Australia has a new party in power and a new PM in Tony Abbott. Kevin
Rudd made a graceful exit and praised himself and his own party for
still being a force to be reckon with in the next GE. And every
Australian is in a party mood. It was just another day in the lives of
the Australian, even when there is a change of govt.
Over here, Alex Au has been quoted to say, “… given that the transition
will unavoidably be difficult, what can the opposition do to buy itself
more credit?” Of course he was referring to the possibility of a change
of govt in the near future with Tan Jee Say saying that it is a matter
of when. Why should a change of govt with a new political party in
charge be unavoidably difficult in a mature democracy of well educated
and knowledgeable citizenry? We are in the First World aren’t we? We are
no longer wild apes. Or we are still stuck in Third World politics that
any change of political power and fortune is going to be messy and even
bloody? It is terribly upsetting and sad that there is such a fear of
an uprising or a military coup or things of such nature that befits a
Third World pariah country with pariah political leadership.
Why can’t our social political system be like the Australians or the
British or any of the mature European country? Even an emerging country
with the brand of Communism is looking more stable and peaceful in
making changes in political leadership. Do we really believe or expect
violence or something similar should an opposition party won the next
GE?
Where is this source of violence and instability going to come from? Why
is this so? Have not the politicians come to the reckoning that in a
democracy, where a GE is held once every 4 or 5 years, a change of govt
is normal, expected and nothing more than the changing of the guards? Or
is it that political leadership in this City is enshrined, hereditary
or that some parties are guaranteed by the dark forces to be forever in
power and any change will release the destructive forces of the dark
side to deal a severe blow to the challenger?
Come to think of it, can be quite scary that this pretentious First
World City will return to its rightful place in the Third World of
instability and chaos if there is a change of political leadership. If
that be the case, it just shows how humbug things are and the oasis of
growth, prosperity, peace and tranquillity is just a mirage. In reality
we have not arrived yet, not achieving anything that can survive a
change of political leadership, and what you see is not what it is. Have
we wasted the last 46 years developing nothing but a shaky political
system that cannot withstand the test of time and change of political
leadership?
Perhaps Alex Au is right, and that is very sad. What do you think?
24 comments:
Did the Aussie opposition said they were not ready to be govt? Did they even praise the incumbent?
That's the crucial difference between Sinkie opposition and Aussie opposition. In fact any other countries opposition.
No amount of what Alex Au, Tan Jee Say, or any other Sinkie said can change this Sinkie reality.
Unless Tan Jee Say can be a leader of a party that can contest 100% of the seats at the next election lah.
If that happens, I think for sure Tan Jee Say will be the next Sinkie PM after 2016. Or even 2015 if PAP decided to call GE earlier.
...for sure Tan Jee Say will be the next Sinkie PM after 2016."
Anon September 09, 2013 8:45 am
Sure or not? Then how come Tan Jee Say only got 25% votes and hence lost PE 2011? And in a PE, WP not ready to be govt is not even an issue, tio bo?
How come?
In the good old days, the Govt was ran by civil servants who were supposed to be apolitical. Nowadays, the Govt is run by MPs who are first and foremost loyal to their political party. In the recent acquisition of a shopping centre in people's park, it was the local MP who was doing all the talking and deciding. SLA people was hardly seen nor heard.
If PAP lost an election, no body will be running the Govt. The whole govt machinery will be paralysed. Whether you like it or not the whole country is held hostage by the ruling party!
I think deep inside their hearts, 60% Sinkies do not really want to change the PAP govt.
Instead, they prefer the PAP govt to change to be more pro Sinkies lah.
And which in fact is what PAP has been doing since GE 2011. But still not enough lah.
Bloody uprising?
Chaotic situation due to change of rulers.
No, not at all.
No Sinkie will face off with the Sin Military when they are activated for whatever reasons. More so when Sinkies are pre-warned by the Most Powerful Man in Sin.
And what First World or Third World?
It is still a Jungle World, is mankind better than other species?
My answer is yes, better and more advanced in viciousness.
