4/12/2013

The discriminating readers in social media



I have written quite a few articles and for the latest two, one on India Indians integrating with the locals and another saying that there is no discrimination against Singaporeans in Singapore, I am expecting readers to strongly disagree with me or even receiving brick bats from them. The position or conclusion of both articles would not go down well with the readers. I too don’t agree with them. But I cannot claim otherwise unless there is evidence to support a different assertion.

In the case of India Indians integrating with the locals, the best I can say is that they are attempting to do something. But integration is not a one day thing, not even one year or five years. It may take a whole generation or cross generations to integrate into a society. So it will be foolish of me to say that they have integrated well with the locals over a few days. It is just the first step in a long journey.

The point about no discrimination against Singaporeans is qualified by the MOM having a few cases and Chuan Jin and Tharman calling up some big organizations for tea. There were cases, and could be many. But where is the evidence? Where are the reporters reporting on them?

The Brompton Bike case and the AIM case would also be non issue if the netizen reporters did not dig and air the cases and the sticky stuff in them. The reporters, mainly the netizens, not so much about the main stream reporters, can play a big role in exposing the crimes and deceits of foreigners and foreign companies discriminating against Singaporeans. And they have the social media to publish what they have unearthed. There is no fear that no one or the main media would not want to publish them. We need to hear more of such cases, and whistle blowers there must be many, to step forward to defend fellow Singaporeans to make Singapore our home and for Singaporeans.

How well are the foreigners integrating with the locals, the India Indian, the PRC Chinese and the Pinoys? When they are few in numbers, they have to integrate and live with the locals. When their numbers are big, they can be with themselves, among themselves, ganged up to protect themselves and their life style. They don’t need to integrate with the locals. They have critical mass to be on their own. They can form their own enclaves, buy properties in select areas, and even discriminate and ostracise the locals, kick the locals out of jobs, deprive the locals of jobs to keep them for their own kind.

We do have a big problem with big foreign populations. The bigger they are, the bigger will be the problem. The problem today is 5.4m in size. It will be 6.9m and bigger in the future. The problem is here to stay and will grow and swallow up the locals if they are not careful, if they are complacent and think that things will be the same, that being the locals they will have a little advantage over the foreigners. When the foreigners outnumber the locals, the advantage will go to the foreigners and the locals will end up at the wrong end of the stick. It can be very pathetic if that day comes. Sad, it will come faster than the unthinking locals can imagine.

25 comments:

  1. You have half a cup of carrot juice and you pour in half a cup of black tea. Now would you say that the tea is integrating with the carrot juice?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Don't forget that you were washed up onto this desolate island in a sampan with nothing but coconut trees and a few other coolis from India and China in the first place.

    Now you sip carrot juice in air-con and the people who brought you to this state want to pour black tea saying it is good for you, what you gonna do ? Should you or should you not trust him ?

    Sentosa

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dear rb
    The root of the problem is PAP.
    And the Sillyporeans who vote PAP.

    After we vote Pro Alien Party;
    Then we get foreigner problems, MRT problems, flooding problems, indiscriminate gun carriage funeral problems ....

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is a sell out of the true blue Singaporeans alright. Never in the history of any country that there is such a massive selling out of a country without the consent of its population. It normally happened when the govt is weak and the intruders invited themselves in and pointed a gun or knife at the throat of the leader. Here it is done willingly and happily by the leaders against the wish of the people.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 10.48am not true lar as 60% a clear majority gave the mandate mah and come 2016 another mandate. So we the 40% just have to respect what the 60% want lor irrespective of the disagreement.

    ReplyDelete
  6. When the people elect a govt, they don't give a blank cheque for the govt to do anything it wants. The unwritten code is to do what is good for country, nation and people. Doing things against this unwritten code is not acceptable.

    The counter argument is that what the govt is doing, bringing in so many foreigners, is good for the country and people. Now that the people is saying no, it is necessary for the govt to bring this to the people in a referendum. It is not masak masak to flood the country with so many people, be it Singaporeans or non Singaporeans.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The most disappointed thing about LKY is having him to say that Singapore is not yet a country, that our pledge is just an aspiration.
    That act alone destroys everything that what Singaporeans stand for, our national identity.
    That act alone degrades and demeans all the efforts of our national servicemen.
    It pains me so much to write this comment about the destruction of this nation by its own founder.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right bro, for 50 odd years, Singaporeans recited the pledge with pride believing in it.

