The future of Singapore's Opposition

[kakowi]

I did look around.

And the fence sitters are the most important. Those who already made up their minds need not be in the equation.

 

[kakowi]

Oh, if only WP and SDP can work together on a common platform - this common platform concept can be a success

 

[myjohnson]

Have you not taken into account the ego aspect of the leadership in different camps in your equation?

 

[popdod]

Let me consolidate my contributions so far and leave it to the leaders for their consideration:

(1) avoid the name "opposition". It is a reactive term. And all it tells the people is that you are an opposer. Which means you are anti-something. Which means people will view you with reservation. Someone bandied the name 'Opposition Front'. That name is extremely negative sounding. It is far better to position yourself as a viable, independent, responsible party that is for the people; than to position yourself as opposing something

(2) create a single party or platform: it makes it easier for voters to identify with you

(3) teach the voters the value of their single vote; their vote, their choices, their consequences

(4) do not be pro-human-rights, pro-opposition, etc BUT be pro-voters: they are the ones who will get you into Parliament

(5) do not get tied up with policy debates simply because you do not have access to the full data to argue intelligently

(6) create a JBJ Foundation to engage economists to do independent research and sponsor post-doctoral projects. There are 33% singaporeans who do not mind contributing a cup of coffee each year to the memory of JBJ. Then when you talk to voters you talk authoritatively

(7) as working suggestions for the harmony of opposition parties: consider letting SDP supporters help around your WP ward so that they can gain expertise in running a constituency; consider having WP supporters helping SDA to help Chiam See Tong over the next two years; There is no point sitting in a table discussing cooperation when you can actually practice it

(8) create a simple slogan and a catchy tagline and keep on promoting this for the next two years

At least it is hoped that the two opposition leaders will consider these 8 points. If they choose to reject it as impractical then at least they have better alternatives.

At the end of the day, it is hoped that they will offer a viable alternative to the voters.

And I would like to conclude to the opposition: it is also your choice to choose if you want to work together and you reap the consequences of your own choice: for better or for worse

That is all.

Well said.
This is the most important aspect i would like to see as a voter.

If i see opposition parties hantam one another....i can't see why i should vote them when they don't see the big picture ahead.


:p :o :p

 

[The_Latest_H]

Have you not taken into account the ego aspect of the leadership in different camps in your equation?

Sometimes people cannot see the forest, only the tree. And that's the issue here: the narrow, tight focus on things that simply doesn't deserve as much attention as winning, and winning together.

We should learn from our neighbours up north.

 

[myjohnson]

That's the pleasant thought that allows LKY to blissfully fall into sleep every night.

 

[myfoot123]

We must remember pap always recited slogan: "NEVER SAY DIE", "SINGAPOREAN CAN DO ATITUDE".

"OPPOSITION NEVER SAY DIE, WHEN ALL UNITE HANDS IN HANDS WE CAN ACHIEVE, WE CAN ACHIEVE!!!"

 

[angry_one]

To me the SDP is the party that has gotten matters right, but there aren't many enlightened sinkees who believe in their strategy. 20-30 percent at most.

The WP is just a 2nd PAP, and i reckon a lot of PAP MPs may migrate there after LKY dies. The PAP may even change its name because it's just associated with corruption and failure now.

 

[silverfox@]

A new political neutral party would have the best hopes of toppling PAP's stranglehold.

Why do I say this?

Because the opposition has created a very bad repu for themselves by creating agendas for the sake of creating it. They got their inspiration and style of doing that by looking at how other countries political movements were. However that is not the way. The people in singapore are not keen on all those personal agendas or how much shit the opposition is digging out or how much shit they are creating.

They are only interested in what can this new political party do for the people. People have the wrong impression that talented people are needed. It's wrong. It's not how talented the person is but how much is he willing to step up and do for the folks.

A new political neutral party which doesn't stand on the side of the opposition neither on PAP side. Not all of PAP's policies are bad, not all opposition ideas are good. Support the good ideas and oppose the bad ones, regardless of the flag of the political party. Time will let people be convinced of the party's intentions. 10 years, the 2nd election period will be the one where people will be convinced on how that party can serve the people.

I go rallies and most of the time I am convinced that opposition just used their displeasure at the PAP to bring their point across. That is personal. A great insight, a great entertainment every 5 years, but that's about it. It can't convince me on how a person who has so much personal agenda be able to serve the people.

Solving issues on hand is the most important and seriously the opposition can't do that.
To set up a political party, one doesn't need to be talented. The heart to serve must be there 1st thing. 2nd thing, he must be well-to-do. Because no money how to survive, and serve the people wholeheartedly with no worries?

