The right to die

Visited a nursing home or a hospice? I assure you that it is not a pretty sight. My respect for all the care givers in the homes, paid or volunteered. Many of the inmates are no longer able to look after themselves. Can't see, can't hear, can't move, can't talk and can't think. And everything must be done for them. Is it a good thing to keep them living in those conditions? Are they living and enjoying life, or are they serving penance for a life not worth living? Many kind hearted souls will swear and fight tooth and nail to keep them alive and going. Life is precious. Anyone with a different view? We are not meant to live forever in this physical form. We come and we go. Different religions and races have their theories and teachings on what come next. Some may believe that this is their one and only existence. Some believe that there is life after death. Some believe that one's spirit lives on forever. The question is whether people should be preserved to live with such indignity, in such a pathetic condition, and celebrated as living. Living life must be living life, not suffering life, immobilised in bed. A lot of education needs to be done to prepare people to live and die gracefully and respectfully. People must not be imprisoned in their dysfunctional bodies in this world one day longer that they have to be. They must be set free to roam the universe, to carry on living as a free spirit. We have the right to live and also the right to die, in dignity. A lot of work must be done in this neglected area that has been left to chance and the opportunitists. We need some of our best talents to be trained in this field and to enlighten the ignorant masses on what life and living is all about and remove the fear of dying. Dying is the last act of grace. A beautiful moment to a new life. Dying is to live again. PS. Exclude the violent and unnatural deaths for they are not meant to die through natural wear and tear.

celebrating singaporean - Glen knight

This man had done wrong, punished, paid his price and live life again peacefully. He has come to terms with his past and taken them in his stride. He is like a buddhist who has found the meaning of letting go. He retreated from life in the fast lane and lives simply on the peripheral of civilisation, doing his things quietly and contemplating on nothing. The man has returned with the youthful enthusiasm to live life again at 62. You can see that he is happy and has no signs of lingering anger or unforgiveness. This is a reformed man, a born again man. Fallen, picked himself up and walks again. Singaporeans have a lot to learn from this man on the lessons of life and humility, and to regain self respect in the face of adversity.

Be mindful

I am not going into a discourse on Buddhism. Political leaders too need to be mindful of the life they want for the people and how the country should move forward. There is this opposing pull of forces to run the full capitalist way and the softer socialist way. The former will let things run their full course, where human nature and the law of the fittest survives will not be restrained. The latter, a more humane look at the inequalities of people and their social makeup that make them less able to pursue their dreams. Criticism of this path is that people are lazy and deserved to be in the doldrums. There will be such people, no doubt about it. Taking the capitalist road, a lot of wealth will be generated and a lot of rich people will be made. At the same time a lot of people will get poorer and less able to get by. In the long run, the pool of the very rich will shrink as they are supreme in their abilities to accumulate wealth at the expense of their less able countrymen. The system will breakdown unnaturally and there will be a new beginning. The role of the govt, with all the powers vested in their hands, has the privilege of being god, to allocate resources and wealth to the people. It has to be mindful where the wealth and resources are going and whether that is the best direction to take. For the last few years, we are seeing this relentless pursuit of money within the govt and outside the govt. The private sector, with money as their only motive while obligation to nation and society as incidental or not in their mindset, will push for the highest return they can get, at all cost. They will maximise profits for short term benefits and ruin the country in the long run. The future of the country is not their concern. Instant gratification, money is. We are seeing cost increases in properties, rentals, services and goods and salaries going only in one direction as if it is the law of gravity, that cost can only go up. The consumers will eventually bear the brunt of everything until they can bear no longer. Forget about the top 20% when their income will always outrun the rising cost and will not matter to them. There must be a price to all these. When will it stretch to a point where it snaps? It is dangerous to slow down growth by shackling the enterpreneurial drive of the able. They must be allowed to push to the limits of efficiency and returns. They are the growth drivers. What can the govt do to keep the less able part of the population more wealthy without increasing their income and pushing up cost? This is the other danger of losing our competitiveness. Rising cost will drive us out of business. Stretch their dollar! The people can live better and feel richer if the cost of 'their' living can be restrained and keep low. Housing, transportation, medical, education, food and essential services can be kept low to increase the value of every dollar these people. This will create a 'controlled economy' at the lower end when govt intervention is necessary to make life more manageable and without pushing up cost to an unbearable state. There can be two economies existing side by side, like two systems, one country. The full force of capitalism and free enterprise shall be allowed to run their 'full' steam in one economy and a managed one for the people who are mostly not so talented but needed to form the base of a thriving nation. This makes the human world different from the animal kingdom. It is the animal farm but subject to how the animals want it to be. This is the mindful part.

How open are we?

Skimming through the few pages of the Goh Keng Swee book by Tan Siok Sun in the papers, it is clear that Keng Swee left politics because of a new love and not too because of his health. In 1982, or even now, we are still a society of monks and priests. A second love life is uncomfortable and could become an embarrassment and the topic of gossips. So it was better to stay away from politics. And Singapore lost one of it brightest leaders because of our high moral standard of social norms. A few days back it was reported that Hilary Clinton was taking out her big gun in her presidential campaign. And that big gun was non other than the charismatic Bill Clinton. Clinton was still as popular as before with or without Lewinsky. The Americans have adored him for what he is and forgiven him for his little indiscretion. And he is still being invited to talk about his exploits in the White House and being paid big money for it. Are we that pragmatic as a people compare to the Americans 'can do' attitude towards life? Or are we just some uptight society that taking a second glance at a pretty face is scorned upon? Or are we just a hypocritical society that claims to be whiter than white and any little speck of dust marks the ruin of a man no matter how talented he is? America is a big country with a big heart for forgiveness. And they are not so uptight about the private lives of their people and leaders. They love them the way they are with all their warts and scars. George Bush is the best living example of how the Americans have accepted him as their president and all his boobs and slips. He is after all a man, and not god.

Sonthi's game of deception

The Bangkok Post had an article pointing to the misleading information and statements made by Sonthi and questioned if this man can be trusted. It reported that just one week prior to the coup he publicly denied that he was going to attempt a coup. And he did. And now he admitted that his charges against Singapore for spying was such for public consumption and was not true. The question now is how long can he get away from deceiving the Thai public? He is now in power and no one can touch him. When his grip on power slips away, how would the new man in power deal with him? Or how would the Thai people deal with him? Would they begin to have doubts about the NSC's charges against Thaksin given such a record? His downfall and disgrace are quite certain unless the Thais are willing to forgive him.