Task+G++Submit+TACN

//** Zhou Shicheng 3B138 **// //** Part Four - A Place In The Sun: Race and National Identity **//

19. The writer is of the opinion that the Singapore government "has shown strikingly little interest in cultivating Singaporean's appreciation for one another's cultures." To what extent do you think he is right? //[chapter 19]//

// The writer says that the Singapore government showed its interest towards a “return to roots” emphasis on the country’s component Asian cultures. The government formed various ethnic-based self-help groups which provided tuition and social services for their respective communities. However, the writer says that the Singapore government has not done well in uniting the different cultures in Singapore and seeing themselves as a Singaporean Singapore. I feel that the writer may be misjudging the government in this area. While it may be true that some Singaporeans are not able to appreciate other’s cultures, we should not judge them as a whole. Also, the Singapore government tries to create mutual understanding among different races, although through authoritarian means. This doesn’t mean that the government shows “strikingly little interest” in cultivating Singaporean’s appreciation for one another’s cultures. Even though the goal of integration is not entirely achieved, I feel that the government is trying its best to help with the situation. The writer’s opinion may be too one-sided, hence I think that the writer is not entirely correct and should give a larger view on the statement by stating that the Singapore government has not done enough instead of “shown strikingly little interest”. // 20. "Singapore is one of the most Westernised cities in Asia. (Yet) in some respects, Singaporeans are not westernised enough." Do you agree with this opinion? // [chapter 20] // // I agree with this opinion. // High rise office blocks, posh apartment buildings and prestigious hotels are omnipresent. Singaporeans crave western goods, especially expensive cars, jewellery and designer clothes. You see an unusually high number of Ferraris, Porsches, Mercedes and BMWs on the roads. All major designer houses have set up shop on the island and are doing excellent business. Also, English is the main language taught in schools and most Singaporeans speak English. For Singapore is now an economic power-house precisely because its political, legal, and social institutions have been shaped in ways to ensure its assimilation into a global economic system that emanates from the West.

Ironically, Singaporeans are not westernised enough in various aspects. Many Singaporeans have not imbibed enough of the strong individual can-do mentality and the public-spiritedness that can be found in the United States. The education system here is very much Asian, where a Singaporean is pushed by this family to do well in school, and feels a sense of obligation to do so. Many Singaporeans conform, and few would stray from the “Singapore Plan”. Westerners, however, have much more freedom and choose what they want to do. Most westerners do not work long hours unlike Singaporeans. Many Singaporeans still follow the eastern values of doing well in school, earning money and supporting the family eventually. Therefore, I agree with the opinion that Singapore may be on of the most Westernised cities in Asia yet Singaporeans are not westernised enough.

21. Why does the writer think that political issues are key considerations behind debates over language education? // [chapter 21] // Language education is very much different from math and science subjects. Language is the symbol of a unique culture, and indication of different races. For example, the Chinese speak Chinese, the Malays speak Malay and the English speak English etc. Hence, Language reflects your race. Political issues are key considerations behind debates over language education because it is easily misunderstood. The government has to make language education fair for every race in order to avoid racial tensions. SAP(special assistance plan) schools helped to keep faith with the policy of compulsory bilingual education without making the second language such a burden that it would drag down the average student’s grades in other subjects; and set realistic, achievable standards for the average student, while pushing those with the ability the excel. Also, when the government stated that it wanted to use SAP schools to create ‘Chinese Cultural Elite’, it sparked off a controversy, as people misunderstood it for that the government wanted more of the nation’s cultural elite to be more Chinese. However, while people complain about SAP schools being Chinese, they do not seem to mind mission schools being Christian. One key difference between Christian schools and SAP schools is that the former were founded by missionaries, whereas some of the latter are government creations. Therefore, it is apparent that political issues are key considerations behind debates over language education.

22.Do you think that opening our doors to foreigners would depreciate the value of citizenship? Why or why not? // [chapter 22] //

I do think that the attraction of foreigners will affect, though little, the value of citizenship.

Foreigners makes up 10% of Singapore's population and thus, we can see that it takes up a rather significant percentage of our population. Singapore requires many skills that some of the foreign talents possess and therefore, subsidized housing and an attractive education package for children were offered. It is due to such incentives that citizens of Singapore feel unfair and that their citizenship holds little value as compared to those of the foreign talents.

Nonetheless, I feel that the small extent of the feeling of unfairness of the citizens may have little overall impact on the true value of citizenship. After all, the incentives provided by the government were to develop the attachment between these foreigners and the nation so that they could take up citizenship too. Thus, attracting foreign talents is in fact, raising the value of citizenship.

Moreover, citizens of Singapore certainly enjoy their very own privileges, be it in voting, health care and even housing whereby only citizens hare able to reside in certain types of housing. 23. George Cherian calls the national urge to upgrade "an unsettling impermanence." What is your opinion on this? // [chapter 23] //

Not too long ago a lot of the old Chinese shop houses had to give away for steel and concrete high rises. Singapore is a modern, wealthy city and old ramshackle buildings had to be done away with. Upgrading is important because it is necessary for Singapore to survive. Housing crisis was solved with the upgrading of living facilities from kampongs to HDBs. Sanitary conditions improved, utilities and facilities were provided, what more can we ask for? It may be argued that upgrading would damage our national heritage and indeed it would. The government had to make the decision whether to sacrifice and survive or to give in and die. Land use had to be maximised since Singapore has very little natural resources. An increasing population means that more housing has to be provided. Moreover, the government realized that the little heritage left was going to disappear quickly and now the remaining shop houses are being restored in their former glory. Therefore, I feel that George Cherian should not have said that the national urge to upgrade is “an unsettling impermanence.”.


 * //[You have chosen a section with several questions that require your personal opinion. While you do have personal insights to share, you could have given more substantiation to your opinions. - LokeLF]//**

Kong Wilson 3B1(10) __**//Part One - Climate Control: Politics Under The New Guard//**__

Mr Goh Chok Tong's impact on Singapore politics "was seen at several levels" as different people had different viewpoints about his contributions to the country. Some saw him as Lee Kuan Yew's puppet and Lee Hsien Long's seat warmer, with pundits speculating that he would be successed by Lee Hsien Long soon. Even when Goh Chok Tong was the prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew remained as Singapore's most influential leader as he was the one initiating massive reforms. However, there were some who regarded him as an important leader due to his decision to investigate whether property puchases by the Lees were at discounted prices even before checking with the Lees. Also, to boost his moral authority in arguing for higher salaries for public servants, he excluded himself from the formula, and announced that he would not accept any raise for five years. Many Singaporeans unconciously sensed that Goh Chok Tong was a leader who could understand them. However, the people viewed the Lees as "high and mighty" and they could never reach their standards. // The Singapore School of Thought emphasises the lack of universality of many political norms. It believes that economic growth is the necessary foundation of any system that claims to advance human dignity, and that order and stability are essential for development. The Singapore School of Thought puts economic development before democratisation, while the Western democracy thinks otherwise. It argues that China's strategy which executes market reform before political reform may be less dramatic in the short term but would produce more lasting benefits. // Press Freedom in Singapore is the freedom to report on any topic that is not censored or limited by government restrictions. Journalists accept this fact as the system of press management in Singapore combines waterthight legal controls with a compelling political ideology that encourages not just obedience, but also active support. In the West, however, press freedom is simply to report freely on any topic one chooses. This is made possible as the Constitution protects the press from the government, allowing it to publish anything it likes. //
 * 1. In your opinion, what do the terms 'authoritarian democracy' and 'benevolent dictatorship refer to. How are they different?** //**[Introduction]**
 * 2.** **Why do you think the term 'The Air-Conditioned Nation' is an apt description of Singapore?** //**[Introduction]**// The original intention of the "depoliticisation" of the Singapore public was to prevent people outside the political arena from setting political agenda and raising controversial issues which may lead to unnecessary conflicts. It was initially intended to suppress the communists which were polically active and aggresive during the 1960s. However, depoliticisation produces a political sphere which is sterile and the PAP may be unable to atract enough able Singaporeans into Parliament and the government. People may start to think that they will not get into trouble as long as they are outside the politcal arena, thus becoming more reluctant to join the government.
 * 3. What do you think the terms 'autonomy as consumers' and 'autonomy to challenge' suggest about the nature of Singaporeans?** //**[Introduction]**
 * 4. The writer thinks that the advent of the 21st century may require a new kind of politics (p 196). What did he envisage this new politics to be like? //[Conclusion]//** This is true because the elected President was very strange to the government and the setup from the very beginning and some even considered him as a nuisance. Before an elected President was present, the Parliament was dominated by a ruling party with a leadership made up of cabnet ministers, and important political decisions were made by them. However, the introduction of an elected President caused the people's mandate to be lent to two separate institutions, parliament and the presidency. This caused the distribution of power to be more balanced and thus the people started to view the government as a more democratic one.
 * 5. Lee's air-conditioned underwear seems to be a concept that challenges national unity (p 207). In your own words, explain how this is so.** //**[Conclusion]**
 * 6. How can Singapore arrest the "privatisation of its public"?** //**[Conclusion]**// In the 1950s, the PAP adopted the strategy "riding the tiger" to make use of the communist party to mobilise the masses to achieve independence. However, in the 1990s, this strategy was adopted because the PAP has recognised the importance of money in Singapore. Thus, the party made use of capitalism and transformed its organisational culture into one that works with and for the market. Both attempts to "ride the tiger" could either help perpetuate good governance, or precipitate the party's self destruction.