What say You? Or what do You think?
patriot
Why can't Singapore be like other First World democracies? That is a good question. What has the PAP done to ensure that there will be stability and prosperity even with a change of government? Nothing. Indeed their object is to put the fear of instability and ruin into the citizens. The person solely responsible for this is none other than LKY whose professed aim is, to quote him," to play for keeps." He has constructed a hideous system to try to thwart any change of government - the elected President, the GRCs, the PA, control of the press and media, the unions, the economy through Temasek and the the GLCs. the armed forces,etc. He stuiously avoided Catherine Lim's question whether the armed forces will be called in if the PAP loses power through the ballot box. Now that he is about to disappear from the scene the present leaders are suddenly panicking at the real propect of a disastrous 2016 GE. Hence the orgy of awards, exhibitions, book launches, dinners in the great man's name to mine the fund of goodwill left to remind us of the "good times" and the mythical "kampong spirit". Is that a legacy we should inherit? let all patriots reject such attempts to deny them true prosperity and happiness in the future.
"Why can’t our social political system be like the Australians or the British or any of the mature European country?"
We are! The only difference ours is one-party like PRC while the Australians, Brit and the US are "Duopoly." Sama sama. Watch, after the election it will be back to the same. Just like the Brit, France, US etc.
"Duopoly?" Never heard of it?” Goggle and find out.
JC
Sinkies had through their blind faith allowed PAP to put in many military men into power. That in turn, allows LKY to warn or tell Sinkies point blank, of military activation should a 'freak' election result happens. Such a warning by LKY can ONLY be made if and when he is confident that his warning will be effective.
Anyway, Sinkies have themselves to blame for the State of affairs now and the hereafter.
patriot
In a mature democracy, the people is the decider of who should govt the country, not any individual or political party. No one shall be the arbiter of whether an election is freak or not.
No one is above the people's will.
redbean:
Politics is a consequence of culture. Actually, like most relationships in nature, it is reflexive i.e. culture influences politics which influences culture, which influences politics...etc.
Australia's 2 parliamentary parties are more SIMILAR than different: they are both CENTRIST, not so clearly defined as "left" and "right" or "progressive" and "conservative", although most media and most people still think the Liberal and Labor parties of Australia fall to their respective sides of that arbitrary dividing line.
Australia -- again culturally speaking -- tends to vote Labor when the cuntree is rich and they need the politics to "redistribute" "free" goodies. Then when the cuntree gets into financial and economic shit, they vote in the Liberal-Nationals to clean up the mess, foster new wealth creation, get rich again, then throw the Liberals out, vote in Labor to give away the goodies...and so the cycle goes on...
This is like the cycle of samsara -- never ending birth, growth, stagnation, decline and death...I'm so used to it I don't even blink anymore.
It is a mature and robust democracy -- one of the finest and strongest in the world.
Singapore cannot follow this model because the CULTURE is different. The single-party, benign-dictatorship model is IMO THE BEST political "compromise" (all politics is compromise) for a city-state like Singapore.
For anyone who prefers an alternative, there is always the possibility of immigration/ permanent traveler. Sure, we pay high taxes here in Oz, but life can be truly awesome, albeit expensive.
Depends on what you seek as an individual. Seriously, a cuntree's peaceful politics only affects each individual to a small degree... at the end of the day you have to decide what you want for your life, and go for it...regardless. Why?
Because the sheeple get the government and the cuntree they deserve. When you can break free from being one of the sheeple, then you become a true Sovereign Individual, and you get to choose how you want to live.
There is one major difference in the Aussie system. The elite in both parties would not put anyone out in the cold. The system would not allow it, the people would not allow it, the policians would not dare to do it.
Hahaha..........
'In a mature democracy..........'
Some say we live in 'Demon-cracy' and some say 'Demo-cracy'.
Me says anything except freedom and liberty.
And few Sinkies live with dignity.
patriot
"Why can't our social political system be like the Australians or the British or any of the mature European country?"
To answer that question, perhaps we should ask what has the PAP done to our election system and so-called democratic system of Government.
Greeting Redbean:
"In a mature democracy, the people is the decider of who should govt the country, not any individual or political party. No one shall be the arbiter of whether an election is freak or not..."
Redbean, neither of us is Spring Chickens, you still believe the craps? Having watched the regime here and elsewhere, "game plans" since the sixties, they convince me in the nineties this regime is here to stay. The Sinkies that cries the loudest especially in TRE were once the regime loyalists - over 80% of them. Now they are saying "this is our last chance or think of future generations or our children's future..." My goodness, why didn't they think of it earlier? Many still yearn for the "old guard.” I can go one ranting, even if the opposition win by miracle, I can assure you this will be "Singapore Spring,” especially with the US military now a foothold in Singapore.
