A Single Paragraph on Singapore - How accurate.

[scroobal]

This is a single paragraph from a book that captures the Politics of this country accurately. It was written by 2 foreigners who don't even reside in this country. They see things that we fail to. Read carefully to capture the nuances of of every sentence.

"For approximately three decades, politics in Singapore was pluralistic and relatively open, but by the end of the 1960s pluralism was fighting a rearguard action against the monopolisation of all public discourse - not just politics - by the state. The PAP had won the 1959 elections as a radical socialist party with strong left-wing backing. Once in government, however, the right wing of the party under Lee Kuan Yew embarked on a more conservative and authoritarian course. In 1963 the Singapore government arrested most of the leading leftists in a security operation called Operation Cold Store, and then systematically began to dismantle and marginalise all forms of civil society in the country - from the labour and student unions to the clan associations and the Chinese Chamber of Commerce. By the beginning of the 1970s, it was clear that all paths were closed except for the one being built by the ruling party. This path of elitism, meritocracy, ethnic essentialism, state-directed industrialisation, and - a radical departure from reigning political orthodoxy among post-war nationalist movements - integration with global capitalism. By the mid 1970s, the ruling party's hegemony was so complete and its rule so successful - at least by its own measures - that it had become difficult to conceive of the earlier alternatives having ever had merit. Public discourse now contemplated with horror the possibility that the nation-building project could have had form other that which emerged. Alternatives were seen as options for failure, if not chaos and anarchy. Yet the studies presented here suggest that was not necessarily true. Alternative outcomes to the current state of affairs used to be well within the imagination of Singaporeans, and some of these alternatives may have have even contained viable seeds for a different kind of social development than that which Singapore experienced. The present did not just happen. It was crafted. Whether by design or by accident, intended or not, it was made by the actions of specific people at specific times. It is also true that people were caught, as it were, in the more imponderable and impersonal blind forces of history over which they had no real control. There were global economic, environmental, political and social trends at work, and those in Singpore could only hope to shield themselves from themselves from them or take advantage of them."

 

[kingrant]

Agreed tht there was a lot more political plurality from after the Jap surrender and the return of the British to Malaya till Operation Coldstore. There were beginning with the Malayan Forum, then the MDU, the Fajar generation, John Eber's group, Progressive Party, labour party, Labour front, and PAP --jostling for power to become the first independent Singapore govt. and playing along with the Alliance then Tengku and also the British Colonial office. So up to this point, the way the cards were stacked - with the Tengku and British preferring to sleep with Lee KY than Lim Yew Hock or Lim Chin Siong, the dealt hand would have turned up pretty much the same even if played over again.

To me, the biggest change - indeed the turning point - must be when the Barisan Sosialis resigned from Parliament and took to the streets in their extra Parliamentary struggle. That fortuitous day on, a great powerful Opposition and the most promising alternate govt, committed hara kiri, and its demise and vacuum was filled by PAP. Anybody leading the victorious party then would have exploited the god sent opportunity to cement their power base and progressively stepped up moves to erase all dissenting voices. Only the newspapers remained then to challenge the new power, but they also fell one by one as the Old Man claimed the high moral ground pleading national security and scaremongering tactics to muzzle them and control the media. From a half dozen independent newspapers to two then to one big brothel now in Toa Payoh.

Btw, which book, Scro? Not surprised if it is banned or the author is/will be after this revelation.

This is a single paragraph from a book that captures the Politics of this country accurately. It was written by 2 foreigners who don't even reside in this country. They see things that we fail to. Read carefully to capture the nuances of of every sentence.