 * //[You have tagged your answers to the wrong questions, Wilson. It's quite amazing how you could have crafted your answers to questions that are totally different. Your responses tend to be curt at times too - LokeLF]//**

Lin Zhuo 3B1(17) Part One-Climate control : Politics under the New Guard 1. In your own words, explain how Mr Goh Chok Tong’s impact on Singapore politics was “ seen at several levels” and how he was different from Mr Lee Kuan Yew as a Prime Minister. [Chapter1]

Mr Goh Chok Tong’s impact on Singapore politics was “seen at several levels”. When Mr Goh Chok Tong first stepped up and took the Prime Minister post, many regarded him as the puppet of Mr Lee Kuan Yew and the bench-warmer of the more-abled Lee Hsien Leong. During his post as the PM of Singapore, the senior minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew was still considered as the most influential leader. Goh Chok Tong looked at the situation in the national terms, and judged that it was good for the country. Under the rule of the Goh Chok Tong government, great success was achieved. During that period, the per capita income rose from $22,000 to $37000; the Housing Board upgrading transformed decrepit neighbourhoods. Educational reforms in Singapore also expanded the proportion of each cohort making it to beyond secondary institutions. Leisure and entertainment options are multiplied. A poll was done in 1996 of 525 Singaporeans and 8 out of 10 gave that they were satisfied with the government’s performance. Goh Chok Tong was also closely identified with programmes such as Edusave, a key symbol of a new empahsisi on spreading the benefits of growth more broadly. Thus we can see the great impact of Goh Chok Tong on the Singapore politics. Goh Chok Tong was different from Lee Kuan Yew, as he was more willing and prepared to defer the wisdom and experience of the elder Lee Kuan Yew, delegating to the able and energetic younger generation of Singapore. Different from Lee whom many portrayed as a leader who was “high and mighty”, Goh Chok Tong was seen and recognized by many of the Singapore as a leader, though ordinary, but the one who understands them.

2. What was the original intention of the ‘depoliticisation’ of the Singapore public and what were the ‘negative effects’ of such depoliticisation?’ [Chapter2] The original intention of the ‘depoliticisation’ of the Singapore public was to suppress the communists who were growing more and more influential in the 1970s. It was also to prevent interfere and attacks from the Singaporean public towards the policies made by the government. This is to prevent unclear confusions towards the government policies and may cause conflicts. Depoliticisation also helps to maintain the respect from the fellow Singaporean public to the government when they carry out policies. The negative effect of depoliticisation is that it deeply changed the mindset of the Singaporeans to raise questions and issues about the policies implemented by the government. An example will be the commentary of the professional communicator Catherine Lim was considered as crossing the line by the government, it made many Singaporeans to come to an conclusion that engaging in political debate was an extremely and unpredicted business and it was the wisest to stay out. In addition, Singapore’s political sterility is probably the main reason for the PAP’s chronic inability to attract enough talents of the younger generation to join the government. People need to go through active participation to learn about the diverse interests that inhabits their society and about the need for negotiation and compromise among them. Such involvements will enable individuals to strengthen their leadership abilities and develop an interest in public affairs. The “depolicisation’ policy carried out by the Singapore government contradicts with that.

3. What do you understand that the “Singapore School of Thought”? Why and How is it different from Western democracy? [Chapter 3] ‘Singapore School of Thought’ is an idea emphasizing on the priority of the development of economy and social development than political democracy. The ‘Singapore School of Thought’ believes that the Western idea of democracy has surpassed many and has been acknowledged as the ideological supremacy of the West, but for the case of Singapore, it is different from the Western countries. Singapore government seemed to prefer China’s way of political strategy, which is to reform the market first then reform the country’s politics, unlike the Western countries which is vice-versa. This is different from the Western countries and their applications of democracy. The ‘Singapore School of Thought’ also depends and relies on many old and traditional Asian values, such as sense of commitment and collective benefits etc. The PAP government too believed firmly that the party itself has its own fundamental rights and had no interest for other foreigners to use Singapore as their guinea pig for their political experiments.

//4. //"The directly elected character of the President adds a new and unfamiliar dimension to Singapore's political matrix." In what way is this true? //[chapter 4] // //Prior to 1991, Singapore’s President was largely a figurehead, in the mould of West Minister head of state. He could be engaged and subtly influential.. The prime minister was the country’s chief executive, not the President. // //Ong Teng Cheong had questioned a government Bill to amend his power after 10 months unto his term. This shows that Ong was serious about establishing the presidency’s independence, which is contrary to the sceptics who saw him a government man. // //Singapore upholds the formal separation of powers- among the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, to prevent the abuse by any one arm of the state. // //Directly elected President also adds a new dimension to Singapore politics, that is the President will have the most of the support from the Singaporeans. This can be seen from the death of Ong Teng Cheong’s wife, Siew May, whom many Singaporeans went to pay respect though most of them have no idea what does she looked like. This is due to their sense of support towards their own elected president. //

//5. ////Explain the difference between the principle of press freedom in Singapore and that of a Western country.[Chapter 5] // //In the system of press management in Singapore, it combines watertight legal controls with a compelling political ideology that encourages not just obedience, but also active support. // //Journalists must also beware of the Internal Security Act, under which they can be detained without trial. They can be fined or jailed if they are judged to be in contempt of court or contempt of parliament. Magazines can also be suspended if found with inappropriate contents, for example the Woman’s Affairs was suspended because it ran a feature on the PAP’s female MPs that included a few critical comments and was judged to have strayed into political commentary in contravention of the aims stated in its licence. This kind of actions provide the government sweeping powers to punish journalists and their publications when they cross the line of acceptability, including the power to silence them completely too. // //Singapore journalists actually pointed out that by vetting the informations that they are publishing, they are actually practising responsible and intellectually-honest journalism. By pointing to the PAP’s record of good government, they said that it does not warrant the kind of negativity and cynicism which is the second nature to journalists in many other countries. //

//6. ////What do you understand by the strategy ‘riding the tiger’ in the 1950s and in the 1990s? [Chapter 6] // //The strategy ‘riding the tiger’ in the 1950s was initiated by Lee Kuan Yew and his like-minded comrades which sealed a Faustian pact with the Singapore’s militant pro-communists in order to harness the only force capable of mobilising the masses in the struggle for Merdeka. // //The strategy ‘riding the tiger’ transformed in the 1990s from targeting at the communists to targeting capitalism in Singapore. The motive and purpose is simple, only money can keep Singapore spinning in an era when markets make the world go round. // //<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-style: normal;">In the 1990s, the government realised the need to build up the external economy and from this we can see that this could not be achieved without the help from private enterprise. Naturally the government concentrated on these cooperations. Lee Kuan Yew had said, “we are in an era of high growth, with fortunes being made by the enterprising and the whole social climate has changed.” // //<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-style: normal;">The main difference between the strategy ‘riding the tiger’ in 1950s and in 1990s is that in 1950s, the strategy concentrated on limiting the influence of other political parties in Singapore, e.g. the Communists; the strategy ‘riding the tiger’ in 1990s on the other hand focuses on the development of Singapore’s economy and improving both the country and people’s fortune. //


 * //[Your response is generally concise and well-illustrated. Good job, Lin Zhuo!]//**

Tan Zheng Ting 3b126

<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;">19. The writer is of the opinion that the Singapore government "has shown strikingly little interest in cultivating Singaporean's appreciation for one another's cultures." To what extent do you think he is right? //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">[chapter 19] //

I think that he is right to a large extent. Firstly, instead of developing the citizens’ interest and sensitivity to another’s culture, the Singapore government over relies on top-down policing to sustain inner ethnic peace. Even though one statement in the pledge states, “one united nation regardless of race, language or religion”, which is achieved through developing citizen’s interest and sensitivity to other culture, there are still policies like ethnic quotas in public housing or laws allowing the government to gag religious preachers and what not. Therefore, by setting down these policies, even though it is used as an “insurance”, has defeated the purpose of letting the citizens develop interest and sensitivity in other cultures. The citizens would not need to make an effort to ensure that ethnic peace remains in Singapore as the government has already planned everything for them. Singaporeans are so-called “free-riders” when it comes to race relations as they do not have the need to develop and sensitivity or interest in other cultures as to keep ethnic peace – they have already been suppressed by law. Therefore, this shows that the Singapore government have shown little interest in cultivating Singaporeans appreciation for other cultures. Also, there is a lack of campaigns that is being used to cultivate the citizens’ interest in other cultures. Yes, there are campaigns which are used to promote one culture, however, are there campaigns to educate the people about what is interesting in another’s culture? There may be campaigns to promote speaking Chinese, to show how deep the Chinese’s culture is, but are there campaigns to teach the Chinese about what is admirable in Malay or Indian cultures? Also, even though there are several agencies set up to perform or handle issues that are too large or important for the government to take charge of, such as the National Youth Council, there is no on organization that is being set up to promote multi-culturalism, even though many people agree that this is more important than promoting courtesy. Even though it may be a little too hasty to force communities to come together, but the fact here is that there is not even an attempt to make a first step. This thus shows that the government has shown little interest in cultivating Singaporean’s appreciation for other cultures. However, the Singapore government did have one attempt to promote multi-culturalism, which is the setting up of a three-year-tertiary-level programme for multi-culturalism theatre training. This is one of the few serious attempts to bring together practitioners in performing arts from all races to institutionalise communication across ethnic borders. This, thus shows that the Singapore government has shown very little interest in cultivating Singaporean’s appreciation for one another’s culture as even though there are a few attempts, the Singapore government on the whole are not showing enough interest as they use other means to preserve inter-ethnic peace.

20. "Singapore is one of the most Westernised cities in Asia. (Yet) in some respects, Singaporeans are not westernised enough." Do you agree with this opinion? //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">[chapter 20] //

Yes, I agree with this opinion. In this case, I will talk about the mentalities of Singaporeans and some actions of the Singapore government. Firstly, about the mentalities of Singaporeans. Singaporean mentalities are mixed with both western values and eastern values. For example, Singaporeans will feel a sense of loyalty to their parents for bringing them up, yet they have the intention wanting to venture out into the world on their own, without any help from their family members. Employees have a sense of loyalty to their employers for giving them jobs, yet they have the intention of wanting to be the boss of their own company, even though it meant being in the competition with their former bosses. Thus, this shows that Singaporeans have mixed mentalities of both societies, which causes Singapore to be stuck in the middle of both societies. Hence, this statement is true. Actions by the government have also shown this form of mentality. For example, the government is very open about decisions they make about political issues concerning the Singaporeans. Take for example the websites on the internet. For Singapore, there is no hidden information about anything you need to know about Singapore right now. One can go to the housing development board website and find everything they need to know. This is a form of western mentality about being open about issues. However, there is also a tinge of eastern mentality about the actions of the government. Remember the case about mas selamat? The news of the escaped was released a few weeks after the escape itself. This can be seen as a eastern mentality as an escape of a highly dangerous criminal is somewhat quite damageable to the reputation of Singapore, or more of the “face” of Singapore. This thus shows that the government itself has both mentalities of the east and the west, thus being able to prove that this statement is true

21. Why does the writer think that political issues are key considerations behind debates over language education? //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">[chapter 21] //

This is because the writer feels that language teaching turns education policy into cultural policy. Math and sciences are topics which will not really affect ethnic peace within Singapore. Language teaching, on the other hand, is something that will affect ethnic peace within Singapore. Ethnic peace is something that is very important to a small city like Singapore, where its main resources are its people; therefore ethnic peace has the need to be included under political issues. The government has been forced to make further adjustments to Chinese language education, in which the second language would not be a burden. This has resulted in the setting up of SAP( special assistance plan) schools, which allows students to study Chinese at the level of a first language. However, this has caused deep unease in many Malays and Indians, for whom the schools symbolise their fear of being marginalised in the land they call home. This can disturb the stability of ethnic peace in Singapore thus linking the situation into politics. Therefore, as ethnic peace, which is a political issue, is concerned with language teaching, political issues are therefore key considerations behind debates over language education.

