SDA want to emulate M'sia's BN

Dear All,

After so many years, I picked up an ST paper today.

I was amazed to see the amount of crap in it but what stood out most was that the SDA was going to try to emulate the BN of Malaysia.

What I am utterly shocked at is that these politicians in Sg want to emulate a failing system riddled with corruption and nepotism and not to mention money politics.

This is very much akin to the politics of Sg as it is but instead of trying to create a new mindset and strive for a new direction, SDA's opposition politicians are holding the BN's system as a goal to achieve.

I think it was the the Sec-Gen of the SDA who said, I quote, "...the BN has been in power for so long and it has shown stability."

He might as well have said the PAP is in power for so long and they are the best people to emulate!

I am amazed that a person who can be elected as Sec-Gen is so ignorant of what is happening in Malaysia and is utterly devoid of creativity in coming up with a new political realisation, agenda and goal for all those who believe what a true democracy should be.

If this is the state of how things are, then I am really sad for Sgeans and I am glad that I have put my papers in to move to the US.

Yes, of course, in the US I may be a second class citizen since I am truly a migrant and I know my role and position and I am willing to accept that.

Sheesh!

Cheers,

MentisMortis

MentisMortis said:

...

Yes, of course, in the US I may be a second class citizen since I am truly a migrant and I know my role and position and I am willing to accept that.

...

Click to expand...

What are the comparisons of a first class citizen here vs a second class citizen there?

So far this topic appears to be relatively untouched.

Not appropriate for this section but perhaps in the Emigration Matters section.

DerekLeung said:

After they got that Andy Lau look alike Khiaw Boon Wah ! Dickweed sucker !

Click to expand...

Dear Derek,

I am speechless and for me that is rare.

WTF are these people thinking? They can't be so stupid as that can they?

While the whole of Malaysia is waiting to remove the BN from power the SDA wants to aspire to be a mini-BN?

If this is not the epitomy of stupidity then I really don't know what is.

Cheers,

MM

I was amazed to see the amount of crap in it but what stood out most was that the SDA was going to try to emulate the BN of Malaysia.

Click to expand...

Wow, Those PAP sinkie losers now try to emulate another 3rd world country, Malaysia after trying so hard to compare with Thailand. They go forward another step , in actual fact , to do something like a developing country.

WHAHAHHAHA!!!! Maybe a few months later, they will try to hip hop like the African.

How come nowadays never flash their FIRST WORLD status? Or are they trying to work very hard and dip into the reserve to declare sinkieland as a developing world.

kakowi said:

What are the comparisons of a first class citizen here vs a second class citizen there?

So far this topic appears to be relatively untouched.

Not appropriate for this section but perhaps in the Emigration Matters section.

Click to expand...

Dear Kakowi,

Yes, this matter is best left to the emigration folder.

However, it is not a secret that migrants are treated a little worse but like I said I'd rather have that than to be treated exactly the same in my own country.

Anyway it also depends on your job and status I guess, blue collars tend to be shunned more unlike white collars I guess.


Cheers,

MM

Thanks for your reply.

MentisMortis said:

Dear All,

I think it was the the Sec-Gen of the SDA who said, I quote, "...the BN has been in power for so long and it has shown stability."

He might as well have said the PAP is in power for so long and they are the best people to emulate!

I am amazed that a person who can be elected as Sec-Gen is so ignorant of what is happening in Malaysia and is utterly devoid of creativity in coming up with a new political realisation, agenda and goal for all those who believe what a true democracy should be.

Click to expand...

Completely agree with you. Reflects badly on him and shows the level of ignorance.

I am amazed that a person who can be elected as Sec-Gen is so ignorant of what is happening in Malaysia and is utterly devoid of creativity in coming up with a new political realisation, agenda and goal for all those who believe what a true democracy should be.

Click to expand...

Creativity is not something a sinkie is famous at. That PAP sinkie is following what others has done. Please note the word FOLLOWING.

Everyone can do that by following, no need brain. So anyone can be Sec-Gen. Wow!! First world indeed!!!!

scroobal said:

Completely agree with you. Reflects badly on him and shows the level of ignorance.

Click to expand...

The concept is not wrong. Only the example is bad.

A coalition needs a clear leading party that is the strongest in almost all aspects. A better example would be the Australian Liberals-Nationals.

Perspective said:

The concept is not wrong. Only the example is bad.

A coalition needs a clear leading party that is the strongest in almost all aspects. A better example would be the Australian Liberals-Nationals.

Click to expand...

There are 3 components that make up SDA - SPP, Justice Party and PKMS. The chap was trying to accommodate the feelings of component parties by mentioning BN which is a race based coalition.

PKMS has more less taken a dominant position with SDA and thus Chiam request for veto powers to be extended.

In explaining this, he cited BN and alluded to the dominant role of UMNO and its "veto" power.

Unfortunately using BN as an example was a really bad choice. The OZ liberal/national would not be relevant example.