"For approximately three decades, politics in Singapore was pluralistic and relatively open, but by the end of the 1960s pluralism was fighting a rearguard action against the monopolisation of all public discourse - not just politics - by the state. The PAP had won the 1959 elections as a radical socialist party with strong left-wing backing. Once in government, however, the right wing of the party under Lee Kuan Yew embarked on a more conservative and authoritarian course. In 1963 the Singapore government arrested most of the leading leftists in a security operation called Operation Cold Store, and then systematically began to dismantle and marginalise all forms of civil society in the country - from the labour and student unions to the clan associations and the Chinese Chamber of Commerce. By the beginning of the 1970s, it was clear that all paths were closed except for the one being built by the ruling party. This path of elitism, meritocracy, ethnic essentialism, state-directed industrialisation, and - a radical departure from reigning political orthodoxy among post-war nationalist movements - integration with global capitalism. By the mid 1970s, the ruling party's hegemony was so complete and its rule so successful - at least by its own measures - that it had become difficult to conceive of the earlier alternatives having ever had merit. Public discourse now contemplated with horror the possibility that the nation-building project could have had form other that which emerged. Alternatives were seen as options for failure, if not chaos and anarchy. Yet the studies presented here suggest that was not necessarily true. Alternative outcomes to the current state of affairs used to be well within the imagination of Singaporeans, and some of these alternatives may have have even contained viable seeds for a different kind of social development than that which Singapore experienced. The present did not just happen. It was crafted. Whether by design or by accident, intended or not, it was made by the actions of specific people at specific times. It is also true that people were caught, as it were, in the more imponderable and impersonal blind forces of history over which they had no real control. There were global economic, environmental, political and social trends at work, and those in Singpore could only hope to shield themselves from themselves from them or take advantage of them."

 

[scroobal]

Bro, your observation is spot on. The authors of the book also blamed Dr Lee Siew Choh and Barisan for the monumental error that that allowed PAP to consolidate.

The book is Paths Not Taken by Michael Barr and Carl Trocki.

Here is the interesting thing. This book is the result of papers presented in Singapore and the book is published by NUS press and freely available. Yet those who claim to be political alternatives like TOC, WP and many other political activist tend to be overly cautious and operate within OB markers of their own.

To me, the biggest change - indeed the turning point - must be when the Barisan Sosialis resigned from Parliament and took to the streets in their extra Parliamentary struggle. That fortuitous day on, a great powerful Opposition and the most promising alternate govt, committed hara kiri, and its demise and vacuum was filled by PAP.

Btw, which book, Scro? Not surprised if it is banned or the author is/will be after this revelation.

 

[kingrant]

Ah, that book..yes, good book, I've read it some time back.

Now reading Unexpected Nation by Edwin Lee. Completed My side of history and Media Enthralled, all avail from NLB. Also read Cherian George's The air-conditioned nation.

Bro, your observation is spot on. The authors of the book also blamed Dr Lee Siew Choh and Barisan for the monumental error that that allowed PAP to consolidate.

The book is Paths Not Taken by Michael Barr and Carl Trocki.

Here is the interesting thing. This book is the result of papers presented in Singapore and the book is published by NUS press and freely available. Yet those who claim to be political alternatives like TOC, WP and many other political activist tend to be overly cautious and operate within OB markers of their own.

 

[kingrant]

Here is the interesting thing. This book is the result of papers presented in Singapore and the book is published by NUS press and freely available. Yet those who claim to be political alternatives like TOC, WP and many other political activist tend to be overly cautious and operate within OB markers of their own.

Agree it's ironic but also hard to tell because OB markers also move with Old Man's whims. Maybe the book was thought to be limited to academic circles which is already corraled by Old man sfely. Some previous others like Christopher Lingle and Prof D.J. Enright could have done more damage, so were sent packing. Then people like Edwin Thumboo is still around.

 

[scroobal]

There is actually a vibrant atmosphere within academia and from what I understand there are no OB markers even for students on given assignments. Old man wanted that to keep up the quality up and in those they days, they drew very good quality people in political science arena from overseas and kept the Singaporeans here. Because he controlled the wider media, he trusted them to keep such materials away from the broadsheets and public space. They handled such sensitive things as then Channel 8 used as a defacto chinese channel for propaganda, the GCT failure in Anson By-Elections.

The likes of Lingle and Threroux etc are usually due to some internal conflicts and one avenue is to turn it into a political circus. Practically 80% of academia in Arts and Social Sciences are anti-establishment.

Academia actually hated Toh Chin Chye because he was a control freak with no leeway. When they lost a local outstanding Philosophy lecturer to OZ, then old man stepped in.

However students forming indulging in politics outside coursework is strictly controlled and that is when ISD stepps in view of the Tan Wah Piow and the democracy square, Fajay incidents.

