A reader posted a comment on our site lately castigating us for only knowing how to criticize without coming up with any “better solutions”. Another emailed us imploring us to offer “constructive criticisms” instead of ranting relentlessly at the government.
What exactly is “constructive criticism” ? I have searched through all major dictionaries and can’t seem to find a definition for it. The term itself is an illusion concocted by the PAP to limit the boundaries in which they can be criticized and to preserve and perpetuate the myth about their “capabilities”.
In the PAP/SPH, jargon, “constructive criticism” must fulfil the following criteria:
1. The identity of the critic must be known so that: he or she can be easily threatened, sued, bankrupted or fixed into submission which will take the sting out of the rest to exercise ’self-censorship’ when criticizing the establishment.
2. Criticize them in subtle / diplomatic / friendly manner in order not to make them look bad so that they can continue to justify their exorbitant high salaries simply by proclaiming themselves as the best talents that Singapore will ever produce. Have a live debate in public between PM Lee and Dr Chee and the fake aura of invincibility which the PAP has so cleverly enshrouded itself will vanish into thin air instantaneously.
3. Offer better alternatives and solutions so that they are able to demolish you if your proposals are unsound or steal your idea to become theirs in the future without giving due acknowledgement or recognition.
An old dog is incapable of new tricks. It is the same old “divide and conquer” strategem employed over the years to split and weaken the opposition camp.
Opposition politicians who give the PAP a “passing grade”, defend its laws as “fair and just” and express their pride in voting for them in previous elections are “constructive opposition” to be given a positive spin by the state media to increase support for them amongst unsuspecting opposition supporters.
Read rest of article here:
http://wayangparty.com/?p=5662
What exactly is “constructive criticism” ? I have searched through all major dictionaries and can’t seem to find a definition for it. The term itself is an illusion concocted by the PAP to limit the boundaries in which they can be criticized and to preserve and perpetuate the myth about their “capabilities”.
In the PAP/SPH, jargon, “constructive criticism” must fulfil the following criteria:
1. The identity of the critic must be known so that: he or she can be easily threatened, sued, bankrupted or fixed into submission which will take the sting out of the rest to exercise ’self-censorship’ when criticizing the establishment.
2. Criticize them in subtle / diplomatic / friendly manner in order not to make them look bad so that they can continue to justify their exorbitant high salaries simply by proclaiming themselves as the best talents that Singapore will ever produce. Have a live debate in public between PM Lee and Dr Chee and the fake aura of invincibility which the PAP has so cleverly enshrouded itself will vanish into thin air instantaneously.
3. Offer better alternatives and solutions so that they are able to demolish you if your proposals are unsound or steal your idea to become theirs in the future without giving due acknowledgement or recognition.
An old dog is incapable of new tricks. It is the same old “divide and conquer” strategem employed over the years to split and weaken the opposition camp.
Opposition politicians who give the PAP a “passing grade”, defend its laws as “fair and just” and express their pride in voting for them in previous elections are “constructive opposition” to be given a positive spin by the state media to increase support for them amongst unsuspecting opposition supporters.
Read rest of article here:
http://wayangparty.com/?p=5662
