mollymeek (![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} mollymeek) wrote,@ 2008-02-28 22:44:00 |
|
Liberalization and the Singaporean Absurd (Disturbingly Funny)
Deputy Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng disclosed a government review on this when he responded to Nominated MP Eunice Olsen's call for more avenues for Singaporeans to express their views on important issues.
Mr Wong said accessibility to avenues to express one's views is not wanting, and generally there are more accommodative dialogues with the man-in-the-street on key issues.
Referring to how recent demonstrations by the Hindu Rights Action Force or HINDRAF in Malaysia led to riots, Mr Wong added that Singapore's own experience in the past have also taught it to be very circumspect about outdoor and street protests.
He also said that while most people involved in a demonstration may have no intention of using violence, a handful of agitators is all it takes to spark off violence.
So while young people, in their exuberance may think it is fun to demonstrate, Mr Wong said that they would have no control of the situation if the agitators choose to exploit it.
Mr Wong said: “The question for Singaporeans is whether we should accept the risks and accept the culture of street protests.
"In my view, one riot is one too many. Violence in the community takes a long time to heal. Once lost, public confidence in our security would take a long time to return."
The use of the Speakers' Corner as an outdoor venue for more political activities, including demonstrations, could be liberalised.
Presently, only indoor venues are allowed be used for demonstrations. (CNA)
Presently, only indoor venues are allowed be used for demonstrations. (CNA)
Brilliant. When people are getting a little out of hand (i.e. too much for some people to stomach), create a Speakers’ Corner. Designate a locus, circumscribe the literal and metaphorical spaces.
Now that more and more people are trying to hold outdoor protests, use the same idea. Demonstrators’ corner anyone? Render everything manageable, watchable, regulatable. (I would suggest that you relocate the Speakers' Corner to Pulau Tekong. An additional benefit is that you can get the recruits to practice their shooting if demonstrations every get out of hand.)
But don’t get excited, Dr. Chee. You know very well what could happen to you if you attempt to make use of any future liberalization.
Deputy Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng disclosed a government review on this when he responded to Nominated MP Eunice Olsen's call for more avenues for Singaporeans to express their views on important issues.
Ah, Ms. Olsen must have asked the wrong question. It’s already bad enough when the people are not entitled to the avenues of expression that citizens in reasonably democratic countries are. Do we have to depend on the whims of the government to open up more avenues? That’s as bad as having to beg for your own money when someone has taken it from you by force. Oh sorry, bad analogy. That’s called the CPF. What I mean is simply that citizens should not be deprived of any common democratic avenues of expression to begin with and shouldn’t rely on their oppressors’ mercy to stop oppressing them. But no lah:
Mr Wong said accessibility to avenues to express one's views is not wanting, and generally there are more accommodative dialogues with the man-in-the-street on key issues.
Not wanting? For Mr. Wong and his colleagues, I suppose. For they already have the media to express your views.
Accommodative dialogues? Such as dialogues regarding ministers’ pay hikes and GST hikes and dialogues that result in the renaming of compulsory annuities to dunno-what. (But, dear, repackaged shit doesn’t smell any better. And as far as Molly can see, so-called accommodative dialogues I recall are just a means of getting ideas to repackage shit.)
Accommodative dialogues? Such as dialogues regarding ministers’ pay hikes and GST hikes and dialogues that result in the renaming of compulsory annuities to dunno-what. (But, dear, repackaged shit doesn’t smell any better. And as far as Molly can see, so-called accommodative dialogues I recall are just a means of getting ideas to repackage shit.)
Over the years, he said the government has also seen and allowed more divergent views in various media - but it will stop short at outdoor and street protests.
Thank you for allowing more divergent views ah. Thank you so much. I wouldn’t have had a chance to talk bad about you if you didn’t allow me to. Thank you sooooo much. Eh, do I have the permission to kowtow to show my gratitude?
Referring to how recent demonstrations by the Hindu Rights Action Force or HINDRAF in Malaysia led to riots, Mr Wong added that Singapore's own experience in the past have also taught it to be very circumspect about outdoor and street protests.
Yes, demonstrations and bad and dangerous. Just like how access to matches can lead to fires and so matches are banned internationally.
Just look at places like Hong Kong where there are so many protests. People even protest about the police giving celebrities with sex scandals special treatment. Look what has happened to Hong Kong. It has collapsed and the people are suffering. Lydia Sum has died. And their budget surplus is greater than our miscalculated, GST hike-enhanced, ERPed surplus which will allow the ruling party to do things that will not develop a crutch mentality.
The government's "circumspection" simply means to me that it is thinking of a way to allow demonstrations without allowing demonstratins, to further contribute to the Singaporean diet of simulated democratic practices (which currently already includes "elections", "oppositional politics" and "free speech" in a corner).
The government's "circumspection" simply means to me that it is thinking of a way to allow demonstrations without allowing demonstratins, to further contribute to the Singaporean diet of simulated democratic practices (which currently already includes "elections", "oppositional politics" and "free speech" in a corner).
He also said that while most people involved in a demonstration may have no intention of using violence, a handful of agitators is all it takes to spark off violence.
So while young people, in their exuberance may think it is fun to demonstrate, Mr Wong said that they would have no control of the situation if the agitators choose to exploit it.
Ah see, you demonstrators. You are doing it because you are childish, immature and naïve. You do it because you think it is fun and not because you are passionate about a cause. And you can even turn violent any time. And good reputations have been assassinated by Mr. Wong. Consider a defamation suit.
Mr Wong said: “The question for Singaporeans is whether we should accept the risks and accept the culture of street protests.
"In my view, one riot is one too many. Violence in the community takes a long time to heal. Once lost, public confidence in our security would take a long time to return."
Aren’t curbs on democratic freedoms also a form of violence? The trauma of oppression takes a long time to heal too, Mr. Wong. And history shows us that it could result in a greater explosion of violence much greater that stray riots. Public and international confidence in our democracy is also adversely affected. (But, of course, that’s not as important as ensuring that the same people remain in power in Singapore for eternity.)
In other news, a JI detainee has managed to escaped because of a "security lapse". This means nothing to me except that we can perhaps expect to see more Big Brother measures being implemented and this terrifying incident will be used to justify them... But I might be wrong.
In other news, a JI detainee has managed to escaped because of a "security lapse". This means nothing to me except that we can perhaps expect to see more Big Brother measures being implemented and this terrifying incident will be used to justify them... But I might be wrong.
