朱元璋以一生不懈的努力与决心，成功地推翻了蒙古元朝，造就了一个新的朝代，汉族明朝。谁会想到，一个出身在贫穷的农户里，后来年幼父母双亡，为了求生到寺庙里当和尚的年轻人，能几经人间炼狱的考验，终于登上了一国九五之尊的最高地位。
当上了皇帝后，他推行了一系列有效的治国方针 ，使生活在水深火热的人民有了安居乐业的希望。这时，国家开始繁荣昌盛，人们在安定的社会里生活，开始对未来有了梦想与希望。
这时的朱元璋呢？他又开始烦恼了。他开始担心如何能维持他辛辛苦苦所得到的江山。他不是一个容易相信别人的君主。在他的眼里，他只能相信与他有血缘关系的亲人。他把兵权都分配了给自己的几个儿子，封他们为藩王，把他们分配到各地去镇守重镇与边疆，以保全朱家的天下。为了确保他的后代能世世代代，稳稳地 坐在龙椅上，他开始“清除”那些他觉得会对子孙不利的能臣与勇将。杀的杀，贬的贬。他精心地计划着，为了就是能为他的子子孙孙铺平道路，安安稳稳地做他们的皇帝。
但历史证明，他打的是如意算盘。太子朱标不幸去世后，他把皇位传给了朱标的大儿子，朱允炆。明朝的第二位皇帝登基后，在他身边谋臣的劝说下，开始“削藩”，把对他皇位构成威胁的“叔叔”们，一一地铲除。可是，他打的也是如意算盘。后来，他一心想灭的燕王，朱棣，反而以靖难之役的名义，把自己的皇位给夺了过去。而朱允炆在朱棣成功地攻进京城时，放火焚烧了宫殿，以身殉国。他的生死也因为找不到他的尸首而成了千古之迷。
这一切的发展，我看是朱元璋所料不到的。他处心积虑地谋略，以为他所布置的一切能万无一失。可是他万万没想到他的子孙会这么快的为了争夺皇位而自相残杀。
说到这里，我感触良多。所谓的创业难，守业更难。一个人有能力控制的，就只能局限在自己掌权或还活着时所能做的一切。在自己放权或撒手归西之后，你的子孙们怎样去“发扬” 或 “糟蹋” 你所留下来的事业，就得靠他们自己的造化了。朱元璋的顾虑是出致于他对人民与家人的爱护与关怀，希望他们能在他死后继续地安居乐业。可是，后来局势的变化是他不能了解与控制的。
从另一个角度来看，把事业托付给子孙，给他们完全的权力去管理事业也何尝不是一个能让他们磨练的好机会。遇到危机的时候，他们得理智地做出判断去化解种种的问题。经过现实生活的各种亲身考验后，才能领悟到守业的艰辛，这何尝也不是为他们上了宝贵的一课。朱允炆，登上皇位时，只不过是一个二十来岁的年青小伙子。他缺乏的，正是他叔叔，朱棣经过连年战乱里所累积的宝贵“社会”经验。在这场争夺皇位的斗争中，他彻底地输掉了自己所拥有的一切。相反的，朱棣在这场斗争中，以自己的能力争取了自己一向来，觉得属于自己的东西，大明的皇位。历史也证明了，他也其实是一位好皇帝，为人民开拓了“永乐盛世”，以不屈不饶的精神，一生为人民贡献。他对待对手的残酷，在这里我就不多说了。
还有，在社会迅速地发展与价值观不断的演变下，新的一代所追求的目标与上一代所拥有的成果，也有可能是不一样的。因时势的转变而对一向处理事务的方针做出适当的调整是必要的。尤其是现在，在这科技与通讯发达的社会里，一切都讲究做事要快而准的办事效率。如果一味地以“小心驶得万年船”的态度去处理事务的话，那就极有可能会错失许多良机。朱棣，永乐年间，派了郑和下西洋，为了就是开拓明朝帝国的海域，对外进行贸易与文化交流。在当时，这样做其实是违反了明朝始祖，朱元璋不对外开放的政策。当时的文武百官，大多都反对他的决定。可是，在朱棣眼里，要使大明繁荣昌盛，这样做是必要的。历史也证明了他英明独断的理国之道，是正确的。当他决定把大都从南京迁移到北京时也遭受到了大臣们的极力反对。可是，他还是一意孤行，完成了把大都建立在北京的愿望。历史又证明了他精明果断的决定，为中国人民留下了一座千古不朽的历史古迹，北京故宫。如果朱棣，墨守成规，一味的按照祖训治理国家，那我们还能看到在永乐年间所创造的盛势吗？
当朱棣，巩固了大明的江山，把大明推到了前所未有的光辉时代时，他也这时开始烦恼了。烦恼什么呢？和他父皇，朱元璋一样，他开始烦恼大明是否能继续繁荣地发展下去，他的子孙能否安稳地保住朱家的江山。大家的老毛病又犯了！这也其实是无可厚非的。要了解到，一个人一生所拼出来的事业，无疑地，也希望能把它顺利地交给子孙，为下一代做出一点贡献。可是，朱元璋与朱棣再英明神武也料不到将来会发生什么事。做了再多的防备，也只不过是权宜之计罢了，不能完全抵制将来的种种变数。
在这浩瀚的宇宙里，一个人的存在是多么的渺小，一个人能改变未来的能力是有限的，一个人的一生只是昙花一现罢了。尽力去做自己得做的事，求个问心无愧就足够了。未来会怎么样，就让下一代去担心吧，自己是管不来的！历史其实是最好的见证！
Showing posts with label 政治. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 政治. Show all posts
Monday, May 16, 2011