 

[jw5]

A new political neutral party would have the best hopes of toppling PAP's stranglehold.

Why do I say this?

Because the opposition has created a very bad repu for themselves by creating agendas for the sake of creating it. They got their inspiration and style of doing that by looking at how other countries political movements were. However that is not the way. The people in singapore are not keen on all those personal agendas or how much shit the opposition is digging out or how much shit they are creating.

They are only interested in what can this new political party do for the people. People have the wrong impression that talented people are needed. It's wrong. It's not how talented the person is but how much is he willing to step up and do for the folks.

A new political neutral party which doesn't stand on the side of the opposition neither on PAP side. Not all of PAP's policies are bad, not all opposition ideas are good. Support the good ideas and oppose the bad ones, regardless of the flag of the political party. Time will let people be convinced of the party's intentions. 10 years, the 2nd election period will be the one where people will be convinced on how that party can serve the people.

I go rallies and most of the time I am convinced that opposition just used their displeasure at the PAP to bring their point across. That is personal. A great insight, a great entertainment every 5 years, but that's about it. It can't convince me on how a person who has so much personal agenda be able to serve the people.

Solving issues on hand is the most important and seriously the opposition can't do that.
To set up a political party, one doesn't need to be talented. The heart to serve must be there 1st thing. 2nd thing, he must be well-to-do. Because no money how to survive, and serve the people wholeheartedly with no worries?

Where are the capable people who are willing to serve who will form the neutral political party?
Do such people even exist?

 

[silverfox@]

Where are the capable people who are willing to serve who will form the neutral political party?
Do such people even exist?

Such people do exist. But we must understand that these people also have their families to feed. So why i said these people must be at least well-to-do. At least their family have something to fall back on and they can then serve the people whole-heartedly. People who are sincere may not be talented people, but they have the sincerity to serve. This kind of actions, the people will have eyes to see.
Ma Ying Jeou took a very long while to rise from Mayor all the way to President of Taiwan. That time period was for serving the people and garnering support.

The notion should be serving the people whole-heartedly. Not some opposition slogan, bring down the govt, or whatsoever.

That is why PAP got 66.6% not because they are very good, its because opposition is not credible. If PAP increases its percentage to >66.6% next election, it doesn't mean they have improved. It just proves that the opponents are getting lousier

 

[popdod]

The notion should be serving the people whole-heartedly.
Not some opposition slogan, bring down the govt, or whatsoever.

Indeed.
By claiming to crush the govt....it only shows personal agenda without any constructive ideas or done anything good for the country.

Why would ppl wanna vote for any party that brings instability to the country?
Doesn't make sense at all.

:p :p

 

[kakowi]

A new neutral political party?

(1) That is the hopes of the current day for voters who are disillusioned by the actual and reported behaviour of the SDP. As well as the incessant quarrels amongst the opposition parties.

Thus it is the hope of voters that a neutral political party is in place.

(2) But political parties are never neutral. All claim to serve the people wholeheartedly. Neutral to the PAP and opposition is simply another word for pro-themselves. This is a fact worth keeping in mind at all times.

(3) It is not beyond a theoretical possibility for any ruling party to sponsor a neutral-political-party as a fifth column.

Why is this so? Especially if it has moved to the right and a gap is formed in the area of neutrality. Especially if more fence sitters are ready to put an X in favour of another party. Especially if there are international attention focused on the ruling party.

(4) The WP is quite 'neutral'. Since 1971, it always have the intention to work within the system, to bring about changes in the system. Today, it has not been able to communicate that position to the public - it is meant for the people

(5) Slogans are useful and very important in the climate where they are not even allowed to wear certain t-shirts, distribute flyers. How else are they to communicate their stand in as few words as possible? Thus taking "Tak Boleh Tahan" as an example. It is catchy, summarized the feelings of a number of people. It is rather the way it is expressed that is the problem - that of civil disobedience. The slogan is good but as a rallying call to civil disobedience, no government will tolerate it. If it is a rallying call to voters to re-examine their position, it becomes something that is more acceptable.

(6) a neutral opposition party will only fight with other opposition parties, cannabalizing each other. All parties so far operate to the left of the PAP. None operate to the right.

And in time to come, the neutral party will split because one becomes more neutral than the other.

(7) Most importantly of all, what is the value of an opposition party to the voters?

Its value comes from its check-and-balance to the ruling party.

