3/12/2007

a nation or just a mnc?

A nation or a MNC? I wrote about Singapore becoming an IBM, ready to be sold to the highest bidder earlier. How relevant is such an observation? PN Balji wrote an article on the Revolving Door Nation today. In his article he discussed about the real intention of the new economic migrants flying first class to our shores as opposed to the penniless migrants of our forefathers who came on cargo ships on a one way ticket. Balji started by saying 'Let's not kid ourselves. Most expatriates who come to work and live here don't do so because they want to make this place their home.' He had spoken to many expatriates and came to the same conclusion. He knew what he was saying which is not what people believe. It is ok for people to want to believe what they want to believe, that foreign talents love this little red dot and are all here to stay. But to believe in blind faith and trying to convince others to believe likewise is a very unjust thing to do. Feel free to believe in your fantasy, but reality as felt and seen by the people on the ground is reality. People with value or are wanted will pick and choose where they want to go. And people who did that are just doing it purely for their selfish reasons and more, they don't owe us a living. What is more humiliating and would in the long run do a long of harm to this young nation, is to self deprecate ourselves by glorifying the foreigners and dismissing ourselves as less than equals. When I look at Parliament, I don't think the foreign talents are that superior to any Singaporeans to be put on the high pedestals. If those are considered the best and better than Singaporeans, then Singaporeans do not deserve to exist. We need to return some pride to the Singaporeans. As Balji said, 'Without pride, there is nothing.' We will only turn into a country without a soul, without shame, just a corporation. Or as Balji said, a revolving door nation. Inevitable? That for our survival we must be soulless and become a flotsam of people, that to survive we no longer have any pride or self worth?

13 comments:

Matilah_Singapura said...

I find it indeed bizarre that a member of the state's apparatus can actually use the word "country" in a speech—suggesting that the people actually own the damn place, and contribute to it's "soul".

Look hard at the evidence:

The government controls virtually everything, including the economy. It controls what the people can and cannot do. Being a "Singaporean" immediately binds you into a "social contract" with The State—a contract which is not voluntary but forced upon you. If you are male, you do NS. If you are female, you are immediately influenced by state policy (by tax relief and grants) to pump out babies—i.e. the state has some control on women's vagina. (Gosh! splendid. I've been trying for years to control vaginas, and have been unsuccessful!)

Singapore is a fascist, corporate state. It is wise to bear in mind that fascism is a form of socialism, where the central control or plutocracy (aka The Elites) call the shots, and the middle class (wage earners) are in danger of being reduced to feudal serfs, and in the extreme case—slaves.

The government controls the currency, and the money suppy, as well as the interest rates and the "reserve ratios" in the fractional reserve banking system, which creates credit and keeps people in debt—regardless of the fact that many are working HARDER for less.

The government controls the land, and has made public housing (built on land the government has forcefully aquired) a POLITICAL INSTRUMENT to keep the incumbent political party in power. I must say, although it goes against my principles of liberty, this is a masterful move. But the cream on the cake is that The People (except for courageous wards like Hougang) support this—to the point where they will not "rock the boat" by defending their own rights, as well as the rights of others (political opposition)—regardless of whether they agree or disagree with the views of those oppressed by the state's kangaroo court system.

State policy on giving "free kicks" to foreign talent, at the expense of the locals makes matters worse. Let's face it, most foreigners immigrate to S'pore solely for the money they can make.

I'll willingly admit, that as an expat Singaporean, I no longer consider S'pore my country (as it has ceased to be owned by the people) and thus come to Hotel S'pore solely for personal profit. If S'pore ceased to exist tomorrow, I'd simply relocate to Hong Kong fro business purposes.

The State stole the country from The People, because The People didn't care to enhance the value of themselves and their country themselves, by voluntary cooperation.

Now we see influential members of The State's Elite "complaining" that the "soul" has died in the country.

What a load of shite! Worst of all, the majority of people believe him!

MATILAH SINGAPURA!

Anonymous said...

Matilah,
this is nothing new to us. This is kangoroo gov at its best. The connest of all con-men.

But what can we say ?
Give us $1 and take back our life.

redbean said...

as a citizen, one has to accept some regimentation and control from the state. but as matilah said, the state must not be allowed to grow too big to consume the individuals.

i am also against the state messing and controlling my income, dictating how much i must set aside for my cpf, medisave and retirement account and this devious creature called minimum sum. i can accept income tax, i can accept a certain amount of cpf, even a little medisave which i prefered to be in the form of medical insurance/medishield.

the rest are my hard earned money and i want them back. stop the shit of trying to tell me how to live my life and spend my money.

Anonymous said...