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
新加坡大选 － 大选的那些事儿 （上）
五月七日。新加坡公民（除了少数不需要投票的人民）将在当天，投下神圣的一票，投选他们所支持的政党或议员。在此我不禁地想了想，如果人民拥有实际的权力去决定治理国家的领导班底，比起以往或现在的一些国家，新加坡人民可算是幸运的了。
从古至今，被外来的侵略者攻占而被强行统治的例子比比皆是，如宋朝被外来的蒙古族所灭，新加坡在二战被日本占领等例子。人民在强权的威迫下，只好战战兢兢地过日子， 哪里还谈得上有权力去“投选政府“。近期也有以独裁统治而陷人民于水深火热的统治者。如北朝鲜，缅甸等例子。在一人，军人或一党的独裁统治下，人民实际上是没有权力可言的。能在险中求存，已经是一件艰难的事了，哪里还谈得上有权力去投票选政府呢？
所以说，在我们手里的一票，是象征着大多数人所向往的，民主自由的权力。在投神圣的一票时，要深思熟虑，不要把投票当儿戏或一件理所当然的事来看待。如果你草率地对待大选，那你可对不起了为民主自由而牺牲的人呀！其实，话说得太重了。选错了，你只好再憋多五年，才能选你后悔没投选的政党吧！
以上的开场白，只是要提醒大家，大选的重要性。上几届，这一届或下一届，统统都重要！一个国家的兴衰，往往与她政治体系的演变，有着直接的厉害关系。选了没能力的政党，人民辛辛苦苦，以血泪建立起来的家园，有可能在短时间内被毁于一旦。拿津巴布韦（Zimbawe)为例子， 2000年开始，津巴布韦政府以白人所持有的土地是在殖民地时代从黑人原住民手中非法取得为理由，进行土地改革，强制性地没收大部分白人拥有的土地。此举造成境内大量白种农人出走，经济陷入混乱，通货膨胀率节节上升。这个本来能自给自足的非洲富裕国家，在短短的几年内变成了世界“数一数二”的贫穷国家。可怕吧！
话又说回来，新加坡能有今天的成就，不仅归功于英明，廉正的执政党，还得归功于人民。人民是国家的根本，国家最大的财富。所以说，慎重地对待，考量“民心”与“民意”也是一个成功的政府所不能忽视的重要环节。俗语说，顺民心合民意者昌,丢民心逆民意者亡。接下来，谈到了本文的重点。
现任的新加坡执政政府，到底有没有不听民意之嫌，而失去了广大人民的支持呢？
在这次大选之际，在我或大多数新加坡人脑海里都不免有着一些百思不解的“困惑”，包括以上谈到的问题。刚好，我前两天读了《明朝那些事儿》，就决定以在明朝统治期间所发生的一些事迹，尝试以对比的方式来讨论眼下的这些”困惑“。
1）执政人民行动党的新候选人，尤其是那些被党安排在”垂手可得“的集选区内的候选人，大多是从国家的各个政府部门调配来参选的人才。他们都是在各自的工作领域里，发挥了他们的才能，而得到政府的垂青，给了他们贡献回社会的机会，被分配到各个选区或集选区参选。从每个角度看来，这些候选人似乎都是出类拔萃的人选，个个都是某某鼎鼎大名的大学毕业生，顶尖的知识份子。但是，重要的问题是，他们有为人民请命，为人民争取福利的决心吗？还是他们只是在党鞭下，一呼百应，顺风行驶的傀儡呢？
科举制度在明朝时代发扬光大，造就了很多的“言官”。顾名思义，就是那些常把四书五经，伦理道德放在嘴边的“说话”的官。朱元璋建国年初，设立了“都察院”。掌管都察院的官员为左右都御史。这些人的权力极大，见到他们觉得有违法纪的事情，他们都有权力阻止或反对。就连皇上老子他们也不放过，有权力劝阻皇上做任何事。转眼回到现实，我们的议员有这种胆识来监管政府的政策吗？在国会里各持己见，对自己觉得不合理的事而掏出胸怀，辩论到底呢？难。如果你恼怒了皇上老子，后果你可想而知了。
继续再谈这些饱读诗书，出口成章的“言官”。既然他们那么博学渊源，那他们所提出的意见，是一定能实践的方案吗？他们大多也是些不识大体，不识时务，认死理去干的书呆子。他们往往也都缺乏了在社会基层里实际办事的经验。其实单靠知识与学识来办事是不行的。我们有这种缺乏某种现实经验而只会纸上谈兵的议员或部长吗？你们还记得在春秋战国时代，赵括纸上谈兵的故事吧。因他的无能与对实战愚昧的看待，赵军被秦军一举歼灭，数十万赵军也被秦军活埋了。如果一个政府部门实行了错误的政策，影响的不止是现在的社会与人民。这些政策的影响力也极有可能会影响到下一代。还记得新加坡当年实行的”两个就好“的生育政策吧！这个政策的失误给广大人民带来了难以估计的负面影响。
2）执政的人民行动党，一向都强调，一个有效率的政府，不需要反对党在国会里有太多的影响力来抗衡执政党。他们也认为反对党事实上，只是为了反对而反对执政党在国会里所讨论的论点，没有具体的方针或计划来治理好国家。还有，执政党对待人民的方式，在某种程度上，也有不听取民意之嫌。他们一贯的作风就是：”我决定的事，说了就算，一定是对你好的。你不用再多说，听我的就对了。“ 这样的观点，我可大大地不认同。
