Elaine Ong /

The voice of the electorate at the recent General Election resounded loud and clear to the ruling party and indeed, some observers claim that politically, the population has come of age. I beg to differ. The political maturity of the electorate is still in its infancy with a large majority of the population still left unclear and uncertain that the ruling party and the state are by right separate identities.

Years of identifying the People’s Action Party (PAP) with the state have left many Singaporeans with what I would call a serious national identity crisis. Mr.Lee Kuan Yew was quoted in 1982 as having said, “I make no apologies that the PAP is the Government and the Government is the PAP.”(Petir, 1982). Singaporeans have taken this to mean that the PAP is Singapore and Singapore is the PAP. While policies of the ruling party inevitably shape the identity of our nation, it is NOT the nation per se. To confuse the two is a very serious mistake.

Recently, since voting for the Worker’s Party as a resident of Aljunied GRC, I have been accused by several friends and family members as having been unpatriotic. Worse still, there are those who rant at me about how I have forgotten the great things Lee Kuan Yew has done for this country and taken it to where it is today. Trawl the Internet and you will see that these accusations surface time and again, and those who do not vote the ruling party are seen as being ungrateful renegades. A letter in The Straits Times Forum page was published not too long ago in which the writer said she was disappointed by the attitude of government scholars who have returned to join the ranks of the opposition. Once again, the term ‘ungrateful’ was used. The fact that we use the term ‘opposition’ itself carries a negative connotation and a naïve, immature black and white view that ‘if you are not for us, than you are against us’.

Then, there is the confusion even among those who work in the civil service. Some wrongly fear that it would cost them their jobs if they voted against the ruling party. There are even civil servants who mistakenly think that a vote against the ruling party is a signal of disloyalty to the state which employs them. The involvement of the ruling party in almost every state institution has perpetuated this myth and blurred the lines between party and state. This is unhealthy and should be set right. The truth is the public administration and its civil servants work for the state and not the political party that is in power.

One cannot blame the average Singaporean for confusing the state with the party. Years of fear mongering by the ruling elite has perpetuated the myth of the party being the state. I admit that for year I too was a politically apathetic citizen with the ‘PAP knows best’ attitude. I believed the line that partisan politics would cause the downfall of this country and cause it to be divided. How true this may be remains a conjecture.

It is incorrect to look at only the failings of a two party or multi-party system in other countries and project it onto what could possibly happen to us (and so far our smallness as a country has always made us somewhat different and unique in that sense), without examining the merits of such systems. I was very disappointed that when the concept of a ‘First World Parliament’ was peddled to the public, SM Goh Chok Tong immediately chose to narrow-mindedly link that idea with politics in Myanmar and other Southeast Asian countries. I was even more disappointed when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong publicly announced during the forum broadcast on national television that indeed ‘PAP wards would be looked after first’ in what he terms as prioritizing (with public not party money).

Truth be told, in spite of voting the opposition, I am a patriot of this country. While others have voted with their feet (and chose to emigrate), I have not done so even though I have been given an opportunity to do so. As a citizen with stakes in this country, it is my hope that Singapore will move politically away from its narrow-mindedness, to embrace greater plurality and respect for views outside the boundaries of the ruling party.

It is time we stopped accepting the view passively that we Singaporeans are subservient sheep and reject the idea that one’s patriotism is measured by how one votes. Let us stop whining about the PAP the way a child whines about his dad and start taking ownership of our choices. Taking ownership of one’s choices results in a greater sense of belonging to the country and a stronger sense of national identity in the long run. One can only truly love one’s country out of love and a sense of belonging, not fear. If we think our views align with those of the ruling party, then vote the ruling party. If we think our views and vision aligns with what other parties propose, take ownership and vote accordingly. It would be pathetic if we voted a particular way just in order to show our gratitude or for fear of looking disloyal or unpatriotic.