>> stop the shit of trying to tell me how to live my life and spend my money

Haha, you only dare to say this inside your blog ? If you feel so strongly about this, why don't you say the above words in your MP's face, or better still shout it out in front of Parliament House when they are in session. I guess it's true what they say about empty vessels making the most noise.

Voyager said...

Redbean, what is so bad about the country turning into a corporation ? It's a lot cleaner that way because emotions will be removed from the equation. One's relationship with the country is defined by a contract and either party has the right to terminate that association by giving a said period of notice. It iwll be win-win situation for both citizen and country.

redbean said...

in the first place in a mnc, the obligations are on both parties and there is a certain amount of equity and fair play. and there is the option of freedom of choice.

as a citizen, the state can demand more than what you are prepared to give at minimal cost. NS is one thing, and defending and dying for the country is another.

if i am a foreign talent who has not contributed to this country, i will be happy to regard this place as a hotel or commercial place to make my money while the going is good but scoot when there is a better deal somewhere.

that is what all the foreigners or those who have no attachment to this place, including singaporeans, will want it to happen. when singaporeans do not think that they own this little rock, they will sell or give it away. cause they simply don't care.

redbean said...

and welcome to the chat, voyager.

as for anonymous' comment, i have been saying all these shit here and in my forum. this is what we can do in this island.

not sure if you can do it wherever you are from.

matilah_singapura said...

> but as matilah said, the state must not be allowed to grow too big to consume the individuals <

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your POV) the people get the govt they deserve. It seems that the majority of S'poreans do indeed support an all-powerful state, so that's that. The majority are "happy" (or at least "tolerant") of the status quo, which means if they continue like this, S'pore will end up a total-fuck up—poor, and without any freedom.

But if the people choose this, so be it.

to voyager:

The danger of a corporate state is that INDIVIDUAL freedom and liberty are the one's "removed from the equation", not just "emotions" as you've stated.

However, I do understand that not everyone is a fan of INDIVIDUAL liberty and freedom, because it is far "easier" in the short-term to get a central all-powerful government to take responsibility, instead of the hard task of taking PERSONAL responsibility for this one-shot human life we all have gifted to us.

There can be no freedom without personal responsibility. I like my freedom, so I pay the price.

Others don't mind being constantly screwed in the arsehole by the Big Dick of The State, so they pay the price and reap whatever they sow.

I simply enjoy watching this kind of violent sex perpetrated on those who choose it—to me, I consider this a form of ENTERTAINMENT :)

Voyager said...

Redbean, that's why I mentioned that it may not be such a bad thing if the country were to become more like a corporation where your only relationship is defined in a contract, and either party has the right to terminate that relationship by giving an agreed period of notice. A worker does not owe loyalty to a corporation. If the corporation is in danger of failing or being bought over, the worker won't be asked to defend it and ensure it doesn't happen. If it fails, the worker simply moves on to another corporation. The relationship is transient, it is only in effect when the needs of both parties are in sync. When that is no longer the case, the party no longer subscribing to the initially agreed to goals can simply give notice of termination. No emotions, no baggage, soulless maybe but it is definitely better than being asked to fulfill huge obligations, like military defence, for no apparent reason than the mere fact that one happened to born within the boundaries of that country.

redbean said...

agree with you voyager. if i am just a foreign talent, i will like every country to be a mnc. i come and trade my skills to the highest bidder. and i go to where the highest bidder is. no qualms, no obligations, and no baggages.

matilah is enjoying this arrangement for a long while.

but if singapore as a nation does this, whoever does it, the leaders will be the first to be hung.

it is just a moot point.

Voyager said...

Then how come Singapore's leaders are still enjoying their fat paychecks ? Where are the hangmen ? All too ball-less ?

redbean said...

send in clint eastwood : )

Matilah_Singapura said...

Voyager wrote:

> if the country were to become more like a corporation where your only relationship is defined in a contract, and either party has the right to terminate that relationship by giving an agreed period of notice. <

All libertarians support the idea of freedom of association, private property and therefore contract law.

There is a flaw in your argument: None of us chose to be born, and none of us willing choice to be born in the country we were born in—in this case Singapore.

Therefore contract law cannot apply because there is NO CHOICE, and no FREEDOM of association—at least in the early years.

The context of contract law is that it is based on voluntary agreement between two parties.

The situation does change later on when we get older and are able to fend for ourselves. Let's say the age is 21 years old.

Therefore at age 21, a person can decide whether or not he wants to be a part of Singapore, The Corporation.

To impose a "contract" on a person who didn't have the choice in being born and cannot fend for himself is akin to SLAVERY.