朱元璋在洪武十三年间废除了丞相，这个一人之下，万人之上的职位。以朱元璋一意孤行的性格，丞相对他来说是一个让他需要花无谓的时间来解释他所做的每一个决定的绊脚石。明朝最后一个贪赃枉法的丞相，胡惟庸就成了他开刀的对象。在某种程度上，朱元璋这样做，巩固了皇帝在朝廷里的权力。可是，以历史为见证，丞相这个职位是必要的。治理好一个国家是一件谈何容易的事。一个统治者，日理万机，要好好地治理庞大的国家，也一定需要有能力的帮手。皇帝老子也有一时昏庸的时候，丞相也往往能在必要时，提醒提醒一下皇上，以免他铸成大错。俗语说，良药苦口利于病，忠言逆耳利于行。其实呀，有时有些反对的”杂声“是必要的。
3）大家都为部长的“俸禄”而大作文章。在一项非官方的调查中，新加坡的总统，总理，部长等的薪金在世界排名，名类前茅。而人民行动党，一贯的解释就是，以高薪才能吸引到在私人领域中成功创业的人才来到政府部门做部长，为人民服务。这解释你接受吗？我可不觉得，不一味地接受这种说法。一个有抱负，要为民请命的好官，真的会为了俸禄的多少，而量”禄“而为吗？
话说明朝最有名的清官，海瑞，一生爱民如子，甘心奉献他的一生，不辞劳苦地为人民请命。他从不计较朝廷给他的俸禄有多少，也往往把他的私人财物用来救济那些更需要帮助的穷苦人民。海瑞这位从不贪图荣华富贵，一心只为人民的好官，死后身上也没有任何值钱的东西。他一直以来家徒四壁，更难以置信的是，家里人连为他办丧事，买棺材的钱也没有，真让人心寒。
请不要误会，我举海瑞这个例子，不是希望咋们的部长们也都两袖清风，不求任何回报地为人民服务。我了解到在现实社会里，要有象海瑞这样生活的清官是不可能的。但我认为议员或部长，就象老师或护士一样，都是神圣的工作。这些肩负神圣使命的工作者，秉持的主要宗旨往往就是为他人服务而不把薪金的高低列为考虑的主要因素。如果我们只能以高薪来吸引“人才”为人民服务的话，那我们的社会里就存在着一颗随时会爆炸的计时炸弹了。新加坡人民全都那么肤浅吗？新加坡真的没有肯为人民服务而做出种种牺牲的”圣人“吗？在这里你有没有想到人民党的詹时中先生呢？他不辞劳苦地在波东巴西社区里为人民服务。在资源限制的情况下，他含辛茹苦地波东巴西治理得井井有条。为什么有资源限制这点，我也不必多说了，大家心知肚明了！人民要的，就是这种不畏惧强权，不怕困难而坚持自己的信念，一生为民请命的好官，好议员！
写到这里，心里还有一些与大选相关的事宜想写出来。再过一天就是投票日了，不写就来不及了。可是，现在就是太累了，心有余而力不足。有可能大选成绩公布之后，我再写我的下篇吧！
从古至今，被外来的侵略者攻占而被强行统治的例子比比皆是，如宋朝被外来的蒙古族所灭，新加坡在二战被日本占领等例子。人民在强权的威迫下，只好战战兢兢地过日子， 哪里还谈得上有权力去“投选政府“。近期也有以独裁统治而陷人民于水深火热的统治者。如北朝鲜，缅甸等例子。在一人，军人或一党的独裁统治下，人民实际上是没有权力可言的。能在险中求存，已经是一件艰难的事了，哪里还谈得上有权力去投票选政府呢？
所以说，在我们手里的一票，是象征着大多数人所向往的，民主自由的权力。在投神圣的一票时，要深思熟虑，不要把投票当儿戏或一件理所当然的事来看待。如果你草率地对待大选，那你可对不起了为民主自由而牺牲的人呀！其实，话说得太重了。选错了，你只好再憋多五年，才能选你后悔没投选的政党吧！
以上的开场白，只是要提醒大家，大选的重要性。上几届，这一届或下一届，统统都重要！一个国家的兴衰，往往与她政治体系的演变，有着直接的厉害关系。选了没能力的政党，人民辛辛苦苦，以血泪建立起来的家园，有可能在短时间内被毁于一旦。拿津巴布韦（Zimbawe)为例子， 2000年开始，津巴布韦政府以白人所持有的土地是在殖民地时代从黑人原住民手中非法取得为理由，进行土地改革，强制性地没收大部分白人拥有的土地。此举造成境内大量白种农人出走，经济陷入混乱，通货膨胀率节节上升。这个本来能自给自足的非洲富裕国家，在短短的几年内变成了世界“数一数二”的贫穷国家。可怕吧！
话又说回来，新加坡能有今天的成就，不仅归功于英明，廉正的执政党，还得归功于人民。人民是国家的根本，国家最大的财富。所以说，慎重地对待，考量“民心”与“民意”也是一个成功的政府所不能忽视的重要环节。俗语说，顺民心合民意者昌,丢民心逆民意者亡。接下来，谈到了本文的重点。
现任的新加坡执政政府，到底有没有不听民意之嫌，而失去了广大人民的支持呢？
在这次大选之际，在我或大多数新加坡人脑海里都不免有着一些百思不解的“困惑”，包括以上谈到的问题。刚好，我前两天读了《明朝那些事儿》，就决定以在明朝统治期间所发生的一些事迹，尝试以对比的方式来讨论眼下的这些”困惑“。
1）执政人民行动党的新候选人，尤其是那些被党安排在”垂手可得“的集选区内的候选人，大多是从国家的各个政府部门调配来参选的人才。他们都是在各自的工作领域里，发挥了他们的才能，而得到政府的垂青，给了他们贡献回社会的机会，被分配到各个选区或集选区参选。从每个角度看来，这些候选人似乎都是出类拔萃的人选，个个都是某某鼎鼎大名的大学毕业生，顶尖的知识份子。但是，重要的问题是，他们有为人民请命，为人民争取福利的决心吗？还是他们只是在党鞭下，一呼百应，顺风行驶的傀儡呢？
