing the citizenship.

Change within rather than external influences

President Obama can only show his concern about the irregularities in the recent Malaysian general election. What else can he do besides congratulate both the ruling and opposition parties and the people of Malaysia?

Statement by the Press Secretary on Malaysia’s ElectionsOn behalf of the President and the people of the United States, we congratulate Prime Minister Najib on his coalition’s victory in Malaysia’s parliamentary elections on Sunday May 5.  We also congratulate the people of Malaysia, who turned out in record numbers to cast their votes, as well as the parties of the opposition coalition on their campaigns, as a vibrant opposition is a foundation of democracy.  We note concerns regarding reported irregularities in the conduct of the election, and believe it is important that Malaysian authorities address concerns that have been raised.  We look forward to the outcome of their investigations.  The United States looks forward to continuing its close cooperation with the government and the people of Malaysia to continue to strengthen democracy, peace, and prosperity in the region.http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/05/08/statement-press-secretary-malaysia-s-elections

So, political changes have to come from within the country. The PAP and the Singapore authorities are very uncomfortable about the aftermath of Malaysian GE and so they have to form the idea of “Singapore can’t afford to import Malaysian politics”.

Anwar also knows that he cannot depend on the USA for assistance.  Changes have to come from the Malaysian people within Malaysia.

If there are further changes in Singapore politics, it will have to come from within Singapore.  Malaysia politics, whether imported or not imported into Singapore, whether we can or can’t afford, is secondary.  Like President Obama’s statement, Najib can just put it one side but bi-lateral relationship between US and Malaysia will still go on. 

This is why striking off citizenship or leaving the country is a better solution than a press statement ‘looking forward for the outcome of the investigation.’

But both methods will not work under a more open and more democratic Singapore.   

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