Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
Politics and sports
MM Lee has now likened politics to sports in invoking the comparison of teams competing in sports divisions to political parties competing in general elections.
It is an interesting comparison, no doubt, and there is certainly some truth in what MM Lee was trying to point out. Indeed, a team that is in division one is usually of much higher calibre than that of a team in division three and if one has to bet on a winning team, it’s a safer bet with a division one team as compared to a divison three team.
However, when I think about his analogy, it doesn’t make sense to me. How do we know if a team is of division one calibre unless there are other teams around to compare with? Therefore, I disagree that it is wrong to vote for alternative political parties for the sake of it. Without a basis of comparison, how do we know whether a team is a division one team or a division three team? Being the only team in the only division of a competition says nothing about the calibre of the team.
If MM Lee is serious about wanting to lay claim to the PAP being a division one team, all the more he should encourage people to vote in alternative teams so that there is some basis for comparison. And, he should be also calling for lowering of barriers to entry to the competition. Otherwise, he does not have a reasonable basis of claiming the PAP being a division one team.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 14/08/2008 at 12:33 pm, and is filed under Perspective. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 2 years ago
MM Lee is talking about results of a political party in governance just like how sports is being perceived as results-driven.
No basis for comparison? Does this mean that all 43 years of bringing Singapore to where it is today is not indicative of PAP’s abilities or its candidates? Does this also mean that the alternative parties have contributed substantially and proven themselves in all of these 43 years or beyond? What has the NSP, WP, SDP, SPP or even BS done during all these years for Singapore?
How do we know if a political party is good? Maybe in MM Lee’s view, it is how much results they have produced in and out of governance.
about 2 years ago
Food for thought:
Just because you consider yourself Div 1 and have your own paid board committee, referees and umpires to judge your team as Div 1…
doesn’t mean you belong to that Category.
Worse still is you bend the rules of your game (with backing from your own) and don’t even allow proper tackles/challenges to your team, without taking out a red card to show your opponents.
And you don’t even allow supporters of your opposing team to enter the stadium to cheer them. But you allow your own.
Of course there are lots of connections between sports and politics. Also thrown in food and politics with the bak-chor-mee, mee-siam-mai-hum sage.
Sheesh,
Kaffein
about 2 years ago
The oldfart should not use sports to compare with his brand of politics.
What he stands for is completely contrary to the ideals of sports.
He does not even understand the meaning of honour, integrity, sense of fairplay, respect for your opponents and competing in the right spirit.
This is what sports is about ! The world is better off without his brand of politics.
The only aspect this PAP team can claim to be division 1 is in the art of underhand strategies and winning dirty. Bollocks to them !
about 2 years ago
IrCTP,
Looks like you don’t understand what I am driving at. Perhaps a simpler example might suit you better.
Supposedly I own a small company and under my management, the company earns $1,000,000 net profit a year. Sounds pretty darn good for a small company, right? Do I have the right to be be considered “division 1″?
Of course not. The reason is simple. There is no basis of comparison. For all I know, anyone else would have easily doubled or tripled the company’s net profit with their management style. By the same token, others might only earn half or a third of the profits I have earned. Until there are other people to run the same company, how can one claim that he/she is the best in terms of results?
I am not denying the PAP’s achievements as you have insinuated. I’m merely saying that until there’s a good basis for comparing, it is presumptuous to claim that one is top class. Nice try at a sleight of hand to confuse two different issues together in order to paint my comment as a typical anti-government rant but unfortunately for you, it didn’t work this time.
about 2 years ago
Aaron:
“No basis for comparison.”
Look at MM Lee’s peers in the region. With National Day barely over, should I remind you about Singapore’s economic progress vis-a-vis its neighbours after 1965? Even David Marshall has (begrudgingly?) hinted that if his party were to remain in governance from the 1950s, Singapore would not have progressed this much. Where we are today in the region is the results of the pragmatic approach MM Lee and his team from the PAP have adopted. In the eyes of many (even in this region, China and even some Central Asian states), this is “Division 1″ governance. Can anyone dispute that?
This leads me to my other question – Can anyone — be it WP, SDP, SDA, NSP, etc — claim confidence in beating PAP’s performance (or at least the PAP team in the 1960s and 1970s), given the economic and political situation now? Or can any of these armchair political “pundits” claim that they can be right up there in “Division 1″ in terms of governance?
about 2 years ago
Before we liken politics to sports and harp about Div 1, 2, 3 etc. let’s talk about sportsmanship and the rules that go with it. Do politicians qualify as sportsmen?
about 2 years ago
shoestring – Do you believe politics is dirty or clean?
about 2 years ago
IrCTP,
This is the last time I will attempt to explain myself and if you don’t get it, you just don’t and I won’t explain further.