22.Do you think that opening our doors to foreigners would depreciate the value of citizenship? Why or why not? //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">[chapter 22] //

I feel that opening our doors to foreigners will not depreciate the value of citizenship. Firstly, there are material benefits. Citizens are given many privileges in which foreigners do not get. Citizens have the right to speak, have the right to vote and have the right to hold assemblies. Aside from this, Singaporeans are also given healthcare benefits of up to 20% subsidies in which is approximately 5~10% higher than foreigners. However, it is just that in times where there is not much turmoil or crisis in which the people feel that being a citizen has no benefits which makes them feel that being a foreigner has equal benefits thus making them feel that the value of citizenship has dropped Next, there is mentality. Since there is an influx of foreigners into Singapore, this should make Singaporeans feel even more proud than before. People from all over the world coming to a place in which they feel is good, and this good place is what Singaporeans can proudly call home. This does not decrease the value of citizenship, but instead, might even raise the value of it. Singaporeans should be proud that the place they call home is a business hub and has attracted foreign talents all over the world.

23. George Cherian calls the national urge to upgrade "an unsettling impermanence." What is your opinion on this? //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">[chapter 23] //

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;">I personally feel that the upgrading Singapore is a necessity in order for Singapore to continue to be able to survive in the ever competitive world, even if it meant destroying places in which hold many treasured memories for many people. Take Singapore in the 1960s for example. During the 1960s, Singaporeans were asked to move from attap houses known as “kampongs” into high rise HDB flats. Indeed, these kampongs hold many memories for people, in which many of the older generations grew up in, however, in order for Singapore to be able to house its booming population, it was a requirement. Simply put, there was no other situation other than upgrading. The government could not possibly ask the people to move out of Singapore as Singapore’s only resource would be human resource. It would not be possible to imagine 4 million people living in attap houses in the 21st century either. Therefore, upgrading is a necessity that is always changing based on the needs of the world then.


 * //[Zheng Ting, you have interesting opinions to share but I do not always agree with the examples that you quote to back your point e.g. the treatment of Mas Selamat shows Singapore is not westernised enough, are there laws to gag religious preachers and is this an example of not appreciating different cultures? LokeLF]//**

Edwin Tey 3b1(29)

7. What was PAP's main strategy that ensured their strong showing in the 1997 elections and what was the main criticism about it? // [chapter 7] // The main strategy that PAP took to ensure their strong showing in the 1997 was mainly raising the stakes and naming a wide range of programmes that would be rolled out partly in relation to voter support. The 1997 elections was the first time the PAP used the “upgrading” term to fight for the elections. The government launched its multi-billion dollar programme to rejuvenate old HDB estates before the previous elections, but it was only later that voters were able to see the results for themselves. This proposal by the PAP was very effective as the upgrading programme and the selective en-bloc redevelopment scheme was seemed as the citizens as attractive and generous packages. Residents in the areas not ruled by the PAP began questioning when would be their turn to benefit from such programmes. Another crucial measure taken by the PAP was ensuring that upgraded blocks held more benefits in comparison with those without upgrading. The new blocks were filled with sparking new finishes whereas the neighbouring blocks built at the same time looked dilapidated. This made people worry about the price of their flats as the price of the houses have been increasing steadily over the year. The citizens feared that their flats would lose their value if it did not undergo upgrading and were “forced” to vote for the PAP. The main criticism about this form of strategy was that the PAP was gaining their votes through forms of threatening. The PAP candidates varied in quality and some might lose to an opposition challenger. People were deprived of a democratic choice and people were unhappy that the PAP won based on large number of grudging votes and not because they really wanted the PAP to dominate.

8. In your opinion, how accurate is the "PAP's vote share as a barometer of public support for the government." // [chapter 8] // // In my opinion, the “PAP’s vote share as a barometer of public support for the government is only accurate to a small extent. // // Firstly, the PAP’s vote would not accurate due to the “opposition for opposition’s sake” approach the opposition party was taking as mentioned in the previous chapter. People were starting to vote for the opposition as they wanted members from the opposition party to be inside the government to ensure that the PAP was doing their jobs well and at the same time, pick out their mistakes and use it against them in the following elections. Ever since the opposition used this strategy to counter the PAP, the PAP has been losing more votes each year. From this, we can conclude that many citizens did not vote for PAP because of their support of the government but because they wanted the best from the PAP and saw that the threat post by the opposition party might actually spur PAP. // // The // launching of the multi-billion dollar programme to rejuvenate old HDB estates before the previous elections further supports my stand. As quoted from the book, the author thought that the PAP “won based on large number of grudging votes, rather than genuine support”. From this, we can infer that people who were not supportive of the government also voted for the PAP due to the benefits they could possibly gain from it and not because they genuinely supported the government. Therefore, the number of votes received by PAP is not an accurate gauge for their support.

9. What aspects of Chee Soon Juan's character were revealed by the various events that unfolded in this chapter? // [chapter 10] // // The aspects of Chee Soon Juan’s character that were revealed by the various events that unfolded in this chapter is the issue on his immoral acts yet at the same time, he was brave and creative when met with challenges. // // Chee was served notice by the National University of Singapore after allegedly misusing research funds amounting to $226. He embarked on a hunger strike, claiming that his employer’s move was politically motivated and even accused his former department head S.Vasoo of fabricating the allegations against him and got sued for libel. His immoral acts continued as he used unapproved methods to gain the attention of the public onto the lack of freedom of speech in the country by holding unlicensed talks. // // Despite such despiteful acts by Chee Soon Juan, he still deserves respect for his creativity and bravery in going against the opposition and probably the first to threaten the PAP. When Chee Soon Juan first joined the opposition party, it seemed like the opposition was finally attracting the highly educated professionals. Being a highly educated professional, Chee Soon Juan would have had the capability to join the PAP. However, he was brave enough to join the opposition party and went up against the dominant PAP. Throughout his politics career, Mr Chee Soon Juan caught the attention of many people with his various cat-and-mouth games with the PAP. Mr Chee also came up with a series of high profile initiatives and the PAP even had to change their countermeasures against the strong opposition from Mr Chee Soon Juan. Mr Chee made a smart move with outstanding creativity when he mounted a series of public talks, purposely flouting the government’s law of license. It was his creativity and bravery, despite facing possibilities of being thrown in jail that made the PAP come up with the Speaker’s corner. // // From the examples stated above, we can clearly see that Mr Chee Soon Juan was creative and brave, yet lacking in moral conscience. //

10. How did Tang Liang Hong portray himself as being "more Chinese than PAP's Chinese MPs"? // [chapter 11] // // Tang Liang Hong portrayed himself as bring “more Chinese than PAP’s Chinese Mps” as he certainly did place the Chinese’s position above that of other races in Singapore. This was clearly seen from Mr Tang’s background even before he became involved in the politics. Mr Tang was passionate about Chinese language and culture and as a young man, he helped raise funds for the community’s uplifting project of building Nanyang University. Later on, when he became involved in the politics field, Mr Tang advocated more benefits for the Chinese and even claimed that “Chinese educated should be riding the sedan chair instead of carrying it”. The PAP saw his love for the Chinese as a serious threat to the religious peace in the current Singapore. Later on, Tang Liang Hong announced that he was going set up an association to promote Chinese language and the culture as he felt that the PAP was neglecting the Chinese as the PAP have not done much for the Chinese despite them being the largest religious group in Singapore. From his above actions, we can see how Tang Liang Hong portrayed himself as being more Chinese than the PAP’s Chinese Mps. //

11. According to Tommy Koh, what character trait should a person have if he wants to enter politics? // [chapter 12] // // According to Tommy Koh, the character trait a person should have if he wants to enter the politics are that he must be idealistic enough to never retreat completely from public service. Even if faced with immense pressure, one should continue to work hard and offer their services to the public. Secondly, they must be independent enough to not want to join the party of become beholden to the government. Lastly, they must believe that they can at least make some improvements they can make to the system by working within it. This can be seen from the “air-conditioned nation” chapter 12’s this last paragraph. The PAP has been searching for many ways to bring talents with such character traits but many have failed as their attempts to change the system by working from the inside has turned into frustration. However, most of them have shown that they are capable by staying on despite the frustration and most of them have felt that their contributions have definitely outweighed their frustration. From these, we can see the character traits that Tommy Koh thought a person should have to enter politics. //

12. What problem does the 'grey lobby' pose to the PAP and what does the author suggest as solutions to this problem? // [chapter 13] // // The problem the ‘grey lobby’ poses to the PAP is that the old people are going to vote for the side which promises them more as most of them have ran out o their CPF by 70 and this group of people will account for one quarter of the population in Singapore in 2010. // // The grey lobby is a scenario in which the old people will vote for their own and selfish interests. The measure taken by the PAP to prevent this problem is to ensure that most of them have links with their families and communities as the most important thing to these old people now is their grandchildren and by having this link with their family, these older people would not vote for anything against their children’s interest. Thus, these older people would no pose no threat to the voting problem. // <span style="font-family: Calibri,helvetica,sans-serif;">Another step taken by the government is to use their power of persuasion to avert the problem at its source, in the hearts and minds of the people. They can change the constitution and as compared to the laborious, never ending process of convincing every voters why PAP has a better programme than other parties. However, such a measure to counter the problem posed by the “grey lobby” might result in several problems and misconception of the public.