I look forward to the day when my patriotism and love for this country is no longer measured by the way I voted by my fellow citizens of this country, the way a democrat or republican in the United States is not questioned about his loyalty to the state.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

再添两个本地社区感染群

根据卫生部文告,除了此前的永泰行、基督生命堂和君悦酒店商务会议,在新添病例下本地再增加两个出现确诊病例的可能感染群,即神召会恩典堂和实里达航空岭工地。 在当局和警方合理调查下,梳理出各病例和上述地点的关联: (1)永泰行:曾于1月接待来自广西的旅游团,其中2名团员于5日被中国卫生单位宣布确诊。 新加坡目前至少9起病例涉及这间药材店,包括来自同一家庭的3名成员与其外籍帮佣(第19例、21例、27例和28例),3名店内员工(第20、34和40例),旅游团导游与其丈夫(第24和25例) (2)基督生命堂(可能感染群):至少五名病患与新加坡基督生命堂有关,例如第31例病患(53岁男子)曾到访过该处,以及第33例(39岁本地女性)、第38例(52岁本地女性),以及上月底确诊的一对来自中国武汉的夫妇(第8和第9例)。 (3)君悦酒店商务会议:至少三起病例(30、36和39例),上月20至22日举行的会议,至少获得逾100人出席,其中也有来自湖北省的与会者。 (4)实里达航空岭工地:涉及两名孟加拉藉客工(第42和47例) (5)神召会恩典堂:第48和第49例,他们都曾在该教堂上班 当局仍在调查各病例是否有相互关联。目前已知第44起病例,与第13和第26起病例(1月21日抵达我国的武汉母女)有接触。 策安保安员接触来自武汉母女 第44起病例,正是37岁的策安保安公司职员。他相信是对上述母女发出隔离令。 第26起病例,是第13起确诊病例(73岁中国女性)的女儿。她和家人在上月21日,从武汉抵新加坡。她和母亲同日出现症状,都被送往国家传染病中心隔离,直至4日晚8时确诊。…

一窥台北公共住宅新政 只租不卖 用十年让房价合理化

台湾住宅自有率高达80巴仙,当地民众同样也抱有“拥屋”心态,租房通常知识在有能力置产前的过渡阶段。 然而,当地私人租屋市场向来不被政府重视,致使诟病衍生,除了不合理的租房价格,一些房东把一些原本就不适合居住的空间,如天台和地下室改造称租房空间,将租房利润最大化;此外,租户还得面对各种租屋歧视,使得特定群体很难找到租房。 租房居住品质和房客权益缺乏保障,加之被炒高的房价,致使民众提出“居住正义”的诉求。为此,当地政府才会出台“只租不卖”的社会住宅,以低于市价的租金提供给青年、弱势群体,让房屋回归到居住的基本需求。 台北市长柯文哲曾打着“四年完成两万户社会住宅”的竞选承诺,上任后也积极落实,当前,已落成并有住户入住的公共住宅达到三处。 只要户籍和学籍在台北,就可抽签申请公宅。不过当前已落成的仅约一千户,柯文哲认为,只有完成所有两万户后,申请者抽签中签率才较高。 而在今年年底前,全台北将有32至35处、约两万户的公共住宅动工。 在接受当地网络媒体采访,市长柯文哲介绍新建好的公共住宅。小型一房式住宅租金大约7100台币,折合新元约为315元,这还不包括政府将提供的租金补贴。价格虽然可负担,但是在房屋素质和舒适度并未妥协,打出“智慧住宅”概念,所有住宅都有配备温度计、照度计、智慧保全和智慧对讲机。 每个住宅都能链接网络,因为柯文哲认为,穷人没有办法链接网络,根本没机会翻身。他们必须要有管道接触知识资源。在台北,国小三年级以上都可以免费使用网络。 公共住宅也附有社区空间,如跑步跑道和可以种菜田园空间等等,以期打造“田园城市”。 36坪的三房式住宅价格在减免前为两万一千台币,依据台北租房市价,至少介于3万5千至4万台币(折合新币1千700元)。 公共住宅价格比市价稍低,柯文哲的概念是让整体台北的房价缓步重归稳定合理。“如果房价突然下挫,会导致市场大乱,所以宁可用十年的时间让房价合理化。”  …

Netizens sympathise SingPost postman for working around the clock to deliver mails, but some call for check with the labour law

It definitely has not been a good couple of months for Singapore…