Agree it's ironic but also hard to tell because OB markers also move with Old Man's whims. Maybe the book was thought to be limited to academic circles which is already corraled by Old man sfely. Some previous others like Christopher Lingle and Prof D.J. Enright could have done more damage, so were sent packing. Then people like Edwin Thumboo is still around.

 

[elephanto]

I was quite bemused to discover novelist Paul Theroux once lectured at Singapore U before leaving academia to pursue writing full time - Paul Theroux I cam to know becos of his novel 'Mosquito Coast' made into a movie starring my hero Harrison Ford

 

[elephanto]

The present did not just happen. It was crafted. Whether by design or by accident, intended or not, it was made by the actions of specific people at specific times.[/FONT][/FONT] .....those in Singpore could only hope to shield themselves from themselves from them or take advantage of them."[/COLOR]

Unlike Lingle, this type of academics Old Man can tahan.

In fact, he proudly agree with the above quote.

In one of his speeches, he boasted that he 'make no apologies' for meddling in the lives of Singaporeans - how you live, how many kids you have, what trees to plant by the roads .... social engineering accusations.... had it not been for my active intervention, Singapore would not be what it is today.'

 

[kingrant]

There is actually a vibrant atmosphere within academia and from what I understand there are no OB markers even for students on given assignments. Old man wanted that to keep up the quality up and in those they days, they drew very good quality people in political science arena from overseas and kept the Singaporeans here.

From Francis Seow's book, Old man also wanted an independent, livelier and robust Press, but somehow whatever blossomed rankled him and his OB markers moved again and again, which went on to fighting with international media after he had demolished the local newspapers (SCJP, NYSP, ES, SH, etc). Partly also a fight that started with rich Chinese tycoon families who owned newspapers.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Scroo

I would probably say the reverse the PAP won the 1959 as a radical left wing party with strong socialist communist etc backing




Locke

 

[scroobal]

Francis has a lot of skeletons in his over sized cupboard. He prosecuted Chia Thye Poh for sedition before Chia was thrown into detention.

Old man knew the power of the press from day 1. He chose Raja because, he was the lead columnist for the Standard and was anti British and helped galvanise the labour movement before they took power. From day 1, old man muzzled the press to no end. Francis chronology of events paints singapore bad just before he left the government onwards. Francis problem was not about politics. That was not his interest. His issue was money and short of money. He was nevertheless a very well respected litigator.

From Francis Seow's book, Old man also wanted an independent, livelier and robust Press, but somehow whatever blossomed rankled him and his OB markers moved again and again, which went on to fighting with international media after he had demolished the local newspapers (SCJP, NYSP, ES, SH, etc). Partly also a fight that started with rich Chinese tycoon families who owned newspapers.

 

[scroobal]

I think the radical left wing backing implicitly means communist including the theorist, the fireside marxist and the out an out revolutionaries.

Dear Scroo

I would probably say the reverse the PAP won the 1959 as a radical left wing party with strong socialist communist etc backing




Locke

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

Am I the only one that believes truly that the PAP is a fascist political party? It's so crystal clear to me and yet I don't see others mentioning this.

Singaporeans need to know what a fascist political party is and how and why it operates the way it does.

 

[scroobal]

The singapore regime is a unusual. Its agenda is economic growth. They measure themselves in terms of economic performance. It does not even come close to a nationalist agenda. Even when it comes to grassroots and PAP members, the ruling regime consider them as instruments rather then an extension or a movement.

Its certainly authoritarian, prepared to subvert the judiciary, have a sterile parliament, have little or no respect for democracy, have little or no consistent philosophy or ideology except when its comes to economic performance.

In fact, I suspect that old man does not even consider members of the cabinet as fellow members from PAP.

Am I the only one that believes truly that the PAP is a fascist political party? It's so crystal clear to me and yet I don't see others mentioning this.

Singaporeans need to know what a fascist political party is and how and why it operates the way it does.

 

[bhoven]

Ahh yes I remember Ten Chin Liew whom MM said had a good turn of phrase and logic in his response to him.

 

[scroobal]

A brilliant mind. Thanks for remembering him. The University of Singapore had a hard time stopping science undergrads seeking special dispensation to switch from their science studies to take philosophy under him.

It has been said that his students went far and wide because he opened their minds. They can be found in NY, London to Hobart, from high finance to NGOs.

