Stop comparing Singapore with Third world countries
By Gerald Giam
5 November 2009 | 2,752 Views | 14 Comments | 
Print
| 
Email
It never ceases to amaze me the kind of examples some people will use to drive home their point that the PAP is the one and only party capable of leading Singapore forever and ever.
In a letter to the Straits Times forum yesterday titled “PAP’s self-renewal a boon for the nation”, Jeffrey Law praised the PAP’s efforts at “self-renewal”, and in the process took a swipe — or rather three swipes — at neighbouring countries for their far-from-perfect political systems.
He started by saying: “It can be disquieting to know that some politicians in the region indulge in money politics and resort to buying votes.”
Was he referring to politics in other countries or in Singapore?
In the last three elections since 1997, the PAP has been dangling multi-million dollar HDB upgrading programmes in front of voters, telling them if they voted for the PAP, they will get lifts on every floor and nicely spruced up estates. If they didn’t, their estates would become “slums”.
During the 2006 election campaign, the PAP dangled a total of $180 million in front of Hougang and Potong Pasir voters in an effort to get them to vote for their candidates instead of the incumbent opposition MPs. $180 million! That’s $4,540 for each of the 39,647 voters in those two wards!
And that was not all. Just 5 days before polling day in the 2006 elections, the PAP government released $2.6 billion — euphemistically called the “Progress Package” — to the electorate.
Back in 2001, three months before the elections, the government also released $2.7 billion in “New Singapore Shares” to Singaporeans.
There was never a repeat of cash giveaways of this scale in between elections. These giveaways way exceeded the amounts used to buy votes in other countries.
So tell me, who really is engaging in money politics?
The author then went on to lambaste the Philippines because former president Joseph Estrada is planning to run again for President. Perhaps he is not familiar with the concept of a proper democracy whereby any citizen can run for President, subject to minimal eligibility hurdles, and it is up to voters to choose the best man or woman. This is not the case in Singapore, of course, where the presidential candidates are subject to ridiculously stringent eligibility criteria and are chosen by a group of Establishment figures in an opaque selection process.
He then gave a supposedly negative example of how it was common for six or seven candidates from different political parties to compete for a wakil rakyat (people’s representative) post in a small district in Indonesia.
Excuse me? What’s wrong with several candidates competing for one post? What is the ideal number then? One, like in most constituencies in Singapore?
Finally, he did a survey of one person, who remarked that politicians (in Indonesia) were more interested in gaining power and wealth than looking after the welfare of the people. How is Mr Law so sure that this applies to all politicians in Indonesia? And how does he know that it doesn’t also apply to some of our politicians? After all it is not the Indonesian ministers who paid themselves multi-million dollar salaries.
But even if all the above are true, why are we, a developed country, being compared with Third world countries all the time? It’s like comparing apples with oranges. Shouldn’t we compare ourselves with other First world countries like Taiwan, Korea, New Zealand, Denmark and Netherlands?
| Please support my campaign. Buy my book. Click here. |
Email
I am a member of the Workers' Party. I blog in my personal capacity about policy issues in Singapore. 
November 5th, 2009 at 10:35 AM
“But even if all the above are true, why are we, a developed country, being compared with Third world countries all the time? It’s like comparing apples with oranges. Shouldn’t we compare ourselves with other First world countries like Taiwan, Korea, New Zealand, Denmark and Netherlands?”
That is because Singaporeans are all dying to emigrate to countries like Myanmar, Cambodia, Vietnam, India, Indonesia, etc and not to Australia, New Zealand, Japan, etc.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:51 PM
“Shouldn’t we compare ourselves with other First world countries like Taiwan, Korea, New Zealand, Denmark and Netherlands? ”
Come, come, Gerald, sure you know that the Singapore govt have no ‘locus standi’ or guts to do that! ;)
November 6th, 2009 at 12:33 AM
they compare to whichever ‘world’ that suits them.
ask about public transport fares, and they compare to london.
ask about press freedom, and they compare to african dictatorships.
ask about income tax and they compare to norway.
ask about minister salaries and they compare to CEOs
its time to vote these corrupt people out of parliament.
November 6th, 2009 at 1:12 AM
Very true jeff about the comparisons!
November 6th, 2009 at 11:39 AM
[...] to Perdition Election – Gerald Giam’s Blog: Stop comparing Singapore with Third world countries – Robert Amsterdam: The Repression of Political Freedoms in Singapore: The Case of Opposition [...]
November 6th, 2009 at 11:39 AM
[...] to Perdition Election – Gerald Giam’s Blog: Stop comparing Singapore with Third world countries – Robert Amsterdam: The Repression of Political Freedoms in Singapore: The Case of Opposition [...]
November 6th, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Why get workedup over regular contributions from regular bootlickers like Jeffrey Law, Lionel deSouza, Ace Kindred etc (they always seem to get their letters published no matter how moronic or shallow their contents are)
I simply ignore them because I know what they usually write
about.
In fact, we get a better perspective of life here if we were
to lay off ST or SPH publications all together
November 6th, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Keep writing Gerald, your articles will help more youngsters become aware of the propaganda they are being fed.
November 7th, 2009 at 7:59 PM
I don’t think it is a matter of being getting worked-up with the letters written by the bootlickers. Their letters have been deliberately chosen and published by the mass media for a purpose – to reinforce the PAP’s overall psychological warfare tactics and strategy, i.e. to brain-wash and indoctrinate the masses subtly over and over again.
Can you remember someone in the government once said, “If a lie is repeated again and again, one people will believe it to be the truth” or words to that effect. I think it was LKY himself who said that, if my memory serves me well.
So, Singaporeans now seriously need people like Gerald Giam and many other similarly passionate bloggers to refute such “lies” and open their eyes and ears, so that they will stop falling into the PAP’s psychological warfare traps.
Good work, Gerald. Please continue to write and write and write. I enjoy reading your articles. Thank you very much.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:02 PM
Typo Correction:
“If a lie is repeated again and again, one day people will believe it to be the truth”.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:58 PM
leeds – Don’t worry I’m far from worked up. I enjoy refuting these people’s regurgitations of PAP propaganda.
fievel and Lindia – Thanks for keeping me going! :)
November 20th, 2009 at 3:57 AM
If you pay careful attention to the rhetoric, the “comparisons” are made only when it is favorable to do so. The Singapore government and the media will always cherry-pick the issues and the countries to compare those issues against. We are not always compared against developing countries … only as and when it is convenient to do so.
March 20th, 2010 at 4:41 PM
Let’s see.
Firstly, money politics are categorised into 2 types. Overt and Covert. If you give money quietly to the voters, that’s covert and that’s ILLEGAL. If you give money publicly, that’s overt and that’s LEGAL. :)
Secondly, presidents are categorised into 2 types. The talk back type and the obedient type. If you talk back, then you’re considered a threat to the government and will eventually cause chaos. If you’re the obedient type, you will help to keep the PEACE cos you simply let the government do their thing. :)
Thirdly, gaining power and money are categorised into 2 types. The give me HIGH salary to stop my greed type, and the give me basic salary and tempt me type. If you give HIGH salary (in the hundreds of thousands), that’s considered LEGAL cos its open and acknowledged. But if its the basic type, you’re courting corruption.
You see there’s always 2 sides to a coin. Some coins have 4 sides…ingots.
* Should Singapore be compared with the 3 world countries like Malaysia or Indonesia? Why not? We’re not exactly 1st world you know?
May 8th, 2010 at 2:42 AM
Taiwan and Korea are not first world. Probably second world countries..