科举制度在明朝时代发扬光大，造就了很多的“言官”。顾名思义，就是那些常把四书五经，伦理道德放在嘴边的“说话”的官。朱元璋建国年初，设立了“都察院”。掌管都察院的官员为左右都御史。这些人的权力极大，见到他们觉得有违法纪的事情，他们都有权力阻止或反对。就连皇上老子他们也不放过，有权力劝阻皇上做任何事。转眼回到现实，我们的议员有这种胆识来监管政府的政策吗？在国会里各持己见，对自己觉得不合理的事而掏出胸怀，辩论到底呢？难。如果你恼怒了皇上老子，后果你可想而知了。
继续再谈这些饱读诗书，出口成章的“言官”。既然他们那么博学渊源，那他们所提出的意见，是一定能实践的方案吗？他们大多也是些不识大体，不识时务，认死理去干的书呆子。他们往往也都缺乏了在社会基层里实际办事的经验。其实单靠知识与学识来办事是不行的。我们有这种缺乏某种现实经验而只会纸上谈兵的议员或部长吗？你们还记得在春秋战国时代，赵括纸上谈兵的故事吧。因他的无能与对实战愚昧的看待，赵军被秦军一举歼灭，数十万赵军也被秦军活埋了。如果一个政府部门实行了错误的政策，影响的不止是现在的社会与人民。这些政策的影响力也极有可能会影响到下一代。还记得新加坡当年实行的”两个就好“的生育政策吧！这个政策的失误给广大人民带来了难以估计的负面影响。
2）执政的人民行动党，一向都强调，一个有效率的政府，不需要反对党在国会里有太多的影响力来抗衡执政党。他们也认为反对党事实上，只是为了反对而反对执政党在国会里所讨论的论点，没有具体的方针或计划来治理好国家。还有，执政党对待人民的方式，在某种程度上，也有不听取民意之嫌。他们一贯的作风就是：”我决定的事，说了就算，一定是对你好的。你不用再多说，听我的就对了。“ 这样的观点，我可大大地不认同。
朱元璋在洪武十三年间废除了丞相，这个一人之下，万人之上的职位。以朱元璋一意孤行的性格，丞相对他来说是一个让他需要花无谓的时间来解释他所做的每一个决定的绊脚石。明朝最后一个贪赃枉法的丞相，胡惟庸就成了他开刀的对象。在某种程度上，朱元璋这样做，巩固了皇帝在朝廷里的权力。可是，以历史为见证，丞相这个职位是必要的。治理好一个国家是一件谈何容易的事。一个统治者，日理万机，要好好地治理庞大的国家，也一定需要有能力的帮手。皇帝老子也有一时昏庸的时候，丞相也往往能在必要时，提醒提醒一下皇上，以免他铸成大错。俗语说，良药苦口利于病，忠言逆耳利于行。其实呀，有时有些反对的”杂声“是必要的。
3）大家都为部长的“俸禄”而大作文章。在一项非官方的调查中，新加坡的总统，总理，部长等的薪金在世界排名，名类前茅。而人民行动党，一贯的解释就是，以高薪才能吸引到在私人领域中成功创业的人才来到政府部门做部长，为人民服务。这解释你接受吗？我可不觉得，不一味地接受这种说法。一个有抱负，要为民请命的好官，真的会为了俸禄的多少，而量”禄“而为吗？
话说明朝最有名的清官，海瑞，一生爱民如子，甘心奉献他的一生，不辞劳苦地为人民请命。他从不计较朝廷给他的俸禄有多少，也往往把他的私人财物用来救济那些更需要帮助的穷苦人民。海瑞这位从不贪图荣华富贵，一心只为人民的好官，死后身上也没有任何值钱的东西。他一直以来家徒四壁，更难以置信的是，家里人连为他办丧事，买棺材的钱也没有，真让人心寒。
请不要误会，我举海瑞这个例子，不是希望咋们的部长们也都两袖清风，不求任何回报地为人民服务。我了解到在现实社会里，要有象海瑞这样生活的清官是不可能的。但我认为议员或部长，就象老师或护士一样，都是神圣的工作。这些肩负神圣使命的工作者，秉持的主要宗旨往往就是为他人服务而不把薪金的高低列为考虑的主要因素。如果我们只能以高薪来吸引“人才”为人民服务的话，那我们的社会里就存在着一颗随时会爆炸的计时炸弹了。新加坡人民全都那么肤浅吗？新加坡真的没有肯为人民服务而做出种种牺牲的”圣人“吗？在这里你有没有想到人民党的詹时中先生呢？他不辞劳苦地在波东巴西社区里为人民服务。在资源限制的情况下，他含辛茹苦地波东巴西治理得井井有条。为什么有资源限制这点，我也不必多说了，大家心知肚明了！人民要的，就是这种不畏惧强权，不怕困难而坚持自己的信念，一生为民请命的好官，好议员！
写到这里，心里还有一些与大选相关的事宜想写出来。再过一天就是投票日了，不写就来不及了。可是，现在就是太累了，心有余而力不足。有可能大选成绩公布之后，我再写我的下篇吧！
The Hard Truths about an Aljunied Voter's Dilemma by Desmond Mao
Came across this very well-written article whereby a voter in Aljunied voiced his genuine concerns about the current state of politics, he saw unfolding in Singapore.
