3 Mar 2014 (Comment on TRE)
The adage, ‘Open your eyes, ears and senses…’ cuts both ways. One camp says, ‘you got to see it this way’. The other counters, ‘well, why don’t you see it this other way’. Then what?
Which ever way someone sees it, that’s what it is – and that’s where we’ve to start from. No matter what or how, the starting point has to be ‘take that person from where we find him’ and then work from there.
I assume tt, for all the condemnation and counterpoints against the PAP narrative, everyone has to agree tt the ONLY WAY out of the current route to damnation is thro’ MORE VOTES to deny 2/3 seats or kick the PAP to the oppo bench.
If not, then pls stop reading now.
If so, we can’t go around insulting, condemning, ridiculing the very detracters or those you disagree but hv the courage to state their views contrary to ours. Hey, you want their votes or you want the temporal satisfaction of giving them a good one?
Hope most will agree with what I’m about to suggest here;
Treat the IB or ‘other camp’ as detractors. Fellow citizens but diff experiences, values, hopes, knowledge etc but no less valid than our own.
Sure, some are polite, others not so. Same same in our camp.
Illustration; Actually, I agree with some, even much of Petulant’s observations about the WP. To those who disagree, let me ask, ‘Could the WP have done better?’ Hello, if yr answer is that it is not a level playing field, then, did you not know that already when you voted/supported them? Anyway, if yr best excuse is tt the dice is loaded against them, sorry, I’m not impressed (with yr reasoning).
WP is relying on a strategy of bidding their time to strike at the right time for issues and at the time that will either cause max damage to PAP or brandish their brand name in a meaningful way or win them votes or all of the preceding – with their limited resources. Meantime, let PAP self-inflict and the citizenry do the guerilla attacks.
Isn’t tt a wise strategy to take when yr resources are limited and the odds are stacked against you? Why waste precious little firepower you have?
Look everyday on TRE alone, there are no less than 6-8 issues published, not including many times more that TRE choose not to. Which ones do you want WP to take up?
But I disagree with Petulant’s ‘last straw’ that broke her/his support for WP ie AHPETC. In truth, I believe it was a master stroke by Low KT, the old fox of a (honest) politician. Let me explain.
He knew all along PA’s ‘adverse’ audit since he raised that. Knowing the biased Speaker in the House, any further questioning he’d be ‘your time is up, Mr Member’ by Mr Speaker. As for the AHPETC qualified audit, do you actually believe tt Sylvia and Low will allow for that when they knew that their political credibilty – and re-election – was at stake? They know the spotlight they are under..con’t
So, the 2nd ‘qualified’ audit report was deliberate. Can you see, in hindsight, how very confident Chairwoman Slyvia Lim was when she ‘pretended’ to ask MND to supply more info, when she beseeched MND to intervene to find a solution – when she, in fact, threw down the gauntlet to be investigated?
Well, when a Chairwoman gives the come-hither look, at least as seen by a Chairman (of PAP), silvating over a possible ‘fix de grace’ on yr nemesis, you gotta stand erect, no? And so, he fell hook and sinker for the bait.
The rest is recent history when PA’s audit reports were signed off as ‘adverse’. Ha ha ha!
Hats off to Fox Low!
So, yeah, WP has not appeared to perform that great. But they still have a strategy. Strike where its limited resources are maxed for impact. Rely on netizens – and the trend (don’t fight but ride the trend) – to do the infantry man’s jobs.
2. OPPOSITION PARTY & SUPPORTERS
My next comments may win me few friends. I give a non-conventional take and it serves as an answer to the likes of @gong lee who admonishes me ‘don’t be harsh on him (KJ) . Let’s not squabble among ourselves as it will do our cause no good.’
I disagree with the approach but accept that it does play a role. Know what? If we did only that ie ‘don’t squabble’, are we not behaving like the PAP in secret? Everyone speaks with one voice – and atrophy over time, I guess.
Only if we demand higher standards can or will oppo candidates & MPs not take/use supporters for granted. Only when we push them to do more of what’s needed to be done (as seen fr ground level) can they not fall asleep at the wheel. Only when we make clear that they cannot simply ride, and ride ONLY, on our disaffection, our opposition to PAP and hope to be re-elected will our common cause of policy changes or party change be served or better served.
You can treat them with a kid’s gloves when they have won the 1/3 seats or form/join the next govt – but even then, for a honeymoon period only.
Is the next GE not only months away? Do you prefer to see PAP’s 2/3 majority reduced by 2016 or later?
Take yr pick. U want change sooner – then you got to kick the oppo as hard, or harder. Harder, but with a clear intent to advance their abilities, debating skills and substance, reaching out to fence-sitters etc etc.
My final argument is this; If we do not apply pressure in good amounts at the right places and times, you can postpone, if not kiss yr dreams of change goodbye.
It is not PAP per se you should be looking to change, pal. It is the SYSTEM that needs to be fully overhauled, some parts to be jettisoned.
If WP forms the next govt for the next 2 decades, they will grow to be not unlike the PAP. Hey, ‘merito-guanxi’ and ‘power corrupts’ applies to EVERYONE. Your guanxi magnifies the little merit as you have to look after yr supporters. Power corrupts need no explanation.
We must invent EFFECTIVE CHECKS & BALANCE.
Change we must!..incl how we engage detractors & support Oppo.