Netizens should focus on the 1990s, not the 1960s

[zhihau]

it seems that either they are unaware of that recent history or they do not wish to learn anything from it.

Got a feeling it's the former :o:o:o

 

[TwitSeng]

Ppl rmb life during 1960s, good life that time

 

[PoliticalDialogue]

Unless PAP splits, dont think this scenario is possible in our context. Voters who will support party 3 are those who have likely fallen through the cracks of 2-party politics and they are usually the minority of minority. Hence I don't think there is much room for Multi party system other than a 2 party system here.

A possible split in the PAP, which has been mentioned a few times by other people, seems quite unlikely to me. Because Tan Cheng Bock said some PAP grassroot people indicated that they had supported him during the presidential election, others think that a split in the PAP is a real possibility. In the power dynamics, PAP grassroot activists are unimportant and irrelevant. The attitude of the grassroots is not central to what happens within the PAP. The structure within the party that either shows unity or fissures is the CEC and the mass of cadres. Members who have been inducted as cadres have been done so for their political loyalty more than anything else. Thus far, no-one has been able to point to any ordinary cadres, let alone CEC members, who have said or written anything that is a divergence from the party line. If, however, a significant number of seats are won by WP at the next GE, then it is likely a major debate will occur within the PAP and this could include the possibility of alternative leadership.

 

[zhihau]

A possible split in the PAP, which has been mentioned a few times by other people, seems quite unlikely to me.

其疾如风,其徐如林,侵掠如火,不动如山,难知如阴,动如雷震。
这世道上还有谁讲道義？道義早已放两旁，利字摆中间。

 

[tanwahp]

A possible split in the PAP, which has been mentioned a few times by other people, seems quite unlikely to me. Because Tan Cheng Bock said some PAP grassroot people indicated that they had supported him during the presidential election, others think that a split in the PAP is a real possibility. In the power dynamics, PAP grassroot activists are unimportant and irrelevant. The attitude of the grassroots is not central to what happens within the PAP. The structure within the party that either shows unity or fissures is the CEC and the mass of cadres. Members who have been inducted as cadres have been done so for their political loyalty more than anything else. Thus far, no-one has been able to point to any ordinary cadres, let alone CEC members, who have said or written anything that is a divergence from the party line.

Actually, most one-party regimes do not transit to multi-party culture by splits.

In Japan, LDP's dominance was reduced by DPJ which was not a split from LDP.

In India, Congress's dominance was reduced by BJP which was not a split from Congress.

In Malaysia, BN's dominance was reduced by Pakatan which was not a split from BN except maybe a small part. PKR took in many members from UMNO and MCA.

In Cambodia, Funcinpec's dominance was reduced by CPP which became dominant and was reduced by CNRP, all which were not splits.

In fact, most splits of the major party did not succeed.

In Singapore, Barisan split from PAP but did not manage to unseat it.

In Malaysia, S46 split from UMNO but did not manage to unseat it.

In Japan, Japan Renewal Party split from LDP but did not manage to unseat it.

 

[zhihau]

Political Dialogue mentioned that a split within the current ranks isn't likely, nothing mentioned about the splinter group unseating the incumbent.

 

[PoliticalDialogue]

Actually, most one-party regimes do not transit to multi-party culture by splits.

In Japan, LDP's dominance was reduced by DPJ which was not a split from LDP.

In India, Congress's dominance was reduced by BJP which was not a split from Congress.

In Malaysia, BN's dominance was reduced by Pakatan which was not a split from BN except maybe a small part. PKR took in many members from UMNO and MCA.

In Cambodia, Funcinpec's dominance was reduced by CPP which became dominant and was reduced by CNRP, all which were not splits.

In fact, most splits of the major party did not succeed.

In Singapore, Barisan split from PAP but did not manage to unseat it.

In Malaysia, S46 split from UMNO but did not manage to unseat it.

In Japan, Japan Renewal Party split from LDP but did not manage to unseat it.

Political Dialogue mentioned that a split within the current ranks isn't likely, nothing mentioned about the splinter group unseating the incumbent.

It is very difficult to see any split within the PAP or even the emergence of a splinter group (which really is the same thing). It is unfortunate that Dr Tan Cheng Bock (whom I respect) made the mistake of mentioning just after the Aug 2011 PE that some PAP grassroots had supported him and not Tony Tan. People automatically saw that as somehow suggesting that there is a split within the PAP. As I mentioned already, grassroots people are really not relevant in the PAP's power dynamics. Only the PAP's CEC and its mass of cadre members count. So far, there isn't even a whisper within those ranks of disagreement with the leadership. This is really telling given that today we have multiple channels -- including social media -- for such whispers to get around.

Also, I think many people missed a very important development since GE2011: loyalists have taken the helm of many Establishment organisations/institutions since GE2011. It is a bit surprising that this development has gone pretty much unnoticed.

 

[tanwahp]

Political Dialogue mentioned that a split within the current ranks isn't likely, nothing mentioned about the splinter group unseating the incumbent.

Yes but there is no point launching a 50-50 split when you can't unseat the incumbent. Many split factions split for this purpose and tends to become demoralized when they can't do so. Like S46, which started strong but watered down like crazy after 2 elections.

 

[tanwahp]

It is very difficult to see any split within the PAP or even the emergence of a splinter group (which really is the same thing). It is unfortunate that Dr Tan Cheng Bock (whom I respect) made the mistake of mentioning just after the Aug 2011 PE that some PAP grassroots had supported him and not Tony Tan. People automatically saw that as somehow suggesting that there is a split within the PAP. As I mentioned already, grassroots people are really not relevant in the PAP's power dynamics. Only the PAP's CEC and its mass of cadre members count. So far, there isn't even a whisper within those ranks of disagreement with the leadership. This is really telling given that today we have multiple channels -- including social media -- for such whispers to get around.

Also, I think many people missed a very important development since GE2011: loyalists have taken the helm of many Establishment organisations/institutions since GE2011. It is a bit surprising that this development has gone pretty much unnoticed.

Splits are not possible but you can have splinters. In fact, splinters have occurred. Tan Cheng Bock and his loyalists are one. The Singaporeans First is also one. Although they are very small splinters, no one defines splinters by a certain size.

 

[zhihau]

loyalists have taken the helm of many Establishment organisations/institutions since GE2011.

So that's loyalty to party or loyalty to money, aye?

 

[zhihau]

Yes but there is no point launching a 50-50 split when you can't unseat the incumbent.

Say, a split to deny the core group a 2/3 majority?

 

[PoliticalDialogue]

Splits are not possible but you can have splinters. In fact, splinters have occurred. Tan Cheng Bock and his loyalists are one. The Singaporeans First is also one. Although they are very small splinters, no one defines splinters by a certain size.

If you are saying splinter in terms of a couple of Establishment personalities stepping forward and standing as opposition candidates, then, yes, I can see that happening. However, that is unlikely to trouble the PAP; they would view it as simply a pin-prick. It would not constitute a serious threat. On the other hand, if a dozen weighty Establishment personalities stood forward as opposition candidates then that would be an entirely different matter. Although that is possible, I would not rate highly the likelihood of it happening.