For advertisement

Sample

4/29/2011

Time to ask the PAP questions

The PAP has been asking the opposition parties many pertinent questions, like are they ready to form the next govt. Looking at the number of seats contested, this is a reality that can happen. And it is not only patronizing but insulting to the electorate to call it a freak election if it does happened. Freak election can only be held for freaks. So, are the voters freaks? Now is the moment for the opposition to ask the PAP if they will accept the choice of the people if the opposition is elected to power, by a coalition? Would the PAP accept the fate if they were voted out of power? Don’t evade this question by saying it is impossible. Laughing at such a possibility is OK. Laughing has always been a weapon in parliament. I remember someone saying that tanks would be rolling down the streets when there is a freak election or something like that. Can't remember who, I got dementia. Would there really be tanks rolling in the streets? Why is it called freak? Is it because the PAP believes that the people will definitely vote them to power? And if they did not, it is not because the people did not want them but because of a miscalculation. So the election tak pakai, and the army boys and tanks will be rolled out to prevent the opposition from assuming leadership of the country? Is this what a democratic election supposed to be, where a party can claimed that it is the choice of the people, and if not elected, they can quash the election result, calls it freak, and continue to rule? A very convenient argument. Is this a likely scenario? These are very pertinent questions that the opposition parties should ask the PAP, and demand an answer. Would they accept the verdict of the people? Or would they freak out?

14 comments:

Matilah_Singapura said...

Never trust a politician to do important work.

And for goodness sake stop thinking that 'the opposition are our saviours'. They are not. They are humans like all of us.

The question of acceptance of a political loss should be asked by The People themselves -- each as individuals in a loud voice, and not left to any 'representative' or 'agent' acting on behalf of the people.

Also, it is a question of law. Basically the question is: Are you willing to adhere to THE LAW?

I seriously doubt the PAP will cry 'foul' if the people voted them out. Amongst the people themselves, I doubt if there'll be any problems in a political sea change, except for a few 'nasties' in the true-believer/ die-hard camp -- those folks apt to resort to facebook dirty tricks and such-like. You're not going to stop that -- partisan politics is a filthy business, especially when the mob from the gallery gets heated up.

The people biting their nails would be the MNC's asking the question: Can we still make money?

So people, off to the PAP facebook pages and personal blogs with you. Start posting "Will the PAP accept a political loss" -- and whatever answer you have, you will have in writing. Do the same in the MS Media.

Remember: don't trust a politician when you can do the job yourself.

Matilah_Singapura said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

The main arena for expression of views is in parliament and you need your representatives to be there to speak on your behalf. The internet is only an outlet to let go some steam, and can simply be ignored.

Saying it in parliament is a different matter. Don't trust politicians. But like it or not, they are going to screw you. So it is good to have some politicians on your side.

You can't say you don't trust politicians and put your hands down while another whom you also don't trust keep slapping you.

Matilah_Singapura said...

OK, there might be a need for the politicians when you need that representation as a collective to get jobs done where it is impossible for an individual to accomplish himself.

However representative govt only works if the mechanism of representation itself works -- sometimes it does, sometimes it fails miserably.

Asking a direct question to the incumbent is a responsibility shouldered by every citizen -- every citizen has a right to know, directly from the Secretary General of the PAP's mouth, whether or not he will accept a loss from a free and fair election which was over seen by The Singapore Elections Department?

This is a fair question, and a very simple matter with a 'yes or no' answer. There is no in-between. You don't need representatives for a simple task like this. You can ask the question directly.

You cannot have a strong republic without individually active citizens. I have made that point over and over -- it is the basis of my Matilah Singapura Theory which is founded on the people getting the govt they deserve, and they will get screwed everytime unless they are prepared to stand up individually under a constitution which protects everyone individually

If you want a good cuntry, if you think that a citizen has a 'stake' in his cuntry, then for goodness sake don't leave it to the state or a people's representative to 'deliver'.

Every citizens pays the govt salaries. The govt is a servant to each and every citizen. Therefore each and every citizen is entitled to a STRAIGHT ANSWER.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

Matilah, you really think that we are living among angels and saints in paradise and a citizens can suka suka go to the rulers and ask him to explain?

You need to have a drink with people like Francis Seow and Tang Lian Hong on what it is like to do so. Maybe they will be able to convince you about the realities.

Matilah_Singapura said...

Yes I do, actually. All my suggestions are possible in reality :-) Consider it a public service of my 'outreach' program. ;)

Times have changed now. These elections are the most transparent, not due to socio-political culture shifts on their own, but made a reality becasue of technology. The PAP couldn't get away with that shit now with twitter, facebook and youtube and millions of 3G cell phones. No way.

BTW, the question is not defamatory. If you defame, you pay the price: S'pore law allows for that. However, you cannot defame by asking a question. e.g.

'You are a liar' -- defamatory (unless you have solid proof)

'Are you a liar?' -- perfectly fair -- straight 'yes or no' answer.

Anonymous said...

Matilah Singapura is doing a great service to his fellow Singaporeans here from ABROAD.

Anonymous said...

Matilah Singapura is doing a great service to his fellow Singaporeans here from ABROAD.

Anonymous said...

Dont worry. Old fart is talking about Fish tanks. We the citizens intend to put the useless ministers into fish tanks for display through singapore once the government get voted out.

Matilah_Singapura said...

anon 540

Appreciated.

Time for every S'porean to read their constitution. All the opposition parties make reference to the constitution. Whatever govt gets in -- PAP, Opposition or Coalition Govt -- Singaporeans can only rely on one document to protect each one individually -- the constitution.

I'm warming to the Reform Party because they seem to focus on the constitution more than the rest. IMO, there are still amendments to be made -- mainly to narrow the definitions and to remove ambiguity and exceptions in favour of the state.

But before any further amendments can be made -- PROPERLY -- the people need to read and understand the constitution...and stop all the party politics nonsense.

Matilah_Singapura said...

P.S.

To defend a republic properly, every citizen has to stand alone first before he voluntarily chooses to stand together with the rest.

Everyone is unequal, but each of us is individually equal under the rule of law -- which essentially defends your rights and posts limits on 'freedom' so that your rights don't violate the rights of others. "We Are Equally Free" or Libertatis Æquilibritas.

In Singapore, every citizen has been given a 'free kick' in that he lives in a Republic -- distinct from any other form of democracy in that the role of the individual and his achievements count.

Matilah_Singapura said...

On the ability or lack thereof of answering a simple, direct non-threatening question:

Rear Admiral (ret) Lui Tuck Yew ==> rude asshole.

Don't vote this guy. He favours government regulation of the internet.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

The moment is here for the people to do what is necessary for their own good, not the good that the rulers are telling them. Use a little of the brain that is left to think and make your own decision.

That is what is needed from every citizen.

Matilah_Singapura said...

This is what a generic political rally looks like.

which is to say redbean's piece of advice is pure rubbish.

> Use a little of the brain that is left to think and make your own decision. <

The scientific fact is that you need all the faculties you can muster in your brain to make 'your own decision'.

But if you are one of the sheeple, all I say to you is 'good luck'.