- Joined
- Sep 9, 2011
- Messages
- 7,813
- Points
- 0
I am not referring to the unruly behaviour in parliament. I am referring to noraml citizens speaking out against bad govt policies.
Looka t the 15 yr old youth who challenged HK's Chief Executive, Leung CY, abt his proposed National Education for HK schools. Leung finally backed down. Contrast it with Reuben against TCH. The Principal and his parents saw it fit to force Reuben to apologise.
Which system, HK's or SG's, prepares our youths better for the future?
The fact that Reuben stood up one to one against the TCH showed that his education has not failed him. What the Principal did, being a civil servant concerned for his job, and Minister's view of the whole affair have nothing to do with education system. It has everything to do with the political system, including the parents' reaction. It was the outcome of a major mass
resignation of MPs in the early days, an unchecked passing of an amendment to allow GRC that secures total domination of the ruling party even now and the voluntary surrender of a certain Dr who could have given twenty years of parliamentary debates on contentious issues.
Singapore school children cannot do what the HK student did not because of the education system but because of the political system that bans illegal assembly. The true nature of the children's education can be seen when students react in internationally acclaimed universities of the world.
Singapore students tend to get themselves involved in large group social activities, while HK students would go out on individual pursuits. I do not know which is better. For the community as a whole or for the individual?