 * //[Your strength is you go straight to the point. The problem is - some points need to be elaborated on e.g. what does wanting the best from PAP really entail. - LokeLF]//**

Yao Mingyu 3B1 (34)
 * Part One - Climate Control: Politics Under The New Guard**

//1.// <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">In your own words, explain how Mr Goh Chok Tong's impact on Singapore politics "was seen at several levels" and how he was different from Mr Lee Kuan Yew as a Prime Minister. //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-style: normal;">[chapter 1] //

//<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; line-height: 115%;">Mr Goh Chok Tong's impact on Singapore politics "was seen at several levels" as the public viewed the importance of his contributions differently. Some people simply regard him as Lee Kuan Yee’s puppet and Lee Hsien Loong’s seat warmer. Some pundits even predict that it won’t be long before he is out. Even when Goh Chok Tong was Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew still appeared as Singapore’s most influential leader through initiating massive reforms and directing things. // //<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; line-height: 115%;">On the other hand, Goh Chok Tong was seen as a significant leader with character and personality by others. He is recognized for spreading the benefits of growth more broadly and earning respect from his sound handling of the 1996 controversy over property purchases by the Lees at discounted prices. This shows that he is willing to treat everyone equally regardless of their social status. He was also seen as an ordinary leader who really understood his people, unlike the Lees who always seemed “high and mighty”. He accepts the fact that he isn’t the most influential and respected personality in the cabinet, instead he asserts on collective leadership where everyone has a role. Mr. Goh is also more willing to listen to other’s advise and let others take a role in decision-making. //

//<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; line-height: 115%;">2. //<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">What was the original intention of the 'depoliticisation' of the Singapore public and what were the negative effects of such depoliticisation? //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-style: normal;">[chapter 2] //

//<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; line-height: 115%;">The intention of the “depoliticisation” is to prevent people outside politics from having too much political influence, initially intended to suppress the communists and not spark the repeat of the communist activities that took place in the 1940s to the 1970s. It is also intended to prevent people from changing the established nature of Singapore politics and raising unnecessary conflicts. However, due to this ideology, opportunities provided to a younger generation of Singaporeans to develop a keen interest in politics are greatly stifled. This can be severely detrimental to the nation’s political talent pool. As a result, Singapore’s parliament and legislative assembly will have lesser people competing for seats. Citizen’s participation is also neglected as Singaporeans’ political participation is minimal and this results in a lot of social problems. The government will not know what is the sentiments and views of Singaporeans. These are the negative effects. // <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;"> 3. What do you understand about the 'Singapore School of Thought'? Why and how is it different from Western democracy?

I understand that the Singapore school of thought emphasizes on economic and social values such as commitment to education and rights and it regards economic growth as a necessity to advance human dignity, stability and order essential for development. It also believes in the coexistence of Asian and Western values. It lacks the universality of the many western political norms. It is different from western democracy in the way that it emphasizes economical development over democratization, unlike the west. It thinks with more economic rationality and meritocracy compared to the west and is very much based on Asian morality.

//<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; line-height: 115%;">4. //<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">"The directly elected character of the President adds a new and unfamiliar dimension to Singapore's political matrix." In what way is this true? //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-style: normal;">[chapter 4] //

//<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; line-height: 115%;">This is true to an extent in a sense that the elected President was alien to the government from the start, and was even considered as a nuisance by some. Alongside him come speculations on the possible changes to the Singapore’s political matrix. This new addition to the government bring about a radical change in Singapore’s political matrix, as authority became possessed by two separate institutions, the parliament and presidency. Before the election of the president, Singapore was effectively controlled by the parliament, dominated by the ruling party. Singapore was ruled by a highly dominant executive since the ministers sort out most of the significant events and concessions. The introduction of a President balanced the distribution of power in Singapore’s political matrix and henceforth making the government more democratic and justified. This also makes the government more acceptable. //

//<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; line-height: 115%;">5. //<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Explain the difference between the principle of press freedom in Singapore and that of a Western democratic country //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-style: normal;">. [chapter 5] //

In Singapore, the press accepts the fact that they cannot say whatever they want, being controlled by the government in a press management system combining watertight legal controls and a political ideology that encourages both obedience and active support. Licensing and national security laws are the older and more common controls implemented. They restrict the press from publishing materials the government deems “politically denigrating”, and licenses can be revoked anytime. Under the internal security act, journalists can be detained without any trial should they be found of contempt of the parliament. The Newspaper and Printing Presses Act allows the government to form a newspaper company’s board of directors, who will ensure that the company’s publications are not politically sensitive or bound to hurt prominent politicians’ reputations. As a result the government ironically enjoys freedom from the press through this kind of behind-the-scene control which provides them with power to punish members of the press should they cross the line of acceptability. On a general basis, the Singapore press system is sustained by coercion and consent. In contrast, the press in western democratic countries is seen as an expression of democracy and is instead protected by the Constitution which intends to harbor undemocratic tendencies, and therefore the press has the right to publish whatever it likes.

//<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; line-height: 115%;">6. //<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">What do you understand by the strategy 'riding the tiger' in the 1950s and that in the 1990s? //<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-style: normal;">[chapter 6] //

//<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 12pt; font-style: normal; line-height: 115%;">In the 1950s, the PAP rode the tiger by sealing a Faustian pact with Singapore’s pro-militant communists, who conflicted with PAP’s democratic ideologies, in order to harness the only force capable of mobilizing the masses in the struggle for Merdeka to its own advantage. In the 1990s, the PAP rode the tiger by basing Singapore’s economy on capitalism, recasting its original economic culture by transforming its organizational culture into one that works with and for the market. Singaporeans sensed the importance of money in the modern era. This change aided local businesses financially and expanded the regional property markets, creating more local private enterprises and overseas investment missions. The government even offered to clear roadblocks. However, if the funds and investments are mishandled, it may lead to self-destruction. The new changes also make Singapore more vulnerable to market recessions. Hence, in both scenarios, the PAP is taking a double-edged sword, which can be used to their advantage but can also be disastrous if things went wrong. //


 * //[Your response tends to be either based closely on textual details or it contains some attempt to include opinions of your own. - LokeLF]//**

Benjamin Cheong 3B1(5) //**Part One - Climate Control: Politics Under The New Guard**//

1. In your own words, explain how Mr Goh Chok Tong's impact on Singapore politics "was seen at several levels" and how he was different from Mr Lee Kuan Yew as a Prime Minister. //[chapter 1] Mr Goh Chok Tong's impact on politics "was seen at different levels" as he made contributions in Singapore to many different areas. For example, he bridged with the younger generation of Singaporeans then, increased economic growth, boosted national morale, and improved standards of living. Unlike Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Mr Goh introduced the open consultative style of government by opening the Feedback Unit and other instituitional structures. He was also more popular than Mr Lee and kept a closer contact with fellow citizens, impressing them through moves such as forgoing his pay rise and probing the Lees' property purchases without consultation.//

2. What was the original intention of the 'depoliticisation' of the Singapore public and what were the negative effects of such depoliticisation? //[chapter 2] The original intention of 'depoliticisation' was probably to discourage the public from being too political active and maintain a stable government, especially with communists and riots in the 1960s. However, such depoliticisation may introduce risks that Singapore's politics and government will be weak and undeveloped, and will not be able to meet the West's criteria of democratic leadership.

3// . What do you understand about the 'Singapore School of Thought'? Why and how is it different from Western democracy? //[chapter 3] The Singapore School of Thought believes that Asia and the West are able to evolve seperately, even with different forms of government, and yet engage with each other peacefully and productively. Unlike Western democracy, the 'Singapore School of Thought' emphasizes more on economy than democracy, and mainly practices 'authoritarian democracy'.//

4. "The directly elected character of the President adds a new and unfamiliar dimension to Singapore's political matrix." In what way is this true? //[chapter 4] The President has only the ability to veto decisions. This 'negative power' does not contribute much to the political matrix, and is deemed rather redundant in Singapore's political matrix, introduced only to appease the public and political opponents. Hence, the introduction of the President causes a new and unfamiliar dimension to Singapore's political matrix, which has to provide a new role and accomodate the President in such a way that he will not be left out of the matrix.//

5. Explain the difference between the principle of press freedom in Singapore and that of a Western democratic country //. [chapter 5] In Singapore, it is about the government's freedom from the press, where the government has to deter reporters and journalists from receiving leaks, and pacify the press by providing other sources of revenues. However, in the US, it is about freedom of the press from the government, and the Congress ensures that the government does not manipulate the press.//

6. What do you understand by the strategy 'riding the tiger' in the 1950s and that in the 1990s? //[chapter 6] During the 1950s, the PAP 'rode the Communist Tiger' so that they can mobilise and gain support of the masses through communism. However, in the 1990s, the PAP attempts to 'ride the Capitalist tiger', so that they can prosper Singapore through the means of capitalism. I feel that 'riding the tiger' is just adopting several policies from a particular ideology to acheive higher prospects.//

//**[Your response tends to be brief. Some ideas may not be well understood because of the brevity of your style. - LokeLF]**

Ngo Wei Jun (22) 3-B1//
 * //Introduction: The Politics of an Air-Conditioned Nation & Conclusion: Air-conditioned Underwear and the Future of Politics//**

__1. In your opinion, what do the terms 'authoritarian democracy' and 'benevolent dictatorship' refer to. How are they different? //[Introduction]//__

To begin with, I will split the terms further into single words. The word 'authoritarian' means exercising complete or almost complete control over the will of another or of others. The word 'democracy' is a government by the people, with political power exercised either directly or through elected representatives. In this case, an authoritarian democracy would mean that these elected representatives control the will of the common people instead of going in accordance to the will of the common people. In short, it's the people (government) controlling the people and not the people having their own will.

