A frightening and dangerous thought

In a ‘democrazy’, political parties and politicians take sides to outbid or run down the opposing camps during an election. In a fair and equitable system, the people will choose who they believe or want to lead them, and their policies. After the election a victor will be announced and a new govt will be installed, and a new phase of leadership will take over the country. In a mature first world country, all the bickering ends, all the name calling ends, and opposing politicians and parties shake hands and agree to work together. The hatchet is buried. In third world countries, the animosities continue, and political enemies become personal enemies. Some will be detained, imprisoned or fixed up for good. In a mature first world polity, life starts anew for all citizens and all are equal under the law and under the govt. Govt policies do not discriminate the people according to who they supported or voted for. Can we accept a govt that says it will treat its supporters better than those who did not support them? If this kind of thinking is to be institutionalized, then all the supporters of a ruling party will be getting more or better treatment from the ruling party. Would they get more contracts, get promoted, give better jobs etc etc? Would they get priority for car parks, housing or whatever? And if one is to stretch this further, it can become very frightening. What this amounts to is a voting of a govt by a group of citizens to look after them first and those that don’t will be second class, or be treated as lesser citizens. Is this ‘democrazy’? Can the citizens accept this kind of logic and mindset? Or can the citizens that don’t support the ruling party or pay lesser taxes, spare from doing national services or exempted from contributing to the govt’s call for national integration and serving the nation? Or can they serve lesser? A govt that favours only it supporters is against the notion of an all inclusive policy. A govt must be for all and every citizen must be treated fairly and equitably under the law and under the govt. It is the right of every citizen to cast his vote for whoever he prefers in an election. This must not be used to discriminate against him in subsequent govt policies if his choice is not the elected the govt. This kind of thought is not only divisive, it is extremely Third World. The people who support the govt will be taken care off better by the govt. Can you believe it? Can you accept that this is the way to go?


Anonymous said...

You are absolutely right. But governments (democratic and autocratic alike) both engage in such "play". Look at the Republicans, clamoring for budget cuts everyone except for their own districts and unions.

The only difference is that the western press reports and opine (harshly) on such blatant votebuying which you naturally would not see the media here do.

And the greatest tipping point, Singaporeans are daft (as LKY rightly puts it), they are willing to receive freebies for 6 months, and give everything else they own for the next 4.5 years. Generous lots this Singaporeans. Pity the stupid Singaporeans.

Matilah_Singapura said...

I agree with most of this article.

The 'higher law' which is supposed to even out the differences in the gang warfare caused by political democracy is the nation's Constitution. The Constitution is supposed to puts limits on govt power and describe the rights of the citizens under law. Therefore, if the constitution is upheld, citizens can rest assured of being treated equitably regardless of who gets in.

However in reality, we notice daily infringements of virtually every constitution by every govt. in the world.

A word about so-called 1st world democracies: In the 1st world, politics is very big business. The divisiveness may appear to subside after elections, but that is not the case. Those handshakes are all fake.


Because the lobbyists start doing their thing. And the result: the govt ends up giving 'special treatment' to certain interests usually Big Unions, Big Business and Big Welfare.

The gang warfare nature of BIG democracy is permanently fixed. 1st world, or 3rd world. It just manifests itself differently, but the principle is the same.

If the democracy was SMALL however – like the type you have at your local church or golf club, you rarely get this 'gang warfare' because everyone knows each other, their spouses probably go shopping together, and their children are twittering, facebooking an getting stoned and sexed-up with each other. i.e. democracy limited to a community united by common interests – like faith, sports or Tupperware -- tends to work quite well.

In these small democracies, people vote for their (say) president, secretary and treasurer, but the people holding these offices cannot abuse their power to favour or punish the members or abuse their trust and rip off the organisation – if they try, they are immediately and swiftly dealt with, and their WHOLE FAMILY carries the shame.

Matilah_Singapura said...

Judging by the the 'culture' in Singapore – referring to the broad culture – Singaporeans are still not ready for a democracy – because they have consistently shown that a carrot and stick offered by politicians is the way they are going to vote.

They 'automatically' gravitate toward this – as outlined by redbean's supporter-non supporter dichotomy. The citizens consistently FAIL to uphold their constitution and FORCE their govt and politicians to abide by the fundamental laws on which the republic is founded.

Therefore what Singapore needs -- until the culture changes -- is A Strong Man -- a 'benign dictatorship' aka Plato's Repblic, like the Roman Republic during the Roman Empire.

In Australia, govts have been thrown out by their citizens: Gough Whitlam in the 1970's for borrowing and spending like a lunatic, Bob Hawke in the 1980's for attempting to introduce The Australia Card – a national identity card. In the US, the Tea Party Movement have held the Obama Administration's feet to the fire – nearly resulting in a Government Shutdown.