His views are somewhat balanced; with a slight bias towards the ruling PAP party in my humble opinion. Nevertheless, he did point out a few thought provoking points which I hope the ruling party will put some serious thoughts into. It pays to listen to voices from the ground and not just brushing them off as mere noise.
Well done, Desmond. It's a pleasure reading your article.
The Hard Truths about an Aljunied Voter's Dilemma
by Desmond Mao
Its 2 May 2011 at 1am and my mind is in a whirlpool.
Being a 29 year old voter from Aljunied GRC, I find myself in the eye of the storm. This GRC has been described as the frontline of battle in this election. Since the start of election campaigning, the fight for this GRC has dominated the front pages of the Straits Times, testament to the fear within the ruling party that this 5-member GRC may fall into the opposition hands.
Balanced views on the GE are hard to find. Mainstream media is biased towards the PAP, much of social media seems heavily biased towards the WP. Recognising that everyone has their bias and prejudices (including me), this long-winded essay is my attempt at distilling my thoughts on what's at stake for Aljunied voters.
I attended the 1st 2 WP rallies at Hougang and Serangoon stadium and went home amazed yet disturbed. WP rallies are a phenomenon in this country. No other event in recent history can bring people from all races, young and old, rich and poor, English and non-English speakers together to stand like packed sardines in one place. Its amazing (and ironic) that politics has the potential to be both a unifying and divisive force in society.
The disturbing part stemmed from the many angry voices from the audience. Multitudes of people seemed to bear a grudge against the ruling party and the rally afforded a wonderful opportunity to let rip at them. The failures of the PAP were highlighted time and time again, playing to the destructive nature of the mob. As I sat pondering on how these 'inept' PAP ministers should be held accountable, an acute sense of my own fallibilities overwhelmed me.
As a medical doctor in a public hospital, I have made my fair share of errors (some quite horrendous). By the mercies of God, none of them resulted in fatal outcomes to my patients. After explanations and apologies, much grace has been extended to me, giving me an opportunity to learn from my mistakes and to continue serving.
Even the best of us makes mistakes. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Decades of good governance has caused the citizens to come to expect perfection from our Ministers. Sure, we had 2 unforeseen floods, a HDB housing issue, the YOG overran the budget and a man with a limp escaped from prison. Are not Ministers but mere mortals with blind spots like the rest of us? Can they foretell the future? While we need accountability, do we want to foster a culture where absolutely no mistakes are tolerated?
Dark clouds are in the horizon for Singapore. Both the leaders of the country and the enlightened members of the opposition know it. Singapore faces, among many problems, a rapidly aging population. The baby boomers are starting to retire. Soon our population would be like that of Japan, where a rapidly shrinking workforce would have to bear the escalating burdens of caring for young and old. As a nation, we have collectively come to expect the government to eradicate all problems in this country and continue to provide us with an increase in our quality of life.
Come on! Get real! There will always be poor people in amongst us who will fall through the cracks. Even with the best systems in place, there will be a certain level of injustice because the system is thought of and run by human beings! I am of the opinion that the PAP has already performed admirably. Would the opposition do any better? I seriously doubt it.
The PAP of today is clean, has no sex scandals, and makes generally good policies for Singapore. I believe their biggest problems lie with their failure in moderating the expectations of Singaporeans, and their desire to overwhelmingly dominate parliament at all cost.
Is our growth in GDP even sustainable? Is it the government's responsibility to ensure that you get your pay rise, your choice home, your cheap healthcare, that your child goes to your choice school, your comfortable transportation and the list goes on. Its ludicrous to read certain complaint letters in the forum pages. Some Singaporeans have no shame in the things they complain about. The frequent refrain is 'what is the gah-men going to do about this?' Its sad that this country has bred so many 'spoilt brats' who have come to depend on the government to meet their every need. The replies from certain ministries is even more laughable. At times, in a bid to retain the popular vote, the PAP and the civil service have chosen instead to upset the natural order of things by bending over backwards to accede to unreasonable requests.
Can the government continue to satisfy the dreams, aspirations and demands of each generation? Human beings have an insatiable appetite for discontentment. The PAP's present method of pleasing the electorate with goodies and increased efficiency of the civil service would only serve to temporarily appease the electorate rather than truly build this nation.
What then do the people really want? Mr Chiam See Tong and Mr Low Thia Kiang have both held on to their SMCs despite having vastly less resources compared to the PAP and their candidates. Why is that so?
