Source: Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Facebook page.

Hosting a well known dictator (including paying for his accommodation and expenses while he and his entourage were in Singapore), displaying a flagrant disregard for human life by pressing ahead with controversial hangings, a high profile law suit involving the top brass of Singapore’s leading opposition party on arguably pointless grounds and cracking down harshly on individuals with no political power, one has to wonder what kind of image the Singapore government is hoping to cultivate.

With it aggressively going after the “international city” image by pressing hard on the “smart city” front, chasing the media hub status and its efforts to get hawker culture into a UNESCO list, one has to question if the Singapore government is going through an identity crisis. What reputation does Singapore want? It is either a modern progressive metropolis which values its inhabitants and democracy or it is a draconian country where its inhabitants have to live in fear and self censorship? It cannot cherry pick and expect no one to notice the inconsistencies.

How do all these seemingly contrary actions measure up with each other? What is the government hoping to achieve.

You want your citizens to be confident and creative but yet you do not allow them to exercise their intellect by speaking up.

You want the world to treat you like a democratic country but yet you seemingly find endless ways to ensure that an opposition party is never allowed to get too strong. In days of yore, it was the dreaded defamation suit. Now it is nitpicking at rules to ensure that opposition politicians pay for a wrongdoing that has not really affected the public and spending vast sums of state money to do this. Is this democracy or is it blatant bullying under the guise of allegedly rule breaking?

You say you want Singapore to be a happy place and for Singaporeans to be more compassionate. But yet you show zero compassion to alleged drug traffickers even though the level of their guilt is controversial.

You pledge to believe in social mobility but yet you choose to spend millions publicly wooing North Korea,  a country where the murderous leader lives in the lap of luxury while the bulk of its citizens remain dirt poor.

I understand that the government wants to hold on to power but is it so blinded by that pursuit that it cannot see the bi polar message it is sending out? How can Singaporeans trust a government that sends out so many mixed messages? Are mixed messages good for stability?

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

Police issues conditional warning to Preetipls and Subhas Nair for controversial video, E-Pay is off the hook

In the most recent development of the racist advertisement/video saga, social media…

Action needed from MAS to address bank charges as obstacles to cashless society

by Chris Kuan The problem about going cashless rests with the Singapore…

指三分二国人支持禁WATAIN演出 民情联系组民调遭质疑

根据民情联系组(REACH)调查显示,60巴仙参与调查的新加坡人意识到,政府上个月禁止了瑞典金属乐队WATAIN的演唱会,其中三分之二,或66巴仙的人士同意有关决定。 根据REACH通过电脑抽选随机拨电采访进行一项民意调查,发现在接受调查680人中,包括不同年龄层和宗教的人士,20余岁的年轻一群,将近67巴仙不赞成禁止有关的演唱会。无宗教信仰者(51巴仙)也有如斯想法。 在接受调查的680人中,25巴仙觉得WATAIN的表演可能会引起新加坡宗教敏感问题,因此应该被禁止。三分二的人认为,乐队可在避免带出冒犯内容的特定条件下,可以允许表演。 在赞成群组中,受访者较偏向在某些先决条件下,可以允许会影响宗教敏感性的表演,但是随着年龄增长,这个数字有所下降,20余岁受访者占了89巴仙,但是60岁以上受访者只占了47巴仙。 观察民意调查结果后,REACH主席陈振泉(Sam Tan)表示,“令人振奋的是,大多数新加坡人意识到在这个多元种族和多宗教环境下,互相尊重彼此宗教的重要性”。 “鉴于新西兰和世界其他地区最近发生的事件,我希望年轻的新加坡一群了解在维持这个我们耗费数十年建立的和平与和谐,称之为家的地方,所需要的微妙平衡。” 这个在亚洲新闻台脸书上贴出的民意调查,引来了网民回应,且大部分回应皆持有怀疑态度。网民质疑REACH民意调查的范围,很多网民都询问他们在哪里找到受访者: 有者表示680人份的民意调查只是小分量的看法,不能代表新加坡560万人口: 还有网民质疑有关的民意调查真实性,并表示大多数新加坡之前从未听过有关的调查。 Watain乐队演出遭腰斩 瑞典黑暗金属乐队Watain,原定于上月7日在邻近大成地铁站的Ebenex…