The word 'benevolent' means expressing goodwill or kindly feelings, or having the desire to help others. The word 'dictatorship' means a state that is under the absolute or despotic control of one single dictator (absolute ruler). In this case, a 'benevolent dictatorship' is a system of rule where the ultimate ruler above all the common people is one who's kind and seeks to lend a helping hand to the people that he rules over. In short, although that one person wields complete power over the country, he uses that power to serve the community or the greater good.

Undeniably, the obvious similarity is that the words that make up the terms stand at completely opposite ends of each other. 'Authoritarian' does not go hand in hand with 'democracy'. Likewise, 'benevelont' contradicts 'dictatorship'.

However, the difference would then lie in the second word of each term, the political systems. In a democracy, unlike a dictatorship, power is split amongst a group of elected represntatives, or a Cabinet. Therefore, in a dictatorship, a dictator like Hitler has all control over everything, and is the undisputed ruler.

In conclusion, as much as these two terms, at first look, seem extremely similar, the fact is that they are still two completely different political systems.

__2. Why do you think the term 'The Air-Conditioned Nation' is an apt description of Singapore? //[Introduction]//__

According to the author Cherian George, he states 'So, think of Singapore instead as the Air-Conditioned Nation- a society with a unique blend of comfort and central control, where people have mastered their environment, but at the cost of individual autonomy, and at the risk of unsustainability.'

In my opinion, there are two levels to this apt description of Singapore. The first level would on the literary level. In Singapore, it seems that the humble air-con is everywhere and has become a bare necessity in this tropical island. People have their meals in restaurants (with air-con), take public transport (with air-con), and even answer nature's call in the shopping centre's lavatory (air-conditioned as well). It is no surprise that Singapore is an Air-Conditioned Nation.

On the second level, would be the metaphorical and hidden meaning behind this description, and much of this point has been brought up by Cherian George. The air-conditioning system is a selfish technology, as it works basically by expelling heat from inside to the outside. Likewise, Singapore's "cooling" comes from effective "insulation", where the wealth gradient is not flattened by the socialist impulse to equalise outcomes. Domestically, the wealthy are not forced to give up their wealth, and the poor are not promised comforts beyond their means. At the national level, appreciating economic development is the key to stability, and to solve the problem of inequality, it is always for others to "level up", and never for Singaporeans to level down their expectations of material comfort.

Therefore, in conclusion, I agree with Cherian George, that this is one of the metaphors that evocatively crystallise the essence of Singapore politics.

__3. What do you think the terms 'autonomy as consumers' and 'autonomy to challenge' suggest about the nature of Singaporeans? //[Introduction]//__

The word 'autonomy' means independence or freedom, as of the will or one's actions. Consumers are people who use and utilise something for his or her personal use. People who challenge are those who consume, and yet at the same time, start to think deeper and bring up doubts about the "product". In the case of Singapore, Singaporeans now are just satisfied with their 'autonomy as consumers', and do not really have minds of their own. The mindset is that of "As long as I get what I want, and I have my life, it is okay." However, there is a high possibility that in the future, if not the near future, that Singaporeans will start to realise the existence of their 'autonomy to challenge', and become unsatisfied. The mindset will then change into one of "This just isn't right. This isn't what I want. Why am I not getting more? Why isn't my life improving? I must do something about it."

From the once obedient and tamed people under restrictions and limitations, Singaporeans will start to have minds of their own and realise that they can break free of these chains as long as something is done. By then, the authorities (government) will start to face challenges not from the opposition, but from the common folk of Singapore.

__4. The writer thinks that the advent of the 21st century may require a new kind of politics (p 196). What did he envisage this new politics to be like? //[Conclusion]//__

The writer thinks that the PAP government will encounter a changed political landscape whose management will demand new skills and resources. The main shift is towards a more openly contentious form of public debate, as a complexity in issues and interests replaces the hierarchical policies that the PAP has been accustomed to. As the economy further develops, Singaporeans are becoming more critical and demanding, and more aware of their rights and interests. Significant transformations are also on the way that will make it impossible for the PAP government to carry on as before. These have to do with the government's diminishing capacity to manage information, and its internal shift away from top-down control.

First, Singapore's information revolution is expanding the space for self-expression and the sharing of ideas. Second is the fragmentation of the public sector. Third and most importantly, is the impending departure of Mr Lee Kuan Yew from government- if not in the next few years, then at some point in the coming decade.

Thus, the writer feels that the above mentioned scenarios (post-LKY politics, administrative fragmentation, a maturing economy, and the digital revolution) all require a paradigm shift in how internal conflict is managed, from a top-down, personality-based mode towards more transparent methods of resolving differences. The balance will have to tilt from the search for good men to an equal emphasis on good laws, as the ultimate answer to a good government in the 21st century.

__5. Lee's air-conditioned underwear seems to be a concept that challenges national unity (p 207). In your own words, explain how this is so. //[Conclusion]//__

From a "master air-con system" that keeps the whole of Singapore "cool" and running, now everyone has a personal cooling system that serves only that one particular person. Now, to keep one's self cool and comfortable, every single Singaporean transfers heat out into the environment, and no one gives a hoot about somehow overheating the public environment. Likewise, majority of people tend to be constantly living in their "world of me and myself", and choose to ignore the society around them in order to ensure their own private interests. This can be demonstrated by the simple act of avoiding eye contact with a beggar on the street. Furthermore, the very existence of a meritocracy that rewards the individual (that works hard to realise his dreams to make a fortune and live in comfort) and neglects the socially-conscious, in fact contradicts what Singapore strives to be: a communitarian Asian society. Thus, this new concept of the air-conditioned underwear challenges national unity, for it only results in one becoming more individualistic and oblivious to the society out there.

__6. How can Singapore arrest the "privatisation of its public"?__ //__[Conclusion]__//

In order to arrest the "privatisation of its public", the Singaporean government, as strong as it may be, is unable to coerce Singaporeans into a consensus, and must instead moderate contentiousness. This will require a new culture of tolerance, centred on human rights and democratic values. This would be a culture in which Singaporeans know that they matter only because everyone matters, that their views count because everyone's does. In such a culture, one would know that his or her right to take part in collective decisions entails the responsibility to respect the outcome even when it goes against one, and one would have the reassurance that, even when the majority disagrees with one, this individual will be treated fairly and with respect, as a citizen and a human being. This way, we will really be able to see one people, one nation, one Singapore.

[ **//You tend to split up your explanations of certain terms, making our understanding of the idea a little more complicated. But on the whole, your comments relate directly to the issue raised but they would have been better if the explanations were more detailed - LokeLF]//**

//__Han Song (3B1-08)__//
 * //Introduction: The Politics of an Air-Conditioned Nation & Conclusion: Air-conditioned Underwear and the Future of Politics// **

1. In your opinion, what do the terms 'authoritarian democracy' and 'benevolent dictatorship refer to. How are they different? // [Introduction] //

//The benevolent dictator is a more modern version of enlightened absolutism. Being an undemocratic or authoritarian leader who exercises his or her political power for the benefit of the people rather than exclusively for his or her own self-interest or benefit. As for authoritarian democracy, it is more of a democracy based social structure and political governance that consists of a stricter constitution and harsher laws issued. Personally I believe that the difference lies in the distribution of power and the outcome brought along this distribution of power. For benevolent dictatorship, the power lies mainly in one person’s hand, this person will have the final say in every decision, countries with this governance style might face problems such as possessing extremist thinking (North Korea) or development in the wrong direction (still North Korea). As for authoritarian democracy, which I believe Singapore is practicing now makes use of a group of elites to rule the general population, at the same time granting the population with a suitable degree of freedom and liberty to choose what they wish for.//

2. Why do you think the term 'The Air-Conditioned Nation' is an apt description of Singapore? // [Introduction] // //Yes. It is the precise description of Singapore indeed. Singapore’s political environment enables Singaporeans to pursue prosaic material comforts rather than living up to high-minded political principles for their own sake. The air condition is a selfish technology: one of its paradoxes is that its net effect is an increase in heat. At the same time, a prodigious consumer of energy. Similarly, like any rich capitalist state, Singapore’s comfort depends partly on effective insulation, to ensure that the wealth gradient is not flattened by the socialist impulse to equalize outcomes. Central control is another hallmark of Singapore, which resembles the air-condition to a certain extent. Of course the way Singapore’s government take care of the country is similar to that of how to take care of an air-conditioner. Managing the temperature of a habitat through air-conditioning requires covering up openings, providing adequate power supply, and ensuring regular servicing. Singapore’s development model, similarly, is a total systematic approach to economic management. It is highly infrastructure-intensive, and demands fine planning and constant management. Therefore “the air-conditioned nation” is an apt description of Singapore indeed.//

3. What do you think the terms 'autonomy as consumers' and 'autonomy to challenge' suggest about the nature of Singaporeans? // [Introduction] //

//I feel that the term of "autonomy as consumers" indicate the awareness of Singaporeans that they have undisputable rights and claims over certain freedom or welfare. As for the term "autonomy to challenge", it is an indication of Singaporeans' attitude towards measures taken against the general will. This two terms both points to the fact that Singaporeans are demanding citizens, they demand a lot more from the government, they demand more from the government and refuse to stop at the achievable economic prosperity. I think Singaporeans have the mindset of demanding solution whenever problems crop up.// //These all sum up to SIngaporeans' criticizing nature which turns out to be a good thing after all as we constantly renew, reflect, rethink about political renewation, economic revival.//

4. The writer thinks that the advent of the 21st century may require a new kind of politics (p 196). What did he envisage this new politics to be like? //[Conclusion]//

//The writer thinks that the new kind of politics would include a revised constitution with restructured controlling over different aspects of lives of Singaporeans. A more liberal society, more freedom of speech on internet, reduced limitations on public comments would make way for a more politically liberal Singapore. As the nation attains economic success, Singaporeans are demanding more from the government. This resulted in the government’s diminishing capacity to manage information, and its internal shifting away from the top-down control. Reduced central control will eventually give way to something close to a full democratic society. However, a cabinet will still include strong-willed personalities, continuing the style of collective leadership exercised by Goh Chok Tong. The fragmentation of public sectors brings a new political landscape. A new concept of statutory board whereby government departments handed over functions to new statutory boards is produced. Statutory boards were turned into government–owned companies with the goal of subjecting these organizations’’ corporate governance to market discipline and to make them more responsive to changing needs. //

