|
|
|
Your
Letters
09
Feb 08
Dear SDP,
I write as a frustrated member
of the Complaints Choir of Singapore. Despite the ban on our
public performances, I'm glad we persisted at The Arts House. I
hate it that we have to hide our political agendas (if any) as
members; I hate the fact that we are forced to self-censor.
However, I deliver some good news- some of us will
continue to sing in the complaints choir, grousing for all
eternity, hoping to provoke some ears and incite some sentiment
at our murky state of affairs- or for some, continue to pursue
our love for singing, (perhaps) as a manifestation of a single
community spirit. I will keep you updated, SDP.
And thank
you Dr Chee for attending out 3pm performance on Sunday!
JEREMY
SDP's
reply:
It
is a shame that the Choir was not allowed to perform in public.
The audience would have enjoyed judging from the video
that was posted on Youtube. The persistence and determination of
the Choir members were indeed commendable. We hope you will
continue to do what you do, develop yourselves musically as well
as politically. Remember a de-politicized citizenry cannot stand
up for the nation. Thank you all for your hardwork. Well
done!
Dr Chee sends his regards to you and the other Choir
members. He thoroughly enjoyed the performance.
__________________________________
I refer to the letter
written to SDP by a person James regarding TheOnlineCitzen and
published by SDP on 27 Jan, 2008. I would like to share my view
regarding this letter with SDP and its readers.
Some
people have the strange view that "not anti-PAP" means
"pro-PAP".
Some
people have no problem with some ex-PAP becoming opposition
because they have shown strong "anti-PAP" acts to
signal their change of heart. But they question any other person
with past or current "link" in any form and shape with
PAP just because they are not showing an "anti-PAP"
color. These are being labeled or questioned.
This
over-simplified view of "anti-PAP" and "pro-PAP"
political spectrum is no different from the communist China's Red
Guard mindset of pro-Revolution
vs counter-Revolution
in the 60s. In recent years, we see the same mindset in Taiwan's
DPP (Democratic Progressive Party) in dividing people and
social/political issues in term of pro-Taiwan
vs anti-Taiwan.
We have seen the damage done to the respective societies. We also
see the wisdom of Taiwan people to vote against DPP in the recent
legislative council election for failing as a ruling government.
They are wise in not being manipulated by DPP pro-Taiwan vs
anti-Taiwan campaign tactics.
This view that one must
either be "anti-PAP" or "pro-PAP" is wrong
and it is no different from PAP saying one should join a
political party in order to get involved in social/political
issues. Such view is wrong for healthy democratic
development.
True democracy is founded on strong people
involvement in social/political issues. To do this, we need media
to provide good quality issue based information to simulate our
thinking and debate. In the past one year, we have seen many
blogs doing this, including TOC (TheOnlineCitizen) just doing
that.
Some people question TOC because of its editorial
team's past/current "link" to PAP. But they do not
question other ex-PAP turn opposition. Why? So, the real issue
they have is not the past/current "link" to PAP but
their judgment of whether the individual is anti-PAP enough to
their liking. If we subscribe to such judging view, we will have
a polarized" anti-PAP
vs pro-PAP"
political scene. There will be no room for non-partisan concerned
people to get involved in politics. When PAP falls, we will have
only one anti-PAP political force to take over. We will just be
switching from one One-Party domination to another One-Party
domination.
Our democratic development must be one that
grow a strong, politically concerned people who are free to
choose if they want to involve in any political party. We should
expect a wide spectrum of political views and political parties
that can not be simply classified as anti-PAP or pro-PAP. We need
different political parties to avoid another One-Party
domination. We need a strong non-partisan politically concerned
public to objectively judge and readily switch support from one
party to another party instead of one that blindly loyal to a
particular party. The attempt by some people to divide us into
"anti-PAP vs pro-PAP" will ruin this democratic
development.
The members of TOC with past or present
"link" with PAP are still independent thinking, caring
people who raise issue of public concern and serving the public
by sharing their views and gathering information. Reading those
articles help the public to raise awareness of the issues, If
readers want to take further actions, they can do so, like
joining political parties or writing to the newspapers. TOC is
doing a good job in contributing to our democratic development.
It is grossly unjust to doubt their motive based on those
"links".
Don't we know of people who were PAP
and now opposition?
Don't we remember late President Ong
dutifully questioned PAP government to safeguard our reserves,
serving the people above the party?
Being "linked"
to ST, MDA, YPAP or any grassroots body do not immediately and
permanently transform an individual into PAP robot.
Being
"linked" to ST, MDA, YPAP or any grassroots body do not
make people immediately and permanently give up their values and
duties to the people and the nation.
Until and unless
people starting to get involved in raising social/political
issues and talking about them like many blogs and TOC, we will
not have a people based democracy. The effort of many blogs and
TOC is a start.
Until and unless people starting to get
involved in grassroots as individuals serving the community, we
will not have a people based grassroots. Let us appreciate those
who are in the grassroots to serve the people instead of blindly
questioning them.
SAREK
HOME
__________________________________
Dear
Dr. Chee,
I can see the continued destruction of Singapore
before my very eyes. The list is too long but a few can be
mentioned, such as, the denial of the rule of law; the total
disregard of the Constitution, such as the segregation of the
Malays and Indians under HDB policy, such as the illegal
importation of millions of Chinese from China to deny the Malays
and the Indians equality in citizenship; the indiscriminate
importation of foreign workers deliberately intended to destroy
the livelihood of Singapore workers; the deliberate policy of not
educating Singaporeans fully so that they will be forever kept
ignorant of the injustice done to them; the consequent massive
flood of educated Singaporeans overseas resulting in unacceptable
levels of loss in skilled people; the unacceptable income
disparity between rich and poor; the beatings of prisoners as
part of their punishment called caning; the highest rate of legal
executions of any country in the world; the unacceptable levels
of suicides; the ministers paying themselves $3.7 million dollars
a year and calling it a salary! I can go on but I must stop. The
list is too long.