Let me use another analogy. Michael Phelps won 8 Olympic gold medals in a single meet. Everyone says he’s the best athlete out there. Why is he the best? The reason is because when compared to other swimmers in history, no one has achieved what he has achieved.
Back to the issue of political parties being Division 1 or not, how do we know whether they are indeed Division 1 until other political parties had a chance in governance and proven their abilities? Right now, since independence, we only had one political party in governance and while they are not doing a bad job, we have no basis or evidence to say that they are the best or the worst because there is no other benchmark.
If this explanation still fails to make you understand, I’m afraid my writings are not for you are you are welcome to stay away from my blog.
about 2 years ago
(a) Read MM’s speech carefully. He is comparing the quality of candidates from the PAP down the years. He considers the qualities of the Party’s candidates as “division one”.
In your argument, you have linked it to governance and commented that there is no basis for comparison. Even if there wasn’t, why don’t you compare the quality of opposition candidates vis-à-vis PAP’s candidates down the years? Hand on your heart, suppose you put all opposition candidates – dead or alive – in a team and you put all PAP candidates – dead or alive too – in a team, which would you have entrusted to run a newly independent country in the world?
No benchmark? I suggest you think about this issue – ask yourself why there hasn’t been a benchmark; think about whether Singapore deserves such a benchmark; and discuss the possible plans to bring this benchmark back to the political sphere.
Would this not be more constructive than an entry (and nothing more) about your opinion about a senior politician “likening politics to sport”?
(b) This is extracted from David Marshall’s interview:
“When I was Chief Minister, there were men dying of starvation and because of ‘beri-beri’. I took my PA [personal assistant] and an Inspector of Police for night at midnight. For two hours, we toured Singapore and we estimated there were two ten thousand men sleeping on the pavements. No homes.
Today – no unemployment, no homeless. I started this business of building homes for our people. Compare the puny work I achieved and the fantastic HDB homes that are available today for our people. I am deeply impressed and I take off my hat to this very able honest government. Dedicated!”
This is the view of one of the top non-PAP politicians of Singapore. No basis for comparison?
(c) Why are you spouting this stale argument about “if you don’t like, stay away from my writing”? Are you not open to discussion? Do you not welcome comments that are maybe contrary to your views? Have I engaged you on a personal level or have I only commented on your argument?
about 2 years ago
IrCTP,
As far as I’m concerned, you are entitled to your opinion and I’ve respected your views. I’ve decided to disengage from you because my analysis of your replies is that you are not interested in discussion but rather to push your stand. It is counter-productive to keep discussing if, at the end of the day, you are constantly diverting from the topic. I maintain that unless there has been another party in parliament, there is no benchmark for comparison. You start saying things like why do we even need a benchmark in the first place. I cannot comprehend why you cannot comprehend my point that if we want to compare, we need a basis or yardstick. Since we cannot even come to a common agreement on something as fundamental as this, I will not respond and you are welcome not to read my writings if it all ends up being a discussion that leads nowhere. Besides, freedom of speech to me entails both the right to respond and the right not to respond. I will respect your views but unfortunately, we have no common ground to continue further.
about 2 years ago
Good heavens.
Did you read my comments carefully? Or did your mind start to switch off the moment you perceive a miniscule amount of “criticism” to what you’ve written?
But I’ll be nice this time round and explain to you. I did not say (and nowhere did I imply the fact that) there shouldn’t be a yardstick. What I am saying is MM Lee wasn’t wrong in using the “division 1” analogy. He has stated very clearly what “division 1” quality means for the PAP and highlighted how crucial it is for Singapore’s governance. That is his yardstick.
(a) You kept harping on the fact that with no other political party being in governance, there is no yardstick. If you’re talking about post-1969 Singapore, I agree with you (but only because the citizenry elected PAP into the government). However, I am not sure how much you know about Singapore before 1965. I suggest you read up on the governments of David Marshall and Lim Yew Hock (and not just on Wikipedia).
(b) I challenged you in my previous comments think about how to bring about changes so that there will be a basis for comparison. I am disappointed that you did not take the challenge of thinking about it and writing down your thoughts so as to pave the way for some constructive discussion. Instead, you dismissed my comments with one swoop.
My comments are here for all to see. They can see for themselves if my comments have been counter-productive.
about 2 years ago
IrCTP,
I believe politics should be fair and clean as in sports. If we say we have achieved such and such and that proves we are so and so like an Olympic champion, we should have done it based on standards of sportsmanship in order to claim that badge of honor in sports.
But reality isn’t always what I believe. As I have observed, wanting a level playing field in politics is but wishful thinking.
