Singapore shows who's the boss

[boywonder86]

I've only one thing to say...

VOTE FOR THEM SOME MORE!!!

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

What about all the first world developed liberal democracies in North America, Europe and the Antipodes?

Look at Iraq..remove the leader and CHAOS!
Look at Singapore's formative years....people complain that PAP restricts them but there is a need to prevent people from running around like headless chickens without direction
Look at Philippines....a closest ally of US democratic style. A flop of leaders one after another while the country lay in ruins

 

[zack123]

Every country has the right to decide on the desirable elements or the leeway that is given to acts which run a thin line of the domestic law. That is sovereignity.

In this case allowing these Myanmese ravellers to roam the streets to protest against the military junta does not serve the country's interest very much. Similarly any Tibetans who wish to protest against China will be booted out before they can even draw up the 1st placard.

As for the WTO, PETA incidents, these are all mock up protests which targets not individual countries and had been used to the govt's benefit as a showcase to the rest of the world.

The historical success of liberal democracies amongst NA, Eur and the Antipodes is showing signs of cracks if implemented wholly in current times.

Times are changing and the democratical process and institutions should move in tandem with the dynamism of today's world.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Please elaborate on these "cracks".

As for "move in tandem", "move" to what? Benign Authoritarianism?

The historical success of liberal democracies amongst NA, Eur and the Antipodes is showing signs of cracks if implemented wholly in current times.

Times are changing and the democratical process and institutions should move in tandem with the dynamism of today's world.

 

[zack123]

Not all countries are suited to the implementation of pure liberal democracies and neither the idea of authotarianism would fit in today's context. A mixed political philosophy must be adopted to fit with the changing needs of society. As leaders who are voted for the country, several policies which may deem harsh have to be adopted for the betterment of the society. However on the part of the elected leaders, proper explanation have to be done outlining to the citizens on the need for such policies. Definitely it would not be accepted wholly by the demographics but if the vision brings about the positive outcome which is not against the moral values and judgement of the citizens, then it is the duty of the leaders to push forward the plan as a responsible elected leader of the citizens.

Popular policies is the easiest way out but implementing tough policies would differentiate the good leaders.

 

[scroobal]

We're on a slippery slope. What next? Would we allow Tibetans to demonstrate against China here? You think our leaders would allow it? Nope becoz we know China is the powerhouse and dont like others to meddle with their affairs.

So let's be consistent here.

I think what the guys are saying is to carry out actions based on principles. If you throw out the students, then do not entertain or allow their dictators and their relatives to enjoy amenities of Singapore. Its a despicable regime by all accounts.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Your reply appears to be neither here no there. You appear to want to have your cake and eat it. The critical issue appears to be this: Can a State/Society become a successful first world developed State/Society on a sustainable long term basis based on a model not in line with the liberal democracy model(the general main points)? The jury appears to be still out on this one.

Not all countries are suited to the implementation of pure liberal democracies and neither the idea of authotarianism would fit in today's context. A mixed political philosophy must be adopted to fit with the changing needs of society..

 

[zack123]

Your reply appears to be neither here no there. You appear to want to have your cake and eat it. The critical issue appears to be this: Can a State/Society become a successful first world developed State/Society on a sustainable long term basis based on a model not in line with the liberal democracy model(the general main points)? The jury appears to be still out on this one.

The current batch of First World socities are dominated by liberal democracies. However it must be noted that they have the early advantage.

Other nations which attempts to join the ranks will find it difficult. Reason - the economic and political manoeuverings. This will ensue that leaders can propel their citizens towards the desired goals/targets.

Examples
Singapore - almost a first world state
China, UAE - up and coming (arguable, yes)

But we have also to highlight those who adopt liberal democracy and failed and per earlier thread.

 

[manlovesbeef]

>>>>>People like this only waste the time of law enforcers who needs to monitor them. Dats why you have all these mistakes done by the Home Team like MSK incident cos they got too many people to monitor with too few resources. You don't need another burden. Just throw them out of the country<<<<

wah piang eh...i read your exchanges with the others...you are a damn pragmatic person...but times like this, we really ought to be practical and not let emotions sway us....so kinda agree with you...but also kinda pity those Myanmarese...but like you say, we gotta be consistent or next Tibetans, Serbs, Tamil Eeelam and what not all wanna protest and kpkb here, and when emotions run high, and if there is a manipulator behind....you really dunno if a "peaceful" protest will suddenly go haywire