Have you heard of "Bilderberg Group". LKY attended one of the meeting:
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/06/05-3
http://www.wnd.com/2008/06/66442/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-true-story-of-the-bilderberg-group-and-what-they-may-be-planning-now/13808
They may be the staunchest supporters of the old regime. But things changed, people changed, everything changed. What was is not what is.
Perhaps this is how dynasties changed hands, how empires rise and fall. All good things must come to an end and renew for a new lease of life. It is so natural. Nothing lasts.
But then why Sinkie opposition, even after nearly 50 years, did not change to become as strong as PAP?
In olden days, dynasties changed only after a hundred years, or more.
Even in USA, slavery lasted for more than 200 years.
So what is 50 years?
Maybe have to wait long long lah.
Ask yourself. What can the opposition do in 2 or 3 years if they cannot do after 50 years?
"They may be the staunchest supporters of the old regime. But things changed, people changed, everything changed. What was is not what is.... Perhaps this is how dynasties changed hands,"
In another words, these Sinkies change while many suffer all these years in silence. Should we change and vote for the regime - sama sama, payback time? It doesn't matter if the regime continues another 50 years. One thing I am sure, these Sinkies and their children will suffer, with FT and new citizens taking over.
You don't want me to blame these Sinkies, but will you blame me if I change vote and support the regime?
Anonymous September 09, 2013 2:13 pm
"Even in USA, slavery lasted for more than 200 years....."
Really! Slavery still exist in the USA and elsewhere.. have you heard of modern day slavery?
Matilah_Singapura said.,
"Australia's 2 parliamentary parties are more SIMILAR than different: they are both CENTRIST"
DUOPOLY, sama sama in Germany, UK, Canada, USA and and many so call Western "Democracies.
JC
In any first world countries, people can retire, collect pensions and enjoy living, aged gracefully at some point. Sinkies have to work till they dropped dead, little freedom of press, low standard of living, high costs of living. Just because some gaga people think we are first world, does not mean we are. We are still far from it.
The secretary general of a potential opposition party to lead this little red dot in the future is likely by the same sir name of the 4 presidential candidates in PE 2011. His name is Tan "Ching Ku"! The chairman of this party is Tan "Ku Ku". Treasurer is "MangMang" Tan. Organising secretary is "Forever" Tan.
redbean 1129:
>> The elite in both parties would not put anyone out in the cold.
WOW! You have more faith in the Aust political system than most voters here. If you came over here and made that claim, you would make most people laugh until they cry.
The main reason Aust democratic system is so robust, is at the fundamental level, ANTI AUTHORITARIANISM is the corner stone of this culture. You have to live here long time and mix around to get the "feel" of this concept.
Compare to Singapore: CONFUCIANISM is alive and well. People are just shit-scared of authority -- even though they hate authority and write hateful screeds against it on the internet. In the real world however, the people's BALLS DROP when the government shows its heavy hand of absolute power.
@JC257:
"Duopoly" is too simplistic. The robustness of mature democracies is more due to the fact that POWER is DISTRIBUTED. For e.g. Aust Parliament (a mix of the British Westminster and the United States Federal systems): at the Federal level there are 2 Houses of Parliament -- upper house: Senate (from the US system); lower house: House Of Representatives (from the British system). Then each state and territory has its own parliamentary/ legislative assembly government. States and territories have their own local governments -- usually a mayor or CEO and his council. This is power distributed at the governmental level.
Then there are social institutions like the press and media, registered and unregistered "activist" and "special interest" groups, business councils, workers advocates and unions, religious institutions.
All these enterprises have some influence and affect on the local voting population, and because they are groups with reputations, agendas, actions and involvement in the society and culture, they DO have effects (varying in degree, of course) in the political landscape.
Contrast to Singapore: Power seems to be CONCENTRATED at the level of ruling/ governing "elites" and their associates.
Judiciary: An independent judiciary is crucial. Generally speaking, all Australian Federal Governments have NO LOVE for the judges in Federal Courts.
In Singapore, the separation of judiciary and legislature is, how to say...not that clear?
Post a Comment