Both men are capable, extremely dedicated leaders, and men of integrity. People recognise that and respect them for it. Thus despite PAP's Eric Low describing Hougang as a 'slum', I have no doubt that should Mr Low have stood in Hougang SMC, Mr Eric Low wouldn't have had a sliver of a chance this election. The PAP needs to realise that while Singaporeans do want to improve their lot, the majority are not materialistic people who vote solely based on selfish reasons. Like the American voters who propelled Barack Obama from a nobody to President of the United States, Singaporeans are on the lookout for a leader who understands and care for the people, a leader whom we can rally around to achieve our collective dream. Mr Chiam and Mr Low are 2 such leaders. While the people of their respective constituencies received much less than their richer neighbours, Potong Pasir and Hougang continued to vote in their MPs election after election, because they loved their leaders, and their leaders loved them.
Unfortunately, the PAP no longer inspires such devotion from the electorate.
To me, the biggest factor is the salary of a Minister. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against paying someone his fair wage. Everyone needs to eat and put food on the table for his family. The issue is that such great amounts of money attract the wrong candidates and corrupt the calling to serve the people. At the risk of being called naive, I believe that politics is much like the noble professions of teaching, doctoring and nursing, and the clergy. Wasn't it the late Dr Goh Keng Swee that told fresh candidates joining the PAP that they were joining a 'holy order'?
The excuse given by the PAP is that if we don't pay top dollar, they would have trouble recruiting top-notched candidates. Why has this happened? Has the PAP ceased to inspire good people to join its ranks and therefore needs to use the lure of money? If part of the motivation to join the PAP is because of the high salary, how willing would these Ministers/MPs be to serve in a difficult time (eg war, economic collapse) when Singapore isn't able to pay them as much? Even if they had pure, idealistic motives of serving this country, the very scale of their salaries breeds cynicism amongst the electorate. Every time this issue is brought up, the moral authority of the PAP to govern is eroded. My personal view is that the salaries of the ministers should be decided by an independent President. And the salary of the President should be a factor of the median income of the average working Singaporean. But this proposal is a discussion for another day.
The PAP's current practice of parachuting top-notched technocrats from the civil service, SAF and private sector into ministerial positions, through the GRC system, is a perculiar one which may not stand the test of time. No one doubts that these technocrats are extremely smart, capable people who are probably men of integrity with a proven track record. They would probably make good permanent secretaries! Yet, these factors in themselves, would be inadequate to consider them good politicians.
A good politician is NOT an extension of the civil service. Rather, a good politician understands and is able to inspire and rally the electorate into following him in his decisions, even if it means sacrificing our lives to protect this country. I find it laughable that we are told that the 4th PM of Singapore may be amongst the new candidates, but this supposed 4th PM is going to ride into Parliament on the tailcoats of a heavyweight. This brings me to my next point.
I believe in the GRC system. After 45 years of independence, I choose to believe that we have deepened our bonds as Singaporeans. Still, like it or not, many today still vote based on one's race, religion and language. To ensure minority representation, the GRC is a necessity.
As with any other well-intentioned idea, the devil is in the details. I disagree with manner of GRC implementation on three counts.
Firstly, why do we need such a big GRC? Wouldn't a 3-4 member GRC suffice to ensure minority representation?
Secondly, shouldn't new PAP candidates be given the opportunity to prove their own worth by running in SMCs? While there may be issues that arise in filling all SMCs with new candidates (less likely to field a minority candidate in an SMC), only 2 out 11 SMCs have new candidates (Hougang and Potong Pasir). With newly carved out SMCs, this is the best election to allow new candidates to receive a baptism of fire and allow them to have the people's mandate. The GRC system is now being used by the PAP to allow weak candidates to get into parliament. This is an abuse of the original intent of the GRC system that cannot be good for Singapore.
Thirdly, the frequent re-drawing of GRC boundaries (especially in Aljunied) has served to increase the popular belief that PAP does not play fair.
I belong to a segment of voters from Aljunied who love Singapore and are tired of the politics of negativity. We are tired of the opposition opposing for its own sake. We are tired of angry people venting nonsensically at a government who cannot be responsible for all their troubles. We are tired of the PAP's pettiness in denying opposition wards their full rights as citizens who pay taxes and serve NS. We are tired of unfair play by the PAP in manipulating the system for self-preservation of the party. We are tired of the scare-mongering by the PAP and WP that the fall of a GRC into either party would lead to a crippled, partisan government or a total collapse of the opposition.
We're better than that.
There are several issues that I wish to address:
1) The WP needs to reveal its plan for Aljunied GRC
I'm not sure why the party is keeping mum about this issue. It could be because they are unsure of the amount of funds they would receive to run the town council etc... but I'm just speculating. Or *shudder*, there is NO plan for Aljunied?
I encourage Mr Low to tell us your plans and anticipated difficulties in running this GRC? Surely we as voters have a right to know. Surely we as voters would make allowances for your parties' performance should there be problems from underhanded play from the ruling party!
2) Aljunied will NOT become a desolate desert after 5 years
Mr Low TK and Ms Sylvia Lim are also people with track records. Please stop treating Aljunied voters in such a condescending manner. Having said that, I still retain a whole lot of respect for you MM Lee.
