This… is… DEMOCRACY!

Sun, 28 Aug 2011
2 min read
Add Comment

CAUTION: This is Sparta!

So after the first round of the Singapore Presidential Election 2011 (PE2011) results came out last night, I posted this status update on Twitter and Facebook:

If there’s gonna be a recount, can I also recast my vote?

Subsequently, I received comments/@replies to do with breast-beating and vote-splitting.

I also had the pleasure of reading similar-sounding status updates around the same time.

To clarify, when I posted that update, I meant it as a tongue-in-cheek critique of the decision to proceed with the recount.

I was fully aware that a recasting of the vote was and is impossible (although I think a run-off vote might be a good idea in the future so that the candidate that is elected goes into office with the support of a clear and distinct majority).

What I meant was: look, if the difference was 100 votes, I’d wholeheartedly say yes to the recount. But if the difference was 7000 votes, how far off could the vote-counters have been?

Was it not a waste of the vote-counters’ and the electorate’s time with a decision that was logical in theory but not in practice?

Many people were complaining about how the vote had been split, and if Tan Jee Say and Tan Kin Lian hadn’t contested, Tan Cheng Bock wouldn’t’ve have had his vote share eroded, and he would’ve become the elected President instead.

I agree that the vote was split in that there were four candidates, so each candidate garnered a share of the vote, however large (or small) it might’ve been.

But to quote a friend on Facebook:

Democracy means I suck thumb and accept this Tan.

There were four candidates; we voted; the Tan of our choice didn’t get in – deal with it.

P.S. To preempt any criticism regarding the picture at the top of my post: yes, I’m also aware that Sparta used to be an oligarchy…

P.P.S. Yawning Bread and Yee Jenn Jong have quite interesting takes on PE2011.

Scumbaggery in the UK.

Sun, 14 Aug 2011
2 min read
2 Comments

Anarchy in the UK.

(NOTE: For the young ‘uns, the title of this post and the image is a reference to a song by the Sex Pistols.)

I’m quite tired of people hijacking the event popularly known as the London ‘riots’ for their own agenda.

Some examples:

  • “This justifies the strict laws against rioting and protesting we have in Singapore”.
  • “This is why we need to love our government, regardless of whoever is in the government”.

I don’t think those two claims are relevant or appropriate to the situation.

The first misses the larger point – this is not a riot, but simply a case of looting and theft carried out by opportunists who have purposefully disregarded social mores and notions of prop(ri)erty.

The second claim entails a blind subservience without moderation or calibration; a one or the other approach seldom makes sense, especially in contexts like these.

In my opinion, the most pertinent issues that seem to have conveniently been forgotten are:

  1. How this scumbaggery has been wrongly labelled a ‘riot’ or a ‘protest.
    This merely legitimises the actions of the looters and thefts and encourages them to be bolder in their impunity.
  2. How everything including the kitchen sink is wrongful fodder for blame with regard to these acts of “feral” scumbaggery.
    When in actual fact, the adage of “Those who criticise [the younger] generation forget who raised it” has never rung truer.

These articles may flesh out my arguments better:

  1. The UK riots and language: ‘rioter’, ‘protester’ or ‘scum’?
    (via Yu-Mei)

  2. Britain’s liberal intelligentsia has smashed virtually every social value.
    (via Andrew)

BTW with regard to the second article, I disagree with the portion on the “destr[uction of] the traditional nuclear family”.

I think the traditional nuclear family is ONE of the ways in which the problem of “a world where the parent is unwilling or incapable of providing the loving and disciplined framework that a child needs in order to thrive” can be resolved.

Also, I’m advocating a moderate approach to parenting/discipline – it’s okay to ‘let children be’, but at times you really have to rein them in.

Don’t wait for others to speak up.

Tue, 14 Jun 2011
2 min read
Add Comment

Dear Madam/Sir,

I REFER to “Pole-axed by passengers’ insensitivity on trains” (June 13).

As a society, we need to be honest with ourselves about two aspects of human behaviour:

  1. People do not know they are behaving inappropriately until they are told otherwise, and
  2. People will continue to behave inappropriately until they are told otherwise.

Unfortunately, we have been dependent on everyone except our own selves to do the work of telling people off.

This in itself is inappropriate behaviour, and we direly need to undergo a paradigm shift as a society.

Instead of standing by and waiting for someone else to chastise wrong-doers, we need to exercise more boldness in our approach.

We need to firmly and politely inform these wrong-doers in question about what they are doing wrong, and what they can do to correct their behaviour.

Let’s remember that the fruits of tomorrow are borne from the seeds of today.

If we truly value graciousness and civic awareness in our society, then we ourselves must be a part of the process of inculcating said values in our fellow Singaporeans.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,
Laremy LEE (Mr)

(Published as “Don’t wait for others to speak up” on 14 Jun 2011 in TODAYonline.)