Skip to main content

The Awakening of English Educated Elite and the Calling of Tan Cheng Bock??? Perhaps.


Dr Tan Cheng Bock believes the PAP government decision on PE 2017 will affect the outcome of the next General Election. Dr. Tan also indicates his intention to train potential good members of parliament.

Is he saying the People’s Action Party will lose more seats in time to come? And the current MPs, including NMPs and NCMPs, are not up to standard. Perhaps, both are valid statements.

Is this a game changer for politics in Singapore?

To make the statements valid, there will be a need of a true awakening of English educated elite answering to Dr Tan’s calling. Judging from the more than 150 people turning up to listen to Dr Tan, how do we make assessment whether there is an awakening and self conscience?

[No more Chinese educated elite]
When I attended Chinese schools many years ago, about one-thirds of Singapore students were in Chinese schools. Since then the enrolment declined till zero and now there is no more Chinese schools in Singapore.

So, what we have now are English schools and English educated elite. From education diversification point of view, we become more mono-lingua, more English centric and less understanding of our mother tongues even we claimed the success of bilingualism.

Naturally, this development also produces English educated politicians who are quite different from first or second generation leaders.

By and large, the Chinese-English school issue also divides job opportunities, education chances, and salary between Chinese and English educated students, giving advantages to the later.

“I still remember, he said, “First-class university in UK, you know Cambridge, and Oxford. University of Singapore is second-class. Nanyang University is third-class.” We all felt humiliated. We knew that we were not third-class, but because we were educated in Chinese, we would not be able to articulate fluently in English, and thereby unable to communicate the ideas that we had.”

https://mothership.sg/2017/10/new-interviews-with-wp-leaders-low-thia-khiang-sylvia-lim-reveal-previously-untold-stories/

[English educated elite and future Singapore]
This is an era when there is no more Chinese educated elite, after the closing of Nanyang University in 1980. The self-proclaimed 4th generation leaders do not have the personal experience of how Chinese educated Singaporeans were treated even though their older friends or relatives sometimes sharing their experience with them.

How will they lead Singapore, especially in difficult time?

Look at the mis-steps or up-down relationship with China, will advice from Chinese educated elite make a difference?

Do we expect a Chinese educated scholar in history saying thing like ‘I am getting 5 years older because I serve voluntarily in a difficult department or ministry’? Or my salary is too low to justify my high position. Most likely, we will see Ong Teng Cheong type of people doing the right thing at the right time in history.

Is this contributing to a missing link between Singaporeans and the PAP?

[English educated elite or foreign talents]
Under the PAP, there is clearly a ‘talents no enough’, besides ‘money no enough’. So, we need foreign talents as well as foreign talents turned politicians.

How well will they response to the Singapore environment and continue to promote Singapore or Singaporeans first?

[Awakening or response to calling]
Perhaps, Dr Tan is too optimistic and anticipates changes in the next GE. Yes or no?

One thing is for sure. The stage for Chinese educated elite or talents is over. Even our Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong who studied at Catholic High, as he claimed, is going to hand over his power after the next GE.

Can an awakening arise due to PM Lee’s stepping down or a self conscience of English educated elite? This elite see the need to serve Singapore, protect Singaporean interest, in an alternative way or joining the opposition by taking a difficult path.

After enjoying good life, is it time for English educated elite to come forward and serve Singapore? And of course, by doing so, they answer to Dr Tan’s calling for a change.

{"Singaporeans felt they were deprived of their democratic right to vote for a president of their choice," said the former PAP MP of 26 years, who lost the 2011 presidential election by a razor-thin margin.


"How you capitalise on this is a task for any politician wanting to see a change. And a change can only come if the electorate sends a strong signal by voting for more alternative MPs in Parliament."


Dr Tan repeatedly urged Singaporeans to step forward and help bring about change at the forum, which was part of the Future of Singapore series curated by veteran urban planner Tay Kheng Soon.}


http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/pe2017-will-affect-voting-at-next-ge-tan-cheng-bock

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...