3) The PAP will still win a 2/3s majority in this election and Parliament will not be crippled
4) There is absolutely nothing wrong if the WP ends up winning more GRCs in the next election or sets up the government one day
If WP do win Aljunied GRC and do such a good job both in Aljunied and in Parliament, what's to keep them for winning more GRCs in the next election? This can only bode well for Singapore. Naturally, the people of Singapore need to be discerning in deciding if the WP candidates have been constructive rather than destructive in Parliament and evaluate their performance based on that. A little more debate in Parliament never hurt anyone and may just be the catalyst to revive interest in good people joining the PAP again.
Thanks for making it to the end of this long rant from me. I welcome any feedback although I may choose not to reply.
If I have offended you in any way, please accept my apologies.
His views are somewhat balanced; with a slight bias towards the ruling PAP party in my humble opinion. Nevertheless, he did point out a few thought provoking points which I hope the ruling party will put some serious thoughts into. It pays to listen to voices from the ground and not just brushing them off as mere noise.
Well done, Desmond. It's a pleasure reading your article.
The Hard Truths about an Aljunied Voter's Dilemma
by Desmond Mao
Its 2 May 2011 at 1am and my mind is in a whirlpool.
Being a 29 year old voter from Aljunied GRC, I find myself in the eye of the storm. This GRC has been described as the frontline of battle in this election. Since the start of election campaigning, the fight for this GRC has dominated the front pages of the Straits Times, testament to the fear within the ruling party that this 5-member GRC may fall into the opposition hands.
Balanced views on the GE are hard to find. Mainstream media is biased towards the PAP, much of social media seems heavily biased towards the WP. Recognising that everyone has their bias and prejudices (including me), this long-winded essay is my attempt at distilling my thoughts on what's at stake for Aljunied voters.
I attended the 1st 2 WP rallies at Hougang and Serangoon stadium and went home amazed yet disturbed. WP rallies are a phenomenon in this country. No other event in recent history can bring people from all races, young and old, rich and poor, English and non-English speakers together to stand like packed sardines in one place. Its amazing (and ironic) that politics has the potential to be both a unifying and divisive force in society.
The disturbing part stemmed from the many angry voices from the audience. Multitudes of people seemed to bear a grudge against the ruling party and the rally afforded a wonderful opportunity to let rip at them. The failures of the PAP were highlighted time and time again, playing to the destructive nature of the mob. As I sat pondering on how these 'inept' PAP ministers should be held accountable, an acute sense of my own fallibilities overwhelmed me.
As a medical doctor in a public hospital, I have made my fair share of errors (some quite horrendous). By the mercies of God, none of them resulted in fatal outcomes to my patients. After explanations and apologies, much grace has been extended to me, giving me an opportunity to learn from my mistakes and to continue serving.
Even the best of us makes mistakes. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Decades of good governance has caused the citizens to come to expect perfection from our Ministers. Sure, we had 2 unforeseen floods, a HDB housing issue, the YOG overran the budget and a man with a limp escaped from prison. Are not Ministers but mere mortals with blind spots like the rest of us? Can they foretell the future? While we need accountability, do we want to foster a culture where absolutely no mistakes are tolerated?
Dark clouds are in the horizon for Singapore. Both the leaders of the country and the enlightened members of the opposition know it. Singapore faces, among many problems, a rapidly aging population. The baby boomers are starting to retire. Soon our population would be like that of Japan, where a rapidly shrinking workforce would have to bear the escalating burdens of caring for young and old. As a nation, we have collectively come to expect the government to eradicate all problems in this country and continue to provide us with an increase in our quality of life.
Come on! Get real! There will always be poor people in amongst us who will fall through the cracks. Even with the best systems in place, there will be a certain level of injustice because the system is thought of and run by human beings! I am of the opinion that the PAP has already performed admirably. Would the opposition do any better? I seriously doubt it.
The PAP of today is clean, has no sex scandals, and makes generally good policies for Singapore. I believe their biggest problems lie with their failure in moderating the expectations of Singaporeans, and their desire to overwhelmingly dominate parliament at all cost.
Is our growth in GDP even sustainable? Is it the government's responsibility to ensure that you get your pay rise, your choice home, your cheap healthcare, that your child goes to your choice school, your comfortable transportation and the list goes on. Its ludicrous to read certain complaint letters in the forum pages. Some Singaporeans have no shame in the things they complain about. The frequent refrain is 'what is the gah-men going to do about this?' Its sad that this country has bred so many 'spoilt brats' who have come to depend on the government to meet their every need. The replies from certain ministries is even more laughable. At times, in a bid to retain the popular vote, the PAP and the civil service have chosen instead to upset the natural order of things by bending over backwards to accede to unreasonable requests.
Can the government continue to satisfy the dreams, aspirations and demands of each generation? Human beings have an insatiable appetite for discontentment. The PAP's present method of pleasing the electorate with goodies and increased efficiency of the civil service would only serve to temporarily appease the electorate rather than truly build this nation.
What then do the people really want? Mr Chiam See Tong and Mr Low Thia Kiang have both held on to their SMCs despite having vastly less resources compared to the PAP and their candidates. Why is that so?
Both men are capable, extremely dedicated leaders, and men of integrity. People recognise that and respect them for it. Thus despite PAP's Eric Low describing Hougang as a 'slum', I have no doubt that should Mr Low have stood in Hougang SMC, Mr Eric Low wouldn't have had a sliver of a chance this election. The PAP needs to realise that while Singaporeans do want to improve their lot, the majority are not materialistic people who vote solely based on selfish reasons. Like the American voters who propelled Barack Obama from a nobody to President of the United States, Singaporeans are on the lookout for a leader who understands and care for the people, a leader whom we can rally around to achieve our collective dream. Mr Chiam and Mr Low are 2 such leaders. While the people of their respective constituencies received much less than their richer neighbours, Potong Pasir and Hougang continued to vote in their MPs election after election, because they loved their leaders, and their leaders loved them.