I do not deny that the PAP has achieved much, but I have difficulty agreeing they have done so with a spirit of sportsmanship.
Perhaps that is why we say ‘office politics’ and not ‘office sportsmanship’.
about 2 years ago
As for quality of talents and how we qualify them, the BH has written an interesting article here:
http://dotseng.wordpress.com/2008/08/16/education-education-education-all-around-but-not-a-brain-around/
about 2 years ago
shoestring:
If written as objective as possible, history will allow us to make a judgment about how clean or dirty a politician or a political party is. You are right in saying that wanting a level playing field in politics is wishful thinking but given the power-hungry nature of humans and the lemmings-esque masses, we sometimes can understand why people go to extreme ends to keep themselves in power.
Olympics is politics. Sportsmanship, more often than not, comes second.
As for the politics in Singapore, one of my biggest lament is many people are unaware of what’s going on around them and they do not wish to find out; and for those who are marginally aware, they do nothing for themselves.
about 2 years ago
IrCTP,
Now we are talking. At least you recognise that my beef is not with how good or how bad the government is per se but the problem is really with how the comparison is being made. While it is true you didn’t say there shouldn’t be a yardstick, you didn’t say otherwise so how am I supposed to know you got my point or not? At least it is clear to me now what is your point of contention.
And, I’ve aced history most of the time back in secondary school so I know quite abit about Singapore history. The way I read MM’s comments is that he is emphasizing about now and the future, not about the past. The governments of David Marshall and Lim Yew Hock cannot be used to benchmark the current status of achievements by the PAP and what the PAP can achieve in the future. We need to evaluate based on a more recent benchmark which unfortunately we do not have.
I am going to put it down on the record that I do think the PAP has done well but I will not state it as a fact that the PAP is the best option until is clear to me that alternatives have failed. You have your own benchmarks and so do I. You are entitled to your own evaluation of the PAP by your own benchmark and I will not seek to convince you otherwise.
As for how to bring about changes, that is seriously so no-brainer that I didn’t even want to bother answering. It’s obvious that if you want change, you need to step up and challenge the PAP in reality by contesting elections. Unfortunately, I have no plans to do that yet. I’m perfectly happy being the armchair critic I am now because I’ve not decided whether Singapore is the place I want to eventually call home. I’ve plans to do other things in the next ten years and if you want a concrete answer from me, I’ll give it to you 10 years from now.
about 2 years ago
IrCTP,
Olympics may be politics, but sportsmanship definitely isn’t. The Olympics games was originally a celebration of sportsmanship and friendship, but sadly, as you have pointed out, human beings have defiled its noble intentions.
My point is, we should not liken ourselves to sportsman if we do not practice sportsmanship. That is dishonesty and people who can discern it will lose respect the the one who claim to be like a sportsman when he is not.
I used to respect the MM and PAP ministers, and I wish the government would really reflect on why they are losing that respect. Unless of course respect is secondary to them.
about 2 years ago
Aaron:
“I’m perfectly happy being the armchair critic I am now because I’ve not decided whether Singapore is the place I want to eventually call home.”
I’m extremely surprised by this comment of yours, given the copious amounts of your opinions that you have published on the socio-political issues that you have on Singapore. Taking also into consideration, your entry on the women table tennis team’s silver win.
“It’s obvious that if you want change, you need to step up and challenge the PAP in reality by contesting elections. Unfortunately, I have no plans to do that yet.”
Have I suggested to you anywhere that you should step forward to contest the elections? Have I not expressed my views in one of your earlier entries about how to bring about change?
Not one political party in Singapore as of now is capable enough to challenge the PAP in the elections. Not even for the next fifty years if no one does anything NOW.
about 2 years ago
shoestring:
“My point is, we should not liken ourselves to sportsman if we do not practice sportsmanship.”
Many Singaporeans know what it means to be courteous and gracious, having been taught in school and after countless campaigns. But do many of us practise if in our lives?
“I wish the government would really reflect on why they are losing that respect. Unless of course respect is secondary to them.”
I’ll draw your attention to this:
“Between being loved and being feared, I have always believed Machiavelli was right. If nobody is afraid of me, I’m meaningless.” – Lee Kuan Yew, 6.10.1997
about 2 years ago
Aaron: One more thing…
“And, I’ve aced history most of the time back in secondary school so I know quite abit about Singapore history.”