Ahh yes I remember Ten Chin Liew whom MM said had a good turn of phrase and logic in his response to him.

 

[bhoven]

he has come home and now heads the dept of philosophy at NUS...

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

The singapore regime is a unusual. Its agenda is economic growth. They measure themselves in terms of economic performance. It does not even come close to a nationalist agenda. Even when it comes to grassroots and PAP members, the ruling regime consider them as instruments rather then an extension or a movement.

Its certainly authoritarian, prepared to subvert the judiciary, have a sterile parliament, have little or no respect for democracy, have little or no consistent philosophy or ideology except when its comes to economic performance.

In fact, I suspect that old man does not even consider members of the cabinet as fellow members from PAP.

Authoritarian is never used to describe a political party. It may be used to describe a type of government but never a political party.

If you look at authoritarian governments they have either Marxist/Communist political parties at the helm or fascists political parties. There is no where to place the PAP but as a fascist political party. I am not including monarchies.

Once people understand the beliefs of the PAP as a political party, only then will they truly understand why the entire government machinery is the way it is in Singapore.

One type fascism is closely linked to nationalism but there is another type of fascism that is interested in corporatising the country. Of course there are other characteristics of fascism but these two are the main characteristics.

The way with which the media is controlled, the way in which the country's economy is largely controlled by the state, the way in which one head of the political party is held in an immortal-like manner, the way in which the less priviledged within society is left behind or even denied their existence, the way in which a small group of people and their interests are given lalmost free reign over economic and even judicial assistance, the way in which fear is always used to subjugate the population and the way in which propaganda is used without restriction to fool the populace are also characteristics of a fascist political party.

Their white on white uniforms and their use of the word 'comrade' as a standard form of salutation all point to a fascist political party.

Enslaving a large portion of the population to economic slavery via the HDB and taxes upon taxes and extra-normal charges for almost everything purchased is also part of a fascist political party's way in controlling the population. And yes, the PAPies are natioinalistic as can be seen in their NDP budgets. They have a distorted look on Nationalism which is subjugated by their political party's selffish aims but nonetheless they are nationalistic as it allows them to steer the populace with ease, especially when the entire education system is also part of their propaganda machinery.

I strongly believe that once the populace understand the schematics of the PAP as a political party with fascist leanings that these people will see things from a much clearer perspective.

Why are the poor, the sick and the elderly given such a poor response by the government? Why are HDB prices so high? Why does the government control so much of the economy? Why is the media so tightly controlled? Why is the RC, PA and other government instruments used by the government to promote party activities? Why is the police and judiciary used extensively to counter civil society and the opposition?

All these can be easily understood once the beast is known for what it is.

 

[scroobal]

I am aware that he has returned but he does not head it. He was the catalyst that got old man to change Toh Chin Chye edict. It was too late, Ten went into self imposed exile in protest of old man and Toh and despite many attempts to get him back no luck until much later.

The other gentleman who stood up to old man was the first vice chancellor, Sreenivasan who refused old man's order not to admit chinese ed students engaged in politics - the suitability certificate issue . He quit and died pretty much a broken man. His very close family friends were the Kwas, old man's brother-in-law. The families kept in touch until he died.

he has come home and now heads the dept of philosophy at NUS...

 

[kingrant]

Its certainly authoritarian, prepared to subvert the judiciary, have a sterile parliament, have little or no respect for democracy, have little or no consistent philosophy or ideology except when its comes to economic performance.

In fact, I suspect that old man does not even consider members of the cabinet as fellow members from PAP.

I think if Old Man had his druthers, he would throw away the one-man-one--vote first past the post system inherited from the British. He tended to speak his mind uncaring of who was listening - as when he was frustrated with why the people still voted against him and for JB thus breaking the stranglehold when he thought they should not. Recall he even thought abt tweaking the system to give some more voting rights than others. On top of that, see how he always says Singapore doesnt have enough talents for a two party system?

Therefore, in its place, he would probably want to abolish the parl democratic elections, do away with political parties altogether and turn S'pore into an administrative state where only he could be the elected Executive president (like Russia) and for the rest, appoints his mandarins to head the civil service and direct and control State policies. He is already living this dream now except for the irritating fact that every 5 years, he faces a general election which can always trip him up.