Soon, we Aussies are going to throw out this ditsy air-head redhead who is fucking up the cuntry with her crazy waste of money, and fuck-nut anal-raping legislation – which if continued will
bankrupt the country and put everyone in debt.

Democracy: The People Get The Govt They Deserve!

Anonymous said...

Not all Singaporeans vote for the PAP because of the carrots. There are exceptions and not every Singaporean is daft and stupid.

Anonymous said...

This kind of practice by the ruling party is pure and naked vote-buying!

Anonymous said...

If Singaporeans are willing to gain a little monetary benefit at the expenses of losing their dignity, self-respect and principles, that is a sad reflection of how much we have let our forefathers down. No wonder they are called daft and stupid by the MM.

Matilah_Singapura said...

anon 138:

I'm not saying every Singaporean is stupid. What I am saying is people in big groups tend to behave like stupid assholes -- even though individually they might be quite nice and intelligent.

At some level, all political elections are based on carrot and stick. i/e/ people choose because one choice offers better 'benefits' than another choice.

The thing about these '1st world western democracies' is that they are all WELFARE STATES where the gang-warfare is centered around who gets the money and who has to give up the money.

Welfare takes various forms: bailouts and subsidies for Big Business, fixed wage rates and plenty of 'pay-without-work' for Big Labour, and of course free money, free education free what-not for Big Social Welfare. Everybody has some 'goodies' to be got via the so-called 'democratic' process which is now 'loser pay winner'.

Singapore's strength is that it is a popular destination for Sovereign Individuals and private wealth – usually from Hotel Dwellers – people who use the superb services in Singapore but could care less about the politics, unless the govt is ousted and replaced by a more 'welfare' oriented regime.

Therefore the political 'war' in Singapore has another dimension: Freedom Loving, Meritocracy Embracing Hotel Dwellers vs The Whinging Useless pain-in-the-ass Locals who are all out for the 'free lunch' and expect the govt to provide everything from cheap houses to guaranteed employment all their lives.

Here are a ouple of articles about Singapore from the point of view of Hotel Dwellers aka Sovereign Individuals:

1 Singapore – We Told You So!


i.e. the PAP strives to PROTECT private wealth, but the whining locals wan the govt to SEIZE private wealth to spend on welfare 'fore the people'.

Singapore is hell bent on attracting the world's best. And you have to give some credit to those who have 'made it' financially as every dollar is a 'certificate of achievement' earned by serving your fellow man – lots of them, consistently over a long time.

I am just a very small-time, kuching-kurap kachang puteh player. I get the crumbs. But I am thankful that there are private individuals far better at the game of capitalism than I am, which means I can just be one of those 'small boats' which rises with the tide.

Bring it on fuckas – let's see how your finances are without the enormous amount of foreign PRIVATE wealth and entrepreneurship. If there is a fight between 'locals' and Hotel Dwellers' then I might put my dog into this fight :-)

Matilah_Singapura said...

There is bigger and more robust support from self-interested Hotel Dwellers and other types of FT ('foreign trash') for the PAP than there are from ne'er-do-well locals exercising mass stupidity in big groups.

At least the FT's behave as individuals -- each out for their own self-interest -- which is why they tend to be more vigilant and responsible, and coldly rational when it comes to making choices.

When money and individual achievement talk, collective bullshit walks away to hide somewhere.

So suck on that, Collectivist Assholes ;-)

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...


You kpkb for all the wrong stuff. The sinkies are not against the real FTs nor their wealth. You gila to have such ideas. Neither are they asking for a social welfare state like the British system. And all knows that you are a hoteller but no one is chasing you out, proof that they welcome you.

There are certains things that the people are pissed off. And they are too obvious to the sinkies. They are pragmatic people and will be the last to want to rock the boat. They are seeking gradual change constitutionally.

Matilah_Singapura said...

Nabeh. The Constitution was written nearly 50 years ago lah.

What the fuck are you talking about then 'gradual' changes by constitution?!?

So for 40-50 years, just treat the constitution suka-suka, and now change?

WTF! You're nuts!

The 'certain things' the S'poreans are pissed off about is their own doing lah. for decades they've enjoyed the benefits of this carrot-and-stick system -- they have free edu, CPF and HDB.

Do you think that changing parties is going to de-politicise CPF/HDB. Of course not!

"Constitution" -- my banana and two hairy rambutan lah!! Use the constitution to wipe your backside after pang-sai.

That is supposed to be The Rule Of Law, but since the people don't benefit from its protection, please feel free to use it as toilet paper!

Anonymous said...

Just to tell Matilah Singapura that not every Singaporean is like the smart ass that he is. Even if everyone wants to be as intelligent as him, it could only at best be just an envy. Despite this, got to agree with his opinion that Singaporeans also lack his gut, not just his intelligence.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Nabeh, Matilah, you bonkers or what? The constitution written 50 years ago is not the same consituttion today lah. It has been amended and amended and amended....

