Are we Sparta or Athens?

Are we Sparta or Athens? When I caught sight of this heading by Lim Cheng Tju I immediately burst out laughing. I instantly recalled the jokes that an invading army would be stalled by the massive traffic jams in Bangkok while another invading army would laugh itself to death when starring down at our soldiers. Now comparing ourselves to 300 Spartans who fought themselves to death, without asking for a cent more, or the creativity and imagination of Athens, a vibrant and intellectually stimulated city, are we having a drink too much? In a country that is driven by monetary rewards, when every decision is made on monetary terms, when citizenship rings hollow, when the citizens are happily being replaced by foreigners that have little emotional attachments to this island, where can one find the passion like the spartans or the creativity of Athens? The callous input of foreigners to boost up our population is as good as undermining the whole foundation of nationhood. The immigration patterns of today, the motivation, and how the immigrants would immerse themselves and set roots in a new country are very different from the past. To use our immigrant historical background as a justification for more immigrants is a dangerous starting point. We were created out of accident, out of a historical past where nationhood was not our choice. Even the USA was a historical accident. But to try to repeat the same formula is a very simplistic approach to nation building. We are just thinking about numbers and ignore the social glue that needs to bring the diverse people together as one. We have tried that for 40 years and still without much success. The influx of foreigners would only weaken whatever we have built in nationhood. There must be value and passion in the people. Philip Yeo was angry that Singaporeans, especially the young scholars, did not have any value with regard to being a citizen of a country. They think self and money. And in his fit of dismay he said to the effect that money would be better spent on better foreign talents. This is true when value and passion are not important. Just buy talents. And talents that can be bought with money can also be bought by others. That is what foreign talents is all about. It is about their market value and which country offers the best value. We are heading towards a society that has no root, no value, no passion, but only money. Yes, we are creating a culture of mercenaries. Or should we ask, where is the passion?

nkf story - just a thought

Just a thought If the court finds Durai innocent of all the charges, or the one charge that they can frame against him, then rightfully Durai should be reinstated as the CEO of NKF to continue his good work. He could even counter claim for wrongful dismissal and loss of salary and claim compensation for the sufferings he went through, including tarnishing his reputation. Actually the one and only charge of a $20k payment speaks for itself, that there is nothing criminal in what Durai had done. After spending so many hours of expensive investigation time, this is the only thing that came near to a crime and still got thrown out by the court. We shall be proud of the transparency of our legal system and how the rule of law is upheld in our country.

looking for soft options

Lawrence Low wrote a letter discussing about the weak students and the strong students sitting for the same national exam in the Today paper. He lamented that these weaker students would only do less well than the good students. So? Should we have a set of lower standard exam papers for weaker students and one for stronger students? That is what his letter is implying. Actually we already have that, the N level. The weaker students are already doing N level. Are we saying that this is not enough, that we should have a NO level for the weaker students doing the O level so that they will appear to do better, like N level students scoring 6 As which are of lower standard than O level? This kind of averageing down to make the weaker students happier but having fictitious grades is definitely a shift towards a soft solution. What is needed is to raise the standard of weaker students, or spot their talents in other fields instead of trying to compete academically when they are not so gifted. They are meant to do well in other fields. Everyone is gifted in their own ways. Lets not force square pegs into round holes.

convincing the people

There are several key issues today that are testing the govt and the people. The minister's pay is not only one of them, but a major one. Then there is the widening income gap which is also related to the minister's pay, the rising cost of living in every area from education to hospitalisation, food and essential services. All from the basic premise that you pay for what you get and all organisations must be profit driven. Then the CPF and all the people's money being locked away against their wishes. The 6.5 million population is also not sitting down well. There have been many explanations, but all mainly top down, shafting down into the throat type. And the people are expected to swallow it, like it or not. All the decisions have been made. It is actually more like telling the people that we are telling you this is what we are going to do. No way are we going to change what we have set out to do. We are the thinkers and knew best what is good for you and what is good for us. And we have explained to us. So let's move on. Now the real test comes. The quality of leadership is not just getting things done but to be able to convince the people to go along with the decisions. Failing to do so will only draw down on the goodwill of past credits and once expended, it will be pay back time. Are our leaders convincing in their arguments on all these critical and sensitive issues? Are the people buying them or just gritting their teeth and seaming with anger inside them? It will show over time.

Pay rise, looking at the big picture

Pay rise, looking at the big picture This pay rise for Ministers is undeniably the hottest topic today. There is no running away from it. Everywhere everyone is talking about it. So there is no point in putting the head in the sand and pretend that nothing seen, nothing heard and nothing is happening. What is important is to discuss it rationally so that everyone gets a fair hearing and a better understanding of the issue. Sue Ann Chia or Chia Sue-Ann said we must look at 'A big picture view of public sector pay.' She mentioned Dr Henri Ghesquiere, an adjunct professor at the LKY School of Public Policy, saying 'It would look high when viewed in isolation.' What Henri is saying is that it is not high if one look at the big picture, ie, Singapore's success as a first world country. 'Consider how Singapore comes out tops in global rankings for effectiveness of govt and efficiency of the court system....Highly remunerated officials are expected to go the extra mile and deliver beyond the call of duty, he added.' This is another way of looking at the issue other than that they will also not be corrupt. What Henri said also pointed to our obsession to be rated number one in everything. Maybe this is one of the yardstick which the govt is using to measure Singapore's success and the contribution of ministers and civil servants. The more number ones, the more deserving for higher pay. The grassroots must be trained to look at the big picture.