To do that, the party must be truly neutral and not ruling-party-sponsored.

How will voters know that? Because the newspapers and media say they are so? Because they give voice to both PAP and SDP policies? A ruling-party-sponsored-opposition-party will not say good things about the SDP if it will further their cause?

The safest bet is to work within the existing parties, namely WP and SDP.

BUT because more voters today are disillusioned with the PAP, WP and SDP, the emergence of a neutral political party will decimate WP and SDP. Which may not be a bad thing if they are truly neutral. Which is a very bad thing if they are only outwardly neutral.

 

[silverfox@]

A new neutral political party?

(1) That is the hopes of the current day for voters who are disillusioned by the actual and reported behaviour of the SDP. As well as the incessant quarrels amongst the opposition parties.

Thus it is the hope of voters that a neutral political party is in place.

(2) But political parties are never neutral. All claim to serve the people wholeheartedly. Neutral to the PAP and opposition is simply another word for pro-themselves. This is a fact worth keeping in mind at all times.

The safest bet is to work within the existing parties, namely WP and SDP.

BUT because more voters today are disillusioned with the PAP, WP and SDP, the emergence of a neutral political party will decimate WP and SDP. Which may not be a bad thing if they are truly neutral. Which is a very bad thing if they are only outwardly neutral.

There are people who are not happy with PAP, various reasons. Some say PAP serve the people, give benefits but take it back via other means.

There are people who are not happy with SDP, various reasons. Most notably their ability to hold truth to what they say, and their personal agenda against the government.

There are people who are not happy with WP, various reasons. What can this party achieve, or what is this party trying to achieve and what have they done?

With the current political situation in singapore, it is no longer a good thing to work within the existing parties or have any old stalwarts coming out to form a new political party. A new person/people forming a new party, starting out via grassroots (I don't mean PAP grassroots) knowing the people, hearing what are their concerns.

I still re-iterate the fact that this new party must be well-to-do. Because for a start, a lot of stuff that they wish to do for the people, the money will not come from the government. They have to do it through their own means and then will personal donations come in with support.
The party does not have to be formed with many people. 1 person with his ideals can perform. He does not need to be a govt scholar, but someone where the people can relate to and trust. From then if his party wants to grow bigger, he will have to get people who think like him. Not people who join him because they want to use him or his party to bring down the government. That is why this man must be able to discern the main objective of his party. If for a start he does not get this objective right, the opposition parties will stick close with him as an ally and the PAP will just think of this party as another troublemaker.

PAP never thought of WP, SDP as a threat. Not because PAP is complacent, but because these parties I think they are not able to work towards what the people really wants. They have been hearing the people, but have they done anything besides arguing for the sake of arguing?

I rather they spend the effort arguing to do something really concrete. By then, no matter how much PAP badmouths, the people have eyes to see.

When one is able, only then will it be a magnet attracting the right people in joining.

It's just like Romance of 3 Kingdoms. What kind of a ruler you are, will attract what kind of talents. :p

As of now, I have only talked about what a new party should do. I will not talk about how this new party is going to shave percentages off PAP's market share. Because I just feel, success of a new party depends entirely on what they have done. Not what they are going to do.

There are just too many empty promises going around.

 

[NissanViP]

What important now is to bring down merciless and inhumanity LKY Government.

Lets stop disputing which opposition is better.

I suspect there is someone is trying to stir the confusion, misleading and diverting singaporean mindset.

This is our singaporeans weakness that give away to the LKY goverment advantage to brainwashed.

Are we going to be slave and feed government with millions salary and let them betray us in our own home?

Can you people please think about it!!!

Thank you.

 

[kakowi]

Silverfox, I am not disagreeing with you.

Rather I am saying that there is a value to the opposition party, which transcend neutrality. And that is to provide a check against the ruling party. It does not have to be a militant check. It does not have to disagree with the PAP on everything.

An independent check is fine.

Now, the question is if a party is made of PAP, WP, NSP, SDP members, giving a moderate viewpoint, is that a neutral opposition party.

Many feel it is.

I would say, perhaps it is, perhaps it is not. Because its true value lies in its independence. And unfortunately for such a party, it is not able to be gauged.

As for percentage points shaved off the PAP or opposition, it is not possible to assess. All that is certain is that it will cannablize and if effective, certainly diminish the existing opposition parties.

Therefore a desire for a neutral opposition party carries multi-facet considerations. You ignore it at the expense of the thoroughness of your analysis.

I do not know what this is supposed to imply: but I think I will try it here to see how it feels.