Crikey. Who oversaw / produced / wrote the history textbooks for our secondary schools?
about 2 years ago
IrCTP,
Opine all you want. I don’t really care how surprised you are or whatever other things you want to say. This blog is for me to write down my thoughts and what I write is conditioned by numerous factors at the time of writing. Depending on what happens, I may or may not change my views. I’ve said earlier, and I will say it again. If you don’t like what I am writing, or you think I’m a joke, don’t waste your time reading my blog. There are many more blogs out there worthy of your time. If you have too much time on your hands, find another outlet to let steam off, please. Your comments may be a piece of exquisite art to you but I sure don’t know how to appreciate them so please go somewhere else where you will be appreciated.
about 2 years ago
Aaron:
Why are you getting your knickers in a twist? If you dare to publish your views online, you have to be prepared to comments, or worse (or better, depending on your perspective) criticisms. As much as you like to express your opinions, others can also express their views about your opinions as well. There is nothing to like or dislike about another person’s opinions. I’m simply challenging your arguments here, in hope that you’ll examine issues a little deeper and you craft your arguments in such a way that it will invite constructive discussions.
For example, you talk about having aced history during your secondary school days. This claim doesn’t really hold for me because Singapore’s post-World War II history up to our Independence in 1965 was murky about the David Marshall and Lim Yew Hock governments. Can anyone say that the text was truly objective about achievements of the early administrations? Was there a re-telling of stories from the perspectives of the students in Chinese schools who were sympathetic to the cause of the bus workers during the Hock Lee Bus riots? This is simply only the tip of the iceberg.
about 2 years ago
IrCTP,
Since when am I not prepared for criticisms? If I am not prepared, your comments would have never got published. As for challenging arguments, that is fine by me but I do not like people who challenge without offering their own stand. Why should I let you challenge me when you don’t offer your own stand to let me challenge you back? Why is it so difficult for you to even state what is your own position? If you think I am wrong, then say it and back things up with evidence. Stop beating around the bush and get to the point. Until you have a point of your own to make, I’m will not engage you further. I believe in a discussion, not a Q n A session.
about 2 years ago
IrCTP,
It is up to you or MM or his ministers to heed the signal. I have tried to throw some light on how else they can win back lost confidence besides using money. Money cannot solve all problems, especially intangible ones. They may choose to ignore feedback and continue patting themselves on the back or wise up before it is too late.
By the way, using money to solve problems is not a difficult skill that requires scholarly talent. Even I or my next door neighbour can do it. Excellent problems solvers will be able to come up with solutions other than money. These are the ones who deserve the accolades.
Same applies to politics with and without ethics. There is no glory in winning through dirty politics. The one who does so with a conscience wins the vote, at least mine.
Have a good day.
about 2 years ago
shoestring:
I am but a small fry in the grand scheme of things. Perhaps even more insignificant than Aaron here. I am an ordinary Singaporean. Trying to make ends meet. Happy to put food on the table and have a roof over my head. My PSLE results couldn’t even get me into the worst class in RI. The closest I’ve got to an elite school was when taking a bus along Bukit Timah Road.
My comments here (and elsewhere) are to prod minds which are brighter, smarter and more astute into doing something that can ultimately lead to change. Just look at Aaron’s credentials alone, he would be a suitable election candidate, at least in the eyes of Singaporeans. Look at how many younger Singaporeans — like him — are expressing their opinions on the Internet. They have the brains and the capabilities. However, they need to be challenged to delve deeper into the issues or to take a step back to see the bigger picture or to trawl through the annuals of history, just so that their discussions and rhetoric can lead to something more constructive for the sake of the next generation.
The mentality and all that the ruling party espouses are too entrenched in the minds of generations before Aaron’s. If we want to see change for the good of Singapore, it must start somewhere. So why not Aaron’s generation? My generation did not have the benefits of the Internet to air our views, challenge each other’s arguments and galvanise thoughts. Aaron’s and generations after his have this useful tool. Sources of views contrary to those official ones for my generation were scant. Today, we not only have wikipedia but many bright minds who have taken upon themselves to opine. I want them to go beyond just offering opinions. I want them to engage and challenge each other just in hope that they can come up with a blueprint for our future with or without the PAP.
Is that too much to ask, coming from a simple man who still remembers the struggles and efforts made by Goh Keng Swee, S. Rajaratnam, David Marshall, Lim Chin Siong, Chia Thye Poh and most of all, Lee Kuan Yew back when Singapore was struggling to become an entity on the world stage?
about 2 years ago
What I would like is that all Singaporeans, young and old, recognize we each have a responsibility for the future of Singapore. I does not help for the younger ones to label the older ones as passe, conservative or irrelevant. Nor is it any good for the older ones to put the burden of change on the younger ones since the older ones have to be accountable for the state of affairs today. Both groups would benefit from the synergy of combined strengths if only we could step out of those prejudicial restrictions. Same applies to the poor and rich or elite and non-elite.
Lastly, just because a person has done great things does not mean he is infallible or continue to be great.