In other words, Lee Kuan Yew is behaving
as if he is the law unto himself. As if the Constitution never
existed. As if he can do anything he wants.
If any citizen
of Singapore stood by as he continued on his merry way, Singapore
will be totally destroyed. It will no longer be recognizable as
the Singapore that anyone knew. As you are aware, the legal
profession having been discredited, with a corrupt judiciary and
the absence of the rule of law; lawyers are leaving the
profession as we speak. The Civil Service despite large pay
increments and other perks as inducements is continuing to see
massive resignations and no new entrants.
Having said all
this, I understand you yourself having agreed with Freedom House,
the international monitor on democracies that democracy cannot
come about in Singapore though the ballot box. Lee Kuan Yew and
his son have both admitted themselves that they have "fixed"
the system so they continue to win.
Since waiting for the
next elections is useless, since it is going to be the same
arrogance from Lee Kuan Yew, or if he is dead by then, from his
son; surely there is common ground here that only one thing and
one thing alone can work to bring about change; and that is
physically demanding it from the dictators. Since we all know
that there is no dictatorship in the world, so far as we know,
that peacefully handed over power to someone else.
I have
been in the Workers Party from 1984 to 1991 and contested 2
elections, Tiong Bahru in 1988 and Bukit Merah in 1991. During
these years, I have seen the Workers Party cater to perceived or
imagined preferences of the citizenry. For instance since JB
Jeyaretnam was an Indian and Singapore is predominantly Chinese,
whenever he appeared in public, he arranged to be surrounded by
Chinese, to allay any impression that the Workers Party was an
Indian Party. During the later part of his career in the party,
there was constant talk that Mr. Low Thia Khiang should take over
since he was Chinese, and will be appreciated by the Chinese
majority instead of an Indian. Even for photo ops, there was
usually a magical chairs merry go round where the races were
rearranged to show more Chinese. When I look back, I say all this
was wrong. We are all Singaporeans. What difference did it make
whether you were a yellow Chinese with slit eyes and no facial
hair at all, or if you were an Indian with a sharp nose and hair
all over your face? What difference did it make? None.
My
point is this. In whatever that men do, the governing rule is
what is right and wrong. What people think in the immediate
future should make no difference on one's judgment.
And
let me come to the point. Since we both agree, I hope that
elections never got rid of any dictator, the answer lies; you
guessed right as to what I will say; the answer lies in protests.
Protests against an unjust regime are both legally and morally
right. In fact not protesting against these outrages makes every
local Singaporeans an accomplice and collaborator with Lee Kuan
Yew as he continues to destroy Singapore.
I personally
know that there are many who may say that Singapore should be
changed the conventional way, that is through elections. That
protests and such things are not within the Singapore psyche.
That Singaporeans are more civil and gentle people. That if there
are protests all foreign investment will leave Singapore and we
will be turned overnight into beggars.
None of these
questions should even come anywhere near the equation. The answer
is very simple. Should something be done to stop the rot? And can
that something be contesting elections as usual. And if you
already know of its inefficacy, then what is the point of doing
it. I say public opinion does not matter. What matters is what is
right and wrong. That alone should be guiding principle, because
doing the right thing always ensures success in the end.
Otherwise, you will be no better than the present toothless
Workers Party.
Today, the situation is prime for protests.
It is perfect. You have more grievances that what you need. These
grievances cut across racial lines, income groups; in fact these
grievances affect every Singaporeans.
What you must do is
to deliberately make Mr. Wong Kan Seng realize that he has become
helpless. By deliberately breaking these laws unjust laws such as
the assembly and speech laws designed specifically to keep
Singaporeans without a voice. The dense population of Singapore
which equates such places as Gaza and Hong Kong, makes protests
especially effective. The concentration of people is so great
that one message spoken once will be heard by at least 100 people
along Orchard Road. This is the reason why Wong Kan Seng is
terrified of the word protests. Its effectiveness is exemplified
in countries such as Singapore.
Of course there is the
danger of arrests and other forms of intimidation by the
government against protestors. But I believe even now that too
many protests have happened that criminalizing it is becoming
counterproductive. I recall a number of protests organized by the
SDP in 2007, for instance the Burmese protests, the Istana
protest, and so on. I have not read in any news media that the
police have taken any action against any of the protestors.
If
Dr. Chee Soon Juan and his friends are deliberately going to defy
these laws, and if the police are going to arrest him, try him in
the Subordinate Court for 2 months, levy a small fine which he
will refuse to pay, go to jail for a week; come out and do it all
over gain. You see it is this government that is losing its
respect, its time and money; Dr. Chee loses nothing. Instead he
gains international respect and admiration as a freedom fighter.
And if a few can join him and with a few more as time goes on;
you will have another Intramuros Manila Filipinos who ousted the
dictator Marcos.
Moreover, Lee being an octogenarian or
whatever name he may have, he will die soon. That too must give
an added impetus for the movement for change.
The good
news. Singaporeans are very suitable for democracy. Over the
years they have become a civil people. A law abiding people. A
gentle people. They are not like Pakistanis or the Afghans who
are out to kill. Singaporeans will not kill anyone. Such people
are best suited to democracy. And for making them a gentle people
we can thank Lee Kuan Yew for that. But having thanked him, we
should ask him to step aside. Right now.
So my dear Dr.
Chee. Please do something. Taking about electoral reforms within
4 walls are good but not enough. What is needed is physical
action.
Thank you.
GOPALAN NAIR
Attorney at Law
Archive
of your letters from 27 Jan 08 here
|
|