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Another way to describe the constitution is that it is like Matilah, born 50 years ago and now a different animal: )

Anonymous said...

Anon 3.07

You said it all!

Matilah_Singapura said...

redbean trying to score 'points' by attempting to teach his father how to fuck.

What has amendments got anything to do with our argument? Yiou sneaky motherfucker redbean trying to wriggle out ;-)

Of course constitutions get amended BUT THE CORE of the constitution which state clearly what the govt role is and the people's (civil) liberties are -- the 'foundational stuff' is essentially the same.

Of course there are 'differences'. But the constitution is far from being the 'different animal' as redbean suggests.

But have the people defended their Constitutional Rights? Nope. Some half-arsed attempts by JBJ and CSJ -- but both ended up being hammered down. I call their attempts 'half-arsed' because they had no effective stratergy, and the people in their Big Stupid Groups were still blur after being consistently 'carrot and sticked' for years by HDB/ CPF and low income taxes.

This proves that The Rule Of The Highest Law can be subverted politically by 'bribing' and 'threatening' the people -- so go ahead, you might as well use the constitution -- amendments and all -- to wipe your arsehole clean after taking a big messy, smelly post-nasi padang shit.

You fuckers have been bought and sold like the slaves and feudal serfs you truly are! (come on, prove me wrong assholes)

Still, S'pore is a wonderful hotel :-)

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

OK I declare the smart ass wins another argument : )

Matilah_Singapura said...

anon 307 & 335:

I can assure you, I am just an average guy and do not claim to be 'more intelligent' than anyone -- although I do agree that no one is 'equal' in all their intelligences.

Please lah, I might have 'guts' to get by the usual shit that life throws at me, but I don't have the 'guts' to come back to Singapore and shout my opinions and fuck the govt from Hong Lim.

I'm not like that Pillay lawyer who insults LKY on his blog, then 'dares' the cops to arrest him on a pre-announced Singapore visit. Dumb motherfucker. Now he is an American citizen so he thinks that S'pore will respect his US Constitutional rights. Idiot!!

Like I said, all these fuckers CSJ, JBJ, Pillay -- got no strategy lah. You are fighting a self-professed sam-seng: Lee Kuan Yew. He already promised to wallop any opponent with his 'knuckle dusters' -- and he follows through with ACTION. How much clearer can you get?!?

You may not like what I write, you may even take issue with my use of language. However, don't worry about me -- and don't waste your emotions getting pissed with me -- that won't serve you, and it only emboldens me :-)

What you can do for yourself is EDUCATION: know how your cuntry works, how politics can mess your freedom, where the govt gets its 'permission' to rule your life, and for fuck's sake don't swallow the bait like a 20-dollar whore guzzling cum.

Have a little dignity and stand up for yourselves once in awhile -- for your own life and for the lives of your friends and family. You don't even have to waste your time standing up for your cuntry -- just confine it to your own narrow interests -- because it all begins and ends with The Individual.

Matilah_Singapura said...


Very important: get over your fear of 'being wrong'. Very big hurdle.

If you are too concerned with 'losing face' you are going to find it very difficult to handle rejection. You constantly want to be 'validated' even to the point where you compromise or give up important aspects your own 'existence' just so people will 'like you'.

Kill that kiasu/ lose face demon, soon.

Matilah_Singapura said...

redbean: WTF man? It was not my intention to 'win' this or any argument. I already said I agree with the gist of your post :)

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Oh I thought you want to win so let you win lor: )

We are all spectators to this great GE that is unfolding before our eyes. Let's enjoy the plots and sub plots and identify the heroes and the villians.

Matilah_Singapura said...

The political story is generic -- what changes and makes it interesting is the very facts of the human condition.

In my mind, one of my favourite polemicists is H.L. Mencken. One of his quotes:

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

And for me a 'must read' for anyone who has felt frustrated by their govt and its politics is a short essay titled Last Words written in 1926.

Excerpt from the above work:

"I confess, for my part, that it greatly delights me. I enjoy democracy immensely. It is incomparably idiotic, and hence incomparably amusing. Does it exalt dunderheads, cowards, trimmers, frauds, cads? Then the pain of seeing them go up is balanced and obliterated by the joy of seeing them come down. Is it inordinately wasteful, extravagant, dishonest? Then so is every other form of government: all alike are enemies to laborious and virtuous men."

Fucking genius.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Many donkey years ago there was this movie called The Adventurers. It was about a group of mercenaries who toppled a corrupted regime. Their intention was good initially. Soon they too became as corrupt as the regime they toppled and behave exactly like them.

All pigs will end up the same way, regardless of political systems. But there will be a brief period of improvement. Or at least the old rots would be removed and not allowed to pile up.

Then given time, a new rot will take place. It goes in a cycle.