Priorities for those drafting 1791 Bill of rights – ensuring all people have equal rights but do people of minority groups like slaves (women, blacks, native indians and other colored folks?) fall within this category. Since their priority was not the slaves’ welfare, they failed to mention this.
Priorities for SG govt – Ecomomic progess within a political and socially harmonious framwork. Western version of freedom of expression just not on their priority list and hence restriction on protests. All I gonna say is they have different set of priorities than their western counterparts. And they have different ideas of how a country should be run.
Shouldn’t this be of grave concern to average Singaporeans? That SG is not being modeled after western ideals? Somehow I see westerners being more concerned with this non-western aspect than the Singaporeans themselves. Average Singaporeans don’t have much interest in politics. They are not interested in its inner workings nor aspire a political career. So much so that PAP has major problem recruiting party members. And one reason for this non-interest is that govt has been doing their job in providing a stable environment for them to live.
Question :Who started this discussion? An expat or a Singaporean?
Answer: Expat
Question: When does a local get involved in a political discussion?
Answer: Usually in defense of SG political system within a thread started by an expat. It is done to point out that SG being a unique country has a unique political system that bears few resemblance to a western ones. An exception is lotussutra (local?) who is obsessed with politics.
Question: A forumer once mentioned the largest group of forum users are local? Guess where the locals usually hang out or wherein their interest lies?
Answers: Beauty, business, job and computer sections. I don’t see that many trickling into general or other discussion area. This site could effectively be split into 2 – one catering to expat interest and another for locals. Wherein do you think the locals’ priorites lie? Political and expression freedom? Or more bread butter issue and how to look prettier
? Methinks the expats more concerned about the lack of freedom than the Singaporean themselves .And this disinterest in politics not restricted to SG but other relatively stable countries. I see it in citizens of countries like US (low turnout of vote casting) and Japan. As for myself, why do I participate in this forum? I see far too few Singaporeans giving their side of the story and feel compelled to be their voice. Their non-vocal nature largely due to upbringing, reserved and taciturn culture. Nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, something I have come to love about them.
Who should be the ones to set the priorities of a country and how it is run? Bypassers looking in (not referring to those living long term there like SMS) concerned about the lack of freedom or the apolitical Singaporeans themselves?
As for myself, does western political freedom matters to me? Only to the extent it helps to prevent a tyrant govt. And I don’t think SG is one. I am generally happy with the state of affair. Things important to me. My SG family are well fed, decent living condition, access to education and not threaten by high crime rates. And if something like dengue break out, high probability that my family will live thru it as I believe in the govt’s ability to contain the situation effectively. Of course, life’s not a bed or roses. Just like the rest of the world, SG has its problems too.
Is freedom of expression so restricted that Singaporeans do not have access nor understand what it means? Unlike its counterpart in China, Taiwan, Japan and Korea, Singaporeans know English. This allows them to tap into the widest pool of knowledge available in the form of books and internet. Not to mention the very large pool of returning Singaporeans who have either studied or live in western countries. These people know what it is like to live in a free-er society. If things are so bad and oppressive back home, wouldn’t they be more vocal in demanding changes to the political structure. Or better still, don’t go back and just stay in the west. I attended US uni with huge body of SG students. Those in the SG student club I know, only me and another student choose to pick up the US immigration offer of 1 yr unrestricted practical training in the US. Others chose to return SG after graduation. I know about 30 SG students. If the regime that oppressive, more students would be scrambling to stay and pursue US residency, commonly seen in students of other asian nationalities.
I have lived half my life in SG and USA. I can see why each country comes up with a different system. They each developed according to its set of circumstance, unique to its country. No system is perfect and each has its pros and cons. To keep health cost down, PM Lee urged Singaporeans to live and eat healthy such as incorporating more steam fish into their diet. Bush senior also did in similar capacity to encourage healthy living amongst American. And he mentioned he hated broccoli but later withdrew the statement as it upset broccoli growers. He would not have met the same problem in SG. How free is free speech in US? Do we ultimately have to answer to a higher authority, regardless of the country? Do we answer to the one with the most power? In this example, PM Lee (govt) has the final say but in USA, interest groups prevail. I rather be ruled by a prudent govt who considers the interest of whole society then the interest groups. On the other hand, cons for SG is the low level of political participation and awareness. Resulting in difficulty recruiting members to join politic. People also tend to rely on govt for directives. The govt is fully aware of this shortcomings and MM even lament about the lack of charisma in Singaporeans, compared to Americans. All systems have pros and cons. The most important thing is to have the ability to recognize the cons and your weaknesses. Even within China which consistently gets beat up by western press, they do understand the weaknesses within their political system. Recently in a press conference, Premier Wen Jiabao revisited the theme that over-concentration of power is a key cause of corruption. It is a theme raised by Deng Xiaoping himself in the 80s. However they can’t completely and immediately overhaul the political structure without causing major damage. Does the western media report this aspect of the Communist Party. I guess it is far too tempting and convenient for the west to ride the waves of general opinion. Any govt that does not allow the western version of free speech gets protrayed in negative light (and lacks intellect?). Kind of like my-way-or-the-highway?? Believe it or not, I think the Chinese govt is quite a progressive one and working very hard to improve the lives of all its people, not just to consolidate its position. However their hands are tied and burdened by the immense problems facing their countries. They have made many progresses and surprise surprise, these will not get reported in the western media.
And really, will the western type of open political system and career politicians benefit the people of SG. I let the Singaporeans decide for themselves. I believe people across the globe do want the same thing. We all want a life of dignity, free from harassment and excessive control as expounded by the Bill of Rights. However we may have different definitions of what constitute freedom and rights.
As for Chee Soon Juan, he may have succeeded in garnering international support in raising his party’s profile but he is not highly regarded amgst Singaporeans. OP could perhaps pick a more respected person to make his point
? In my days, opposition party leader Chiam See Tong seem to have more credibility than Chee, amgst public opinion.