Unfortunately, the PAP no longer inspires such devotion from the electorate.
To me, the biggest factor is the salary of a Minister. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against paying someone his fair wage. Everyone needs to eat and put food on the table for his family. The issue is that such great amounts of money attract the wrong candidates and corrupt the calling to serve the people. At the risk of being called naive, I believe that politics is much like the noble professions of teaching, doctoring and nursing, and the clergy. Wasn't it the late Dr Goh Keng Swee that told fresh candidates joining the PAP that they were joining a 'holy order'?
The excuse given by the PAP is that if we don't pay top dollar, they would have trouble recruiting top-notched candidates. Why has this happened? Has the PAP ceased to inspire good people to join its ranks and therefore needs to use the lure of money? If part of the motivation to join the PAP is because of the high salary, how willing would these Ministers/MPs be to serve in a difficult time (eg war, economic collapse) when Singapore isn't able to pay them as much? Even if they had pure, idealistic motives of serving this country, the very scale of their salaries breeds cynicism amongst the electorate. Every time this issue is brought up, the moral authority of the PAP to govern is eroded. My personal view is that the salaries of the ministers should be decided by an independent President. And the salary of the President should be a factor of the median income of the average working Singaporean. But this proposal is a discussion for another day.
The PAP's current practice of parachuting top-notched technocrats from the civil service, SAF and private sector into ministerial positions, through the GRC system, is a perculiar one which may not stand the test of time. No one doubts that these technocrats are extremely smart, capable people who are probably men of integrity with a proven track record. They would probably make good permanent secretaries! Yet, these factors in themselves, would be inadequate to consider them good politicians.
A good politician is NOT an extension of the civil service. Rather, a good politician understands and is able to inspire and rally the electorate into following him in his decisions, even if it means sacrificing our lives to protect this country. I find it laughable that we are told that the 4th PM of Singapore may be amongst the new candidates, but this supposed 4th PM is going to ride into Parliament on the tailcoats of a heavyweight. This brings me to my next point.
I believe in the GRC system. After 45 years of independence, I choose to believe that we have deepened our bonds as Singaporeans. Still, like it or not, many today still vote based on one's race, religion and language. To ensure minority representation, the GRC is a necessity.
As with any other well-intentioned idea, the devil is in the details. I disagree with manner of GRC implementation on three counts.
Firstly, why do we need such a big GRC? Wouldn't a 3-4 member GRC suffice to ensure minority representation?
Secondly, shouldn't new PAP candidates be given the opportunity to prove their own worth by running in SMCs? While there may be issues that arise in filling all SMCs with new candidates (less likely to field a minority candidate in an SMC), only 2 out 11 SMCs have new candidates (Hougang and Potong Pasir). With newly carved out SMCs, this is the best election to allow new candidates to receive a baptism of fire and allow them to have the people's mandate. The GRC system is now being used by the PAP to allow weak candidates to get into parliament. This is an abuse of the original intent of the GRC system that cannot be good for Singapore.
Thirdly, the frequent re-drawing of GRC boundaries (especially in Aljunied) has served to increase the popular belief that PAP does not play fair.
I belong to a segment of voters from Aljunied who love Singapore and are tired of the politics of negativity. We are tired of the opposition opposing for its own sake. We are tired of angry people venting nonsensically at a government who cannot be responsible for all their troubles. We are tired of the PAP's pettiness in denying opposition wards their full rights as citizens who pay taxes and serve NS. We are tired of unfair play by the PAP in manipulating the system for self-preservation of the party. We are tired of the scare-mongering by the PAP and WP that the fall of a GRC into either party would lead to a crippled, partisan government or a total collapse of the opposition.
We're better than that.
There are several issues that I wish to address:
1) The WP needs to reveal its plan for Aljunied GRC
I'm not sure why the party is keeping mum about this issue. It could be because they are unsure of the amount of funds they would receive to run the town council etc... but I'm just speculating. Or *shudder*, there is NO plan for Aljunied?
I encourage Mr Low to tell us your plans and anticipated difficulties in running this GRC? Surely we as voters have a right to know. Surely we as voters would make allowances for your parties' performance should there be problems from underhanded play from the ruling party!
2) Aljunied will NOT become a desolate desert after 5 years
Mr Low TK and Ms Sylvia Lim are also people with track records. Please stop treating Aljunied voters in such a condescending manner. Having said that, I still retain a whole lot of respect for you MM Lee.
3) The PAP will still win a 2/3s majority in this election and Parliament will not be crippled
4) There is absolutely nothing wrong if the WP ends up winning more GRCs in the next election or sets up the government one day
If WP do win Aljunied GRC and do such a good job both in Aljunied and in Parliament, what's to keep them for winning more GRCs in the next election? This can only bode well for Singapore. Naturally, the people of Singapore need to be discerning in deciding if the WP candidates have been constructive rather than destructive in Parliament and evaluate their performance based on that. A little more debate in Parliament never hurt anyone and may just be the catalyst to revive interest in good people joining the PAP again.
Thanks for making it to the end of this long rant from me. I welcome any feedback although I may choose not to reply.
If I have offended you in any way, please accept my apologies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