Mind you, he referring to BN as a stabilising force is not a quote from Chiam. Of course he should have known better where the ST is concerned as there are lot of ignorant people who will just pick up on the BN aspect. He should have known better.

What is more interestying is the veto question which now puts PKMS in a corner after capturing the alliance in numbers. Chiam knows that they need him more than he needs them thus the extension of the veto powers requested.

SPP and JP has been the smaller parties in the SDA and NSP and PKMS the bigger ones. When NSP pulled out, it was not surprising that the vacancies it left behind are all filled by PKMS.

But PKMS never is a threat to anyone. In reality, it gets the numbers because it is the only party that pays a salary to its CEC members, courtesy of the building left behind by UMNO. That has explained all the infighting within PKMS and also explains why they are only ambitious party-wide and not nation-wide election. Members get themselves elected into the CEC, nothing else matters, not even whether they appear or not.

I think Chiam's request for veto powers to be extended has little to do with just PKMS, it is the minor position of SPP. He agreed to lead the SDA in the first place with the condition that they will not oust him when they get successful enough, hence the veto powers. One can tell by the fact that the leading party of SDA with SDA's only seat has hardly grown over the years. With his health condition, he is in a more possible position to be ousted. I won't be surprised that the veto power extension was called by other leaders in the SPP, who want to maintain leading position.

Perspective said:

I won't be surprised that the veto power extension was called by other leaders in the SPP, who want to maintain leading position.

Click to expand...

Veto power requested I believe is personal to holder - Chiam.

Dear Scroobal

As the SDA has as much chance of gaining political power as going to the moon, I feel all the condemnation is unwarranted given the context of the remarks.

He was in all probability commenting about the desirability of having a stable coalition with one dominant party and leader. I.e party political issues versus national political ones.

Most opposition politicians in SG are sad to say somewhat parochial and do not look for examples further afield ( Dr Chee excepted ). The reference to the BN is not surprising in that regards and frankly in terms of a stable coalition proven over time the BN has a better record than Anwar and Reformasi.

The SDA remains a weak alliance despite having in its midst as perspective pointed out the richest and most well funded opposition party in SG and yet which practically cannot convert its financial muscle into political advantage with GRCs and Housing block quotas. Hence the inward looking nature of PKMS and its self political marginalization.





Locke

scroobal said:

There are 3 components that make up SDA - SPP, Justice Party and PKMS. The chap was trying to accommodate the feelings of component parties by mentioning BN which is a race based coalition.

PKMS has more less taken a dominant position with SDA and thus Chiam request for veto powers to be extended.

In explaining this, he cited BN and alluded to the dominant role of UMNO and its "veto" power.

Unfortunately using BN as an example was a really bad choice. The OZ liberal/national would not be relevant example.

Mind you, he referring to BN as a stabilising force is not a quote from Chiam. Of course he should have known better where the ST is concerned as there are lot of ignorant people who will just pick up on the BN aspect. He should have known better.

What is more interestying is the veto question which now puts PKMS in a corner after capturing the alliance in numbers. Chiam knows that they need him more than he needs them thus the extension of the veto powers requested.

Click to expand...

The SDA was formed based on the BN model to combat the obstacle of the GRC and the difficulty of finding minority candidates, especially Malays. But adopting a political alliance structure out of convenience and suitability is different from trying to emulate the political practices or results, that I agree.

However, I think that there may be deeper vibrations beneath the surface. The Malay component of the SDA is the PKMS, which is an offspring of UNMO and friendly with UMNO, perhaps not as brothers but still as cousins. Any public statements made by the SDA has to take the PKMS sentiments into consideration.

lockeliberal said:

Dear Scroobal

He was in all probability commenting about the desirability of having a stable coalition with one dominant party and leader. I.e party political issues versus national political ones.


Locke

Click to expand...

Agree, its more party political issues. I frankly don't see ist going anywhere. The fact that PKMS seem to have taken up more positions is an idnication of Chiam style of single leadership no second gen planned.

Ramseth said:

The SDA was formed based on the BN model to combat the obstacle of the GRC and the difficulty of finding minority candidates, especially Malays. But adopting a political alliance structure out of convenience and suitability is different from trying to emulate the political practices or results, that I agree.

However, I think that there may be deeper vibrations beneath the surface. The Malay component of the SDA is the PKMS, which is an offspring of UNMO and friendly with UMNO, perhaps not as brothers but still as cousins. Any public statements made by the SDA has to take the PKMS sentiments into consideration.

Click to expand...

I agree as well. The comment on the veto is telling. I like to be the fly on the wall when they have their debate. Grabbing all the position means nothing if the veto is granted.

SDA = BN

PKMS = UMNO
NSP = MCA
SPP = Gerakan
SJP = 46 Party

SPP = Penang State?
PAP = Singapore State?

hi there.

u are not worry about the guns problem in america?

fivestars said:

SDA = BN

PKMS = UMNO
NSP = MCA
SPP = Gerakan
SJP = 46 Party

SPP = Penang State?
PAP = Singapore State?

Click to expand...

Are those illustrations meant to be helpful or harmful to the SDA?