5. Lee's air-conditioned underwear seems to be a concept that challenges national unity (p 207). In your own words, explain how this is so. // [Conclusion] //

//By introducing this new concept, he is stating that centralized control must give way to individual autonomy, steep hierarchy to flat structure, and standardization to diversity. A circumstance will appear whereby each individual cools his intimate space by transferring het out to his environment, an act of selfishness perhaps. More devastating consequences would be the low probability of Singaporeans not recognizing the need to make sacrifices for the common good but instead enjoy the high degree of individual liberty. Lastly, the population will choose to ignore their obligations to the ground that sustains them, therefore slipping easily into the habit of protecting their private interests, and insulating their consciences from the society’s demands. All the possible outcomes of the new concept is completely on the contrary to Singapore’s self-image as a communitarian Asian society.//

6. How can Singapore arrest the "privatization of its public"? // [Conclusion] // //In order to stop the “privatization of its public”, words from government will have to transcend into solid actions which deal an impact great enough to alter the thinking of Singaporeans. Currently, the government have been giving repeated assurances of its sincerity in wanting people to contribute to public affairs. But concrete actions and effects have yet to take place. The desired outcome would be something similar to current economic management of Singapore, whereby the government intends to operate completely open, transparent and predictable rules, so that the only risks that capital needs to consider are normal market risks. They did not stop at nice-sounding speeches but it reviews and amends regulations, and introduces incentives, all with admirable decisiveness. If this could be applied in solving problems like the above mentioned, the desired outcome should not be that difficult to achieve. Therefore, arresting the privatization of the public would require the removal of barriers to social and political life, under the support of government in both words and actions.

[ **You have read this portion of the book well as demonstrated by your familiarity with the terminology used by the writer. It would be better if you are able to include more of your personal observations in your response - LokeLF]**

__Alcander Seah__// __Kai Jun 3B1 (01)__ //**__Part Two | Lighting and blunder: PAP vs the OPPOSITION__**//

7. What was PAP's main strategy that ensured their strong showing in the 1997 elections and what was the main criticism about it? // [chapter 7] //

The main strategy used by the government to ensure strong support during the 1997 election was to introduce more benefits and reforms that appealed to the people. In the 1988 election, when challengers told voters the incentives if they were elected such as a swimming pool for potong Pasir voters, they were in turn given an increased margin of victory and the government’s reminder that the residents were electing not just parliamentarians but also people who were having a direct role in maintaining their neighbourhood fell on deaf ears. The result of the 1991 general election proved that the reminders had backfired on the PAP by alienating dissatisfied voters further. Hence in the following 1997 elections, the PAP government raised their stakes by introducing a wide range of programmes that would be rolled out partly in relation to voter support. The government also adopted decentralised voting that would allow it to measure the level of support in individual precincts and allow them to adjust their programmes accordingly. In the 1997 elections, it showed that these incentives offered played a major role in the results. The PAP government, after launching its multibillion dollar programme to rejuvenate old HDB estates before the elections. These upgrading programme, and the selective en bloc redevelopment schemes were attractive and generous packages. Hence it is evident that the PAP’s strategy in the 1997 election showed that by linking the local vote to a host of social and economic benefits previously dispensed nationally, the PAP used this as a powerful counter to the opposition and served as an essential factor that paved their way for success. However, their strategy had also attracted critical criticisms. The roundtable pointed out the inherent unfairness of the strategy. Firstly, the OAO candidates varied in quality and some might justifiably deserve to lose to an opposition challenger. By inflating the stakes with government programmes and services, it would result in robbing voters of their democratic choice. It was pointed out that the PAP had won convincingly but not on sweet grounds as they had benefited from large numbers of grudging votes rather than genuine support. The US state department 1999 human rights report on Singapore also stated that the constitution provides citizens with the right to change their government peacefully through democratic means; opposition parties free to contest elections and the voting and voting counting system are fair, accurate and free from tampering. However, by abusing their power to intimidate opposition and influencing the electorate, it makes the whole election unfair and unbalanced. These criticisms has led political scientist to classify Singapore as a non democratic country, with the punishments meted out to opposition seen as the ugliest side of Singapore politics. In conclusion, the PAP has maintained its political dominance in part of developing genuine voter support through honest, effective administration and its strong record of bringing economic prosperity to the country and partially, by manipulating the electoral framework, intimidating organized political opposition and circumscribing the bounds of legitimate political discourse and action. Although the government’s action against opposition can be thought to still waters around the ship of state, ultimately what keeps it afloat is the support of the people, based on social and economic policies that have benefited most Singaporeans and have given them the satisfaction to let the PAP government continue ruling the country.

8. In your opinion, how accurate is the "PAP's vote share as a barometer of public support for the government." // [chapter 8] //

// I feel that this statement is accurate only to a small extent. // // First of all, there are a lot of limitations to how much one can conclude from the total vote share. The overall percentage votes are more or less influenced by small time candidates who are non factors in Singapore elections. Furthermore, opposition parties would also avoid contesting for seats that were PAP’s stronghold where the ruling party tended to win by a large margin as can be seen from the 1991 elections. This further undermines the reliability of taking the PAP’s vote share as a gauge for the public’s support for the government as it is based on unfair grounds with opposition powers reluctant to contest for it as it was almost certain for them to lose. Next, it is shown that the seats contested in 1988 and the 1991 elections had a percentage drop from 61.2% to 60% a 1.2% dip. This suggests the credibility of the previously drawn conclusions about the movements of popular votes. Lastly, the 1997 general election also represented a swing towards the PAP. Should the voter sentiments remained unchanged, the PAP’s share should have dropped from 61% to about 58%, due to the expansion in the number and size of GRCs. Yet, PAP’s share rose to 63%. // Hence, I feel that this statement of "PAP's vote share as a barometer of public support for the government." //is not entirely accurate due to the limitations, biased and fluctuation that is inevitable in any general election. Hence, by drawing conclusions based on PAP’s vote count, it is not an accurate estimation of the public support. However, it must also be noted that this is the best estimation that can be made due to the absence of regular opinion polls to measure the government’s approval ratings.// 9. What aspects of Chee Soon Juan's character were revealed by the various events that unfolded in this chapter? // [chapter 10] //

This chapter has indeed revealed a lot about Chee Soon Juan’s character. Firstly, this chapter revealed that he had a lot of character issues that puts his integrity at question. It was mentioned that he was served notice by NUS after misusing research funds amounting to about $226. Furthermore, he even sued his former department head S. Vasoo of fabricating the allegation against him and ended up getting sued for libel instead. Secondly, when it turned out that a key number cited by the SDP had been a blatant typographical error, Chee soon Juan instead of apologising and make a retreat, instead openly tried to insist that there was no mistakes making him come across a s an evasive and untrustworthy person. The PAP government also constantly expressed utter contempt towards Chee Soon Juan, thus evidently proving that his moral values were not justified. Although his points raised were well accepted by the more educated individuals, however, his character issues have prevented him from gaining a strong foothold and trust among the people. Secondly, it also revealed that Chee Soon Juan was a scheming person. This can be seen from the different tactics deployed just to accomplish his goals. For the sake of making his point that the PAP was a repressive regime by drawing on the lack of freedom and speech in Singapore, constantly made used of every opportunity to swing people towards his stand. This was the case when he was convicted for holding unlicensed talks; Chee Soon Juan chose to serve a jail term rather than paying fines as he wanted to use this as an opportunity to draw on public sympathy. As a result, his jail term drew overseas attention, and in 2000, the PAP gave the approval of a speakers’ corner where people could speak their views freely. Last but not least, this chapter revealed that Chee Soon Juan was an ambitious and articulated person. Since assuming the role of secretary general in 1994, he started intensifying his activities to boost the status of the SDP. He wrote book such as Dare to change, forged an alliance with the Malay based party PKMS, setting up an open Singapore centre to promote democratic ideas and campaigning overseas. In conclusion, this chapter revealed that Chee Soon Juan had character issues that concerned his integrity. It can be said that he was an attention seeker looking to get into trouble and hungrier for overseas attention rather than gaining the respect of fellow Singaporeans.

10. How did Tang Liang Hong portray himself as being "more Chinese than PAP's Chinese MPs"? // [chapter 11] //

Tang Liang Hong portrayed himself as being more Chinese than the PAP’s Chinese MPs by portraying himself as a Chinese Chauvinist. He was passionate about Chinese language and culture. As a young man, he helped raise funds for the community’s uplifting project of building Nanyang University. He called for more time in school to be spent on Chinese language and made remarks such as Chinese educated should be riding the sedan chair instead of carrying it. Furthermore, Tang Liang Hong also announced plans to set up an association to promote Chinese language and culture. Hence, through these measures, he tried to portray himself as more Chinese influenced than PAP members and saw this as an opportunity help him earn the support and trust of the Chinese educated people, paving his way for success in politics.

11. According to Tommy Koh, what character trait should a person have if he wants to enter politics? // [chapter 12] //

According to Tommy Koh, a person should most importantly be patriotic towards their country should they want to enter politics. As quoted by him “In politics, you may have to do something that violates your personal ethical code for your country’s interest. If you have a weak stomach then don’t do it.” This trait can also be further supported by David Marshall’s motto “I will not run away from the chance to serve my country.” Hence, if you want to enter politics, one important trait that a person should posses will be their patriotism to their country, where they are willing to put the country’s interest before their self. The next trait that a person who wants to enter politics should have is being morally upright. This can be proven in Tommy Koh’s speech, where he mentioned that he doesn’t enjoy mudslinging that takes place in politics where people run each other down with underhand tactics. Hence it can be inferred that another trait a politician should have will be their code of conduct, where they do not rely on underhand means to achieve their goal but rather through persuasion and logical arguments. In conclusion, there are two essential traits which Tommy Koh a person who is entering politics should bear. Firstly, he must be patriotic to the country and secondly, morally upright, being able to justify all their behaviour. By possessing these two characteristics, only then will they be able to succeed in the area of politics and become well received by the people in the future. 12. What problem does the 'grey lobby' pose to the PAP and what does the author suggest as solutions to this problem? // [chapter 13] //

There are indeed several problems posed to the PAP concerning the grey lobby. The grey lobby is mainly a scenario that assumes that the elderly will be isolated and therefore vote according to their selfish and narrow interest. To solve this problem, the PAP has been trying to ensure that most senior citizens will continue to have strong links to their families and communities. By ensuring the senior citizens this point, the problem can thus be considered resolved as it is hard to picture grandparents any more than parents vote against their own children and grand children. Hence by keeping these generational bonds intact, the senior citizens will pose lesser risk of bringing down a whole government based on their own mindset and thinking. Another strategy which the government can implement will be making use of their powers to advert the problem at its source. However, there are consequences to this approach. When the government uses the legalistic route instead of using persuasion, people will arrive at certain negative inferences. Hence, this the government’s strategy of using their own power to control the situation may draw the suspicion and resentment of the people and it will not be long before the government loses the favour of the public and fall from power. In conclusion, the grey lobby has both positive and negative sides. Although there are certain positive points in the grey lobby, however, the negative points cannot be dismounted too as they are vital for the continuance of a political party.


 * //[You have put in a great deal of effort to provide details to explain your stand. Do check your use of certain expressions/vocabulary for accuracy. - LokeLF]//**

**//Part One - Climate Control: Politics Under The New Guard//**
 * Lim Zheng Jie(3B1) 16**

1. In your own words, explain how Mr Goh Chok Tong's impact on Singapore politics "was seen at several levels" and how he was different from Mr Lee Kuan Yew as a Prime Minister. //[chapter 1] Mr Goh Chok Tong's impact on Singapore politics "was seen at several levels" as the public viewed the importance of his contributions differently. For some, he was seen as a puppet which would take the role of Prime Minister in the mean time while waiting for Lee Hsien Loong to take his place one day. Even when Goh Chok Tong was Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew still appeared as Singapore’s most influential leader through initiating massive reforms. However, Goh Chok Tong was also seen as a significant leader by others, recognized for spreading the benefits of growth more broadly and earning respect from his sound handling of the 1996 controversy over property purchases by the Lees at discounted prices. He was also seen as an ordinary leader who really understood his people, unlike the Lees who always seemed “high and mighty”. //

2. What was the original intention of the 'depoliticisation' of the Singapore public and what were the negative effects of such depoliticisation? //[chapter 2] The original intention of the 'depoliticisation' of the Singapore public was to prevent people outside of the political arena from changing the nature of Singapore politics and raise mistaken views which might lead to conflicts. However, this caused Singaporeans to have the mentality that as long they kept their hands off politics they would stay out of trouble. As a result there is a lack of members in the Parliament and government as opportunities for young potential politicians to develop an interest in public affairs are stifled. Citizen involvement is also neglected as Singaporeans cannot participate in public affairs and are unable to learn about the need for compromises in the society. //

3 //. What do you understand about the 'Singapore School of Thought'? Why and how is it different from Western democracy?// [chapter 3] The 'Singapore School of Thought' emphasized on economic and social rights, which would come with stable economic growth and fair governance. It believed in the coexistence of Asia and West although they develop in different manners. It is different from Western democracy as it puts economic development before democratization, while the latter does the opposite. It also relies on Asian values, like a deep commitment to education and a firm sense of public morality, to develop Singapore’s political structure.

4. "The directly elected character of the President adds a new and unfamiliar dimension to Singapore's political matrix." In what way is this true? //[chapter 4] This is true to an extent in a sense that the elected President was alien to the government from the start, and was even considered as a nuisance by some. This new addition to the government brought about a radical change in Singapore’s political matrix, as authority became possessed by two separate institutions, the parliament and presidency. Before that, Singapore was effectively controlled by the parliament, dominated by the ruling party. Significant political decisions were subject to ministers’ discretion and hence Singapore was ruled by a highly dominant executive. The introduction of a President balanced the distribution of power in Singapore’s politics and therefore deepened public acceptance of the government. //

. [chapter 5] In Singapore, the press gives up its freedom of publishing anything it wants, being controlled by the government in a system combining legal controls and a political ideology that encourages both obedience and active support. Licensing and national security laws restrict the press from publishing materials the government deems “politically denigrating”, while the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act allows the government to form a newspaper company’s board of directors, who will ensure that the company’s publications are not politically sensitive. As a result the government ironically enjoys freedom from the press. In contrast, the press in western democratic countries is seen as an expression of democracy and is instead protected by the Constitution. It is assumed that the Constitution harbors undemocratic tendencies, and therefore the press has the right to publish whatever it likes.

// In the 1950s, the PAP rode the tiger by sealing a Faustian pact with Singapore’s pro-militant communists, who conflicted with PAP’s democratic ideologies, for the sake of using the only force capable of mobilizing the masses in the struggle for Merdeka to its own advantage. In the 1990s, the PAP rode the tiger by basing Singapore’s economy on capitalism despite the risk of self-destruction if there were to be mishandling of funds, as it sensed the importance of money in the modern era. It aided local businesses financially and expanded the regional property markets, and concurrently relied on its core qualities to ensure good governance. //


 * //[Your response tends to be very closely based on textual details. It would be good to see more of your own use of language and expressions. - LokeLF]//**

Introduction: The Politics of an Air-Conditioned Nation & Conclusion: Air-conditioned Underwear and the Future of Politics **
 * Ng Jing Han 3B120

1. In your opinion, what do the terms 'authoritarian democracy' and 'benevolent dictatorship’ refer to? How are they different? [Introduction]

// 'Authoritarian democracy' is a democratic governing system that does not seem to be “fully” democratic in the sense that people do not enjoy certain civil liberties, which include the rights of people to have the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and also the rights of accessing free media. Thus, although free and fair multi-party elections are conducted regularly, and citizens can vote for the government they want, it is difficult to establish political opposition in the country, as there may be a lack of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. The media, which is responsible for the propagation of ideas to the masses, may also be state controlled.

Dictatorship refers to a form of government whereby political power is held by a single ruler who has the final say in making decisions and governing the country. ‘Benevolent dictatorship’ however refers to the situation where the dictator uses his absolute political power to bring about benefits to the people and citizens under his rule rather than using the power solely for his or her own benefit. However, we also have to note the extent to which the dictator is ‘benevolent’ is rather subjective. Whether a dictator is “benevolent” or not is a matter of subjective perspective. For example, Napoleon’s supporters would consider him as a benevolent leader while people who suffered under his reign would not agree that he was a benevolent dictator. These two systems are very different in the way they are run.

In a 'benevolent dictatorship’, the government is usually run by a sole dictator, who has the power to rule without the restriction of the law or constitutions. The dictator has the final say in making decisions and no matter whether that decision would benefit or harm the people; nobody is able to alter the dictator’s decision. Also, many a times, the dictator is self-appointed.

However, in an 'authoritarian democracy', the government is elected by the people and is a representation of the majority’s will. Unlike 'benevolent dictatorship’, political power is distributed in the government and nobody has an absolute power. In certain authoritarian democracies, they have a system of check and balances. This ensures that no part of the government gets too much power. Sometimes, important and significant decisions made by the government also have to pass the constitution to ensure that decisions made are beneficial to the people of the country. //

2. Why do you think the term 'The Air-Conditioned Nation' is an apt description of Singapore? [Introduction]

//The Air-Conditioned Nation' can be used to describe Singapore both literally and metaphorically.// // Singapore can be seen as an Air-Conditioned Nation literally as the use of air-conditioners is extremely common and widespread in the country. Having a tropical climate, Singapore is both warm and humid. Hence, as technology advances and as people gain material wealth, there has been a great increase in the number of air-conditioners installed on the island. Today, we can see air-conditioners in houses, shops, malls and even in most forms of public transports. These air-conditioners have helped the people in Singapore enjoy comfort and overcome the hot weather.

Singapore can also be seen as an Air-Conditioned Nation metaphorically. Air-conditioning requires “covering up openings, providing adequate power supply, and ensuring regular servicing”. This is similar to Singapore’s approach towards developing and managing the country’s economy. The economic development model that Singapore adopts requires much fine planning and constant management and is highly infrastructure-intensive. One example is Singapore’s port, which makes use of extremely efficient information technology and business-friendly policies to attract companies to operate in Singapore.

Another example is Singapore’s water management programme. This programme was on such a massive scale that it even required some people to resettle at another place. Although the people who were resettled may not approve such resettlement programmes, these programmes and policies benefited people and achieved economic success for the country in the long run.

From these examples, we can see how comfort is achieved through control. Under the central control, everybody shares the common goal of maintaining Singapore’s economic competitiveness. The metaphor of an Air-Conditioned Nation reflects how the Singaporean society enjoys comfort and materialistic gains at the expenses of being centrally controlled and losing individual autonomy. This metaphor is an apt description of Singapore’s materialistic and highly controlled socio-political culture. //

3. What do you think the terms 'autonomy as consumers' and 'autonomy to challenge' suggest about the nature of Singaporeans? [Introduction]

//These terms suggest that many Singaporeans are contented with their lives and are satisfied with the stable economic development in Singapore. This results in political stability as the population are generally satisfied with the government and do not cause political conflicts.

However, in this Information Age, as people are gaining more exposure to the political and economical situations in other countries, they start to develop their own ideas. People have become more demanding, as they are more aware of their own rights and welfare. Being better informed and ideologically more sophisticated, they are able to challenge and question certain government policies if the policies conflict with their interests.//

4. The writer thinks that the advent of the 21st century may require a new kind of politics (p 196). What did he envisage this new politics to be like? [Conclusion] //In the writer’s vision, Singapore's 21st century political system would be more open to political diversity.

As we get into the Information Age, communication between people is extremely convenient and information is circulated rapidly. This is especially so due to the information explosion on the Internet, resulting in people having access to many mediums to exchange ideas and views. Information can be obtained so easily on the Internet that it is very difficult for the government to censor and control the ideas that people are exposed to. Hence, the government has to be more open to various political views that may not agree with the government and even oppose them. In this sense, the writer envisions a political system that is more liberalised than today’s.