      LKY said how proud when the old guards of Dr Toh Chin Chye / Mr Rajahranam put their heads together to compose this pledge. Now said just an inspiration

      Delete
  8. Annon 12:06. If we believe in LKY, then it is true that we should abolish NS altogether. There is no nation to defend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no more need for National Service.
      Sinland is invaded.

      Delete
  9. /// It pains me so much to write this comment about the destruction of this nation by its own founder. ///

    Are you kidding me?
    LKY was just a prime minister of Singapore.
    He was not the founder of Singapore.

    Sang Nila Utama Lee Kuan Yew, a prince of Palembang in Sumatra.
    He founded ancient Singapore.

    Sir Stamford Raffles Lee Kuan Yew.
    He founded modern Singapore in 1819.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thomas Bingley founded modern Singapore.

    ReplyDelete
  11. My grandfather founded Singapore before Lee Kuan Yews' parents got married.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Of cos the conyou party wanna stirs up shit to introduce more perks for the new immigrants. If conyou never exists, sinkies will live in freehold landed houses and drive private cars like many malaysians. His existence is a curse to us. Hope he dies soon soon and reelection in his ward and opposition sure win.

    ReplyDelete
  13. He does not want to see a Singaporean sense of identity to emerge.
    This sense of Singapore identity will compete with PAP for ownership over the direction of Singapore's evolution.

    As long as there is no Singaporean core;
    everybody will acknowledge PAP to be the legitimate leaders of Singapore.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Let's hope of the 77 MPs, some will have a little conscience and gumption to break free and serve the citizens instead of the party.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Had any of the 77 had a little conscience, they would have kept the distance from PAP.
    Anyone with the pack is part of the pack which behave like hyenas and dingoes.

    ReplyDelete
  16. STForum Online 13April

    Goh Khee Kuan

    [A retiree's view on govt performance]


    "... isn't it the Govt's performance
    that enables the creation of the political, economic, social and investment climate we have today?

    We should be grateful for what we have.

    Look around the world.

    Many people are worse off now compared to a few years ago.

    We could have been a Cyprus
    and have our savings taken away by the govt."


    http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/forum-letters/story/retirees-view-govt-performance-20130413

    ReplyDelete
  17. Seah Chiang Nee's Saturday column

    [Jobless in the republic]


    "PMET
    has become a familiar word in the republic in recent years,
    one that is increasingly associated with some of the woes of the new Singapore.

    It is an institution
    that has been badly affected by the country’s immigration strategy of increasing the population
    and providing cheaper manpower for businesses.

    'If the govt is right in saying
    that Singapore’s future can be secured through mass immigration,
    then we, the present generation,
    have to be the sacrificed,' said a retrenched engineer.

    Although the govt has recently raised restrictions and reduced the foreigner intake as a result of public protests,
    the overall immigration policy is being firmly pursued.

    How badly are PMETs hit?

    Two years ago
    there was an inkling of things to come when a cabinet minister in charge of the labour movement, NTUC,
    talked of plans to go for cheap labour.

    Lim Swee Say said his unions would help put on track
    a “Cheaper, Better, Faster” economy.

    This sort of leadership philosophy has stagnated productivity and helped widen the gap between the rich and the poor."


    http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2013/4/13/focus/12958275&sec

    ReplyDelete
  18. There is only one race: the human race.

    However you are never going to get rid of cultural or racial discrimination, even though there is no such thing as "race".

    People will believe what they choose, and act according to their beliefs.

    IMO, the key is to always be on the right side of the trade, and profit from your position.

    People have the right to be wrong, and you have the right to profit from their error.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is only one primate?

      Dont call them man, chimp, gorilla, orang utan or monkey, just call them primate.

      Okay?

      Delete
  19. Yes there is one race but of different colours and features. And they called themselves names, and there are many countries and many nationalities.

    ReplyDelete
  20. once u endorse the *washington consensus*
    forget about sovereignty
    ka kui dua dua, ka chung bua gu you

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Cheaper, Better, Faster” is correct but should only apply to the PM, MP, top civil servants. Not to the poor and vulnerable who already have to pay for gst and coe for buying a bread.

    ReplyDelete