CSJ chooses Singapore.
8 h ·
I don’t think it comes as a surprise to anyone that I had initially planned to vote for Mr Tan Kin Lian in this Presidential Election.
But after hearing Mr Tan’s utterances on some issues over the past week, I found myself (and I suspect like many of you) wavering in my support of his candidacy.
I am not enthusiastic, for different reasons, about all three candidates. And yet, come Friday, I have to make a decision.
To this end, I am reminded that life seldom packages things neatly into good and bad, right and wrong for us to choose. The reality is that we are often faced with moral dilemmas where we have to choose the best from a bad lot.
On this, we must remember a very important life lesson: Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
While I consider Mr Tharman to be the most cerebral of the three candidates, what is more important is the fact that for more than two decades, he was part of the ruling clique that systematically stripped Singaporeans of their voice and ability to choose their own leaders.
He was in the party that (1) changed the rules of the Elected Presidency so that Halimah Yacob walked into the Istana without challenge, (2) enacted yet more changes to the PE so that previously eligible candidates are now disqualified, (3) introduced the GRC system that has enabled his party’s overwhelming hold on parliamentary power, (4) legislated POFMA which further curtailed free speech in Singapore, (5) allowed ministers to rent enormous state-owned bungalows while herding Singaporeans into tiny flats – the list rolls on.
To believe now that he is independent running for president is to believe that water flows upwards.
Then, there’s Tan Kin Lian. I know of two young women who are eligible to vote this PE. They are strong-minded and fiercely independent. They are my daughters and I am their biggest admirer. This is the reason I find Mr Tan’s “pretty girl” remark off-colour.
Intended or not, his comments trivialise the worth of women and does nothing to advance their empowerment and promote gender equality. I’m glad that he has apologised for them.
I also find myself in deep conflict with his view that the voting age be raised to 30. If my son, who is about to serve his National Service, can be called upon to fight in an armed conflict should one break out, and be trusted to make decisions that could mean the difference between dying and living for himself and his platoon mates, then why can’t he be trusted to choose his government?
To ask a man to kill or be killed for his country and then deny him of the right to vote seems illogical – indeed, deeply immoral.
Three, Mr Tan said that "I don't believe politics solves problems” and that "opposition does not help”. I can only hope that he was misquoted or his words were taken out of context.
Many of us spent our lives fighting for a system in which political parties, civil society and non-government organisations actively participate in political debate and public life. To make throwaway lines like this is reprehensible.
I’ve heard many people who were initially inclined towards voting for Mr Tan are now, because of his remarks, expressing their desire to cast a spoilt vote or voting for Mr Ng Kok Song.
If you are thinking of doing this, I beseech you to re-consider your decision.
To spoil your vote is akin to doing nothing; it’s like standing around and watching while a house is on fire. At this crucial juncture of our country’s development, we cannot afford to remain a bystander and do nothing.
The last time we got to vote for a president was in 2011. After 12 long years, we finally get that chance again. That vote is too precious to spoil.
As to voting for Mr Ng Kok Song, I can do no better than to remind you of what Mdm Ho Ching said: “It is good that Singaporeans can choose between 2 very capable and worthy persons (Tharman and Ng).”
I think Mdm Ho very ably expresses my concern about voting for Mr Ng Kok Song – he and Mr Tharman are but two different shades of grey.
For all that he has expressed, much of which as I pointed out I vehemently disagree with, Mr Tan Kin Lian is a good man. I share his views on CPF, high salaries of elected officials, and National Service.
But that’s not the reason why I find myself advocating for him at this late stage of the election. The real reason is this: All of Mr Tan’s transgressions pale in comparison to the damage that Mr Tharman’s (former) party has done to democracy in Singapore and, more importantly, the harm it will continue to inflict on our nation’s future development.
Besides, Mr Tan’s views are not immutable. He can be educated through debate and discussion to see things differently (as with his apology about women).
On this occasion, we, as citizens, are called to make a profoundly important decision, a decision that will determine the direction of how our country proceeds.
We have in Tan Kin Lian who, for all his foibles, carries with him the hope that, if elected, we can start to pry open, one finger at a time, the PAP’s suffocating grip on our country and start the arduous but exciting process of building democracy for our nation.
As imperfect as the choice on Friday is, if it helps to “build a democratic society, based on justice and equality”, then it should be clear who we choose.
I choose Singapore.