Also, for Singapore’s economy to strive, the government needs to maintain economic competitiveness by ensuring that industries are managed by regulatory agencies that set consistent and reliable rules and not by politicians who make changes to the industries due to their own political interests. This will attract more companies to invest and operate in Singapore. Hence, the author envisioned that there would be reduced central control from the government. The writer also envisioned that when Mr Lee Kuan Yew retires from the political arena, it would be more difficult for the cabinet to “impose its will by fiat” as the cabinet would have lost an authoritative figure. Hence, the government has come up with more effective and transparent methods of resolving internal conflicts to establish a good government.//

5. Lee's air-conditioned underwear seems to be a concept that challenges national unity (p 207). In your own words, explain how this is so. //[Conclusion]// // To begin, we must compare air-conditioned underwear with an air-conditioner. Compared to the air-conditioner, which cools everybody from a central control unit, air-conditioned underwear cools one individual at a time. // // Hence, we can see that Mr Lee's air-conditioned underwear concept seems to challenge national unity as it encourages people to be self-centred and individualistic who only care for their own well being. People lose the sense of collectivism and work for their own private interests rather than for the benefit of the entire society and nation. // // Also, while the air-conditioned underwear provides comfort by cooling the individual wearing it, it releases heat into the surroundings. This shows that the individual does not care about his or her environment and obviously would not make sacrifices for the society, let alone work with others towards a common purpose or goal. This is indeed very different from the concept of an air-conditioner, which provides the cooling facility to a group of people through a centrally controlled system and they work together towards a common goal, which when applied to the economy refers to that of achieving economic success. //

6. How can Singapore arrest the "privatisation of its public"? //[Conclusion]// // Privatisation of the public occurs because when the government has provided many incentives for people to work hard and accumulate wealth, people may become more concerned about working only to meet their own interests, and many people even adopt a “mind-your-own-business” attitude to work hard solely to gain wealth for self consumption, and not to contribute towards attaining a common good for society as a whole. // // To //// arrest the "privatisation of its public”, we have to change the mindsets of people, so that they are more socially responsible and have a sense of collectivism. Mutual respect between people has to be cultivated regardless of their having opposing views. This social tolerance among people will ensure that everybody in the society is treated equally and fairly such that the society is able to make progress as one entity. //


 * [Jing Han, you could have used font of a bigger size. The above is totally strenuous on the eye. Fortunately, your response is well-organised and structured and you have included your personal opinions on the issues raised. Language use is good too. - LokeLF]**

=Ching Zhi Xiang 3B106= =Part One-Climate Control: Politics Under a New Guard= // Mr Goh Chok Tong came to power as the Prime Minister of Singapore on November 28, 1990 and during the years under his governance, saw Singaporeans’ livelihoods become significantly better off. He scored several impressive successes and his impact could be seen on many levels. // // One of which was the handling of the proposal to increase public servants salaries. In order to boost his moral authority, he personally announced that he would not be included in the proposal and that he would not receive any increase in salary for the next five years. This was a rather huge impact that he made in politics for it meant that he was willing to make small sacrifices for the better good. // // The most powerful impact he made on Singapore politics was by investigating on the property purchases by the Lees at discounted prices. This showed that Mr Goh was willing to treat everyone as equals, daring to check on the purchases of the Lees to ensure that no one should be entitled any sort of special privileges above the rest regardless of status. He carried out his duties and responsibilities as Prime Minister without fail. // // Mr Goh was seen as someone who was able to understand the people and whom they could relate with. The image of the Lees was that of an impossible high perfectionist standard that seemed to be too far off from the people. //
 * 1) In your own words, explain how Mr Goh Chok Tong's impact on Singapore politics "was seen at several levels" and how he was different from Mr Lee Kuan Yew as a Prime Minister. //[chapter 1]//

2. What was the original intention of the 'depoliticisation' of the Singapore public and what were the negative effects of such depoliticisation? //[chapter 2]// // The intention of the idea of “depoliticisation” was to prevent people outside politics from having too much political influence, initially intended to suppress the communists and not spark the repeat of the communist activities that took place in the 1940s to the 1970s. However, despite the government assurances that they accepted alternative viewpoints, people were afraid of crossing the invisible line and getting themselves into trouble. Thus came the conclusion that engaging in any form of political debate was extremely risky business that was best not ventured into. This results in Singapore facing a weak and underdeveloped political culture that is unable to meet the challenges of democratic citizenship and also of finding potential leaders to lead Singapore. //

3. What do you understand about the 'Singapore School of Thought'? Why and how is it different from Western democracy? //[chapter 3]// The Singapore School of Thought is the lack of universality of many western political norms. The Singapore School of Thought felt that democratic nations operated differently and held different views on issues such as life and death. Its ideas differed with western democracy over the pace of democratization. The Singapore School of Thought felt that economic growth should come first before political reform rather than the latter, quoting the example of the Soviet Union to show how the western democracy may not always work. The Soviet Union lacked the cushion of economic comfort to endure the instability of political openness.

4. "The directly elected character of the President adds a new and unfamiliar dimension to Singapore's political matrix." In what way is this true? //[chapter 4]// In my opinion, I feel that this is rather true. The President’s power was considered to be rather limited and with the directly elected character of the President, he opened the doors for possible change in the government system ruled by a highly dominant executive. It raised the possibility that the presidency could alter the balance of power in Singapore politics.

5. Explain the difference between the principle of press freedom in Singapore and that of a Western democratic country //. [chapter 5]// The principle of press freedom in Singapore is based on coercion and consent. The government has the authority to determine the composition of a newspaper company’s board of directors and stands on the fact that as long as the press is allowed to make money it would support the system. Thus, in Singapore, the government representing the will of the people is protected from the press since it might report false information due to private commercial interests. However, over in the West, the constitution protects the press from the government, as it tends to harbor undemocratic tendencies.

6. What do you understand by the strategy 'riding the tiger' in the 1950s and that in the 1990s? //[chapter 6]// In the 1950s, the strategy of “riding the tiger” was so as to take advantage of the communist so as to come to power in the struggle for Merdeka. However, the idea of “riding the tiger” took up a different form in the 1990s, aiming to harness the power of the market so as to create wealth for the country and attract talent from places around the world. However, both attempts at doing so placed the government at a huge risk of getting “eaten by the tiger.”


 * //[Your response tends to revolve round explanation of terminology and concepts. You could have included illustration of events/facts to support your points. - LokeLF]//**

Ng Jun Eng 3B121
 * Introduction: The Politics of an Air-Conditioned Nation & Conclusion: Air-conditioned Underwear and the Future of Politics **

1. In your opinion, what do the terms 'authoritarian democracy' and 'benevolent dictatorship refer to? How are they different? I feel that authoritarian democracy is a system where members of the public can elect their own government but have no influence in areas other than elections. Benevolent dictatorship is a system of dictatorship where the dictator works for the citizen’s benefits instead for his benefits or a small group of people’s benefits. Authoritarian democracy allows the citizens some freedom to choose who they want to lead, even though the person they choose may not be best choice for serving the country. Benevolent dictatorship, however, involves a leader who does his best for the country serving the people well even though his decisions cannot be challenged and he cannot be replaced by due to public request.

2. Why do you think the term 'The Air-Conditioned Nation' is an apt description of Singapore? Singapore is a humid tropical country with a hot climate all year round. So, a large proportion of the population uses air-cons to keep cool and work efficiently without the heat bothering them. Air-Conditioners are now seen everywhere, from shopping malls to even toilets. In this aspect, Singapore is literally an Air-Conditioned Nation. I feel that “The Air-Conditioned Nation” is also an apt description for the attitudes of Singaporeans. Singaporeans, when faced with a problem, would not try to rectify it. Instead, they will filter out whatever is causing the problem, even if it was once beneficial, and continue without it. An example of this attitude is the chewing gum ban in Singapore. Chewing gum was posing a problem to the cleanliness of Singapore when people left it everywhere -- in the streets, in cinemas, in buses. The government solved the problem by banning chewing gum, letting the public have no access to gum in Singapore, hence filtering out the problematic gum. This way of solving problems is similar to the air-conditioner as the air-conditioner filters out heat from the room, bringing more heat into the outside environment, while Singaporeans throw away whatever is causing the problem without discovering why it was problematic and leave the problem for others to deal with.

3. What do you think the terms 'autonomy as consumers' and 'autonomy to challenge' suggest about the nature of Singaporeans? These terms suggest that Singaporeans satisfy their own needs. “Autonomy as consumer” suggests that Singaporeans are free to consume and use what they want in Singapore. This shows that Singaporeans satisfy their own needs as they were given the right to consume or use what they want. “Autonomy to challenge” tells us that Singaporeans are free to demand whatever they want and challenge decisions. This shows that the Singaporeans constantly have new needs to be satisfied as they constantly improve themselves. So, they are given the freedom to demand and challenge for resources to satisfy them.

4. The writer thinks that the advent of the 21st century may require a new kind of politics (p 196). What did he envisage this new politics to be like? In the advent of the 21st century, Singaporeans are becoming more critical and demanding, and more aware of their rights and interests, the information revolution in Singapore also made it more possible for self-expression and idea sharing. The Internet also makes it possible for people to communicate in a manner too difficult for the government to monitor and censor. Hence, the author feel that this new politics should be more liberal and allow citizens to express themselves more freely without interference and censors from the government.

5. Lee's air-conditioned underwear seems to be a concept that challenges national unity (p 207). In your own words, explain how this is so. Firstly, an air-conditioner is a central unit in a room that cools everyone in the room down while air-conditioned underwear cools only the individual that is wearing it, so it is only for one’s personal benefits. Air-conditioned underwear is a concept that challenges national unity as it allows one to cool his personal space by filtering heat out to other people. When enclosed in his own comfortable private zone, there is little motivation to care about whether one is damaging the environment. Similarly, people who possess a high level of personal freedom might not see beyond themselves and realise the need to make sacrifices for the benefits of others, hence working only for themselves and their own benefits with no thought for society.

6. How can Singapore arrest the "privatisation of its public"? In order to arrest the privatisation of the public, Singapore must introduce a new culture of tolerance, centred on human rights and democratic values. Everyone must know that they matter only because every other person in the city matters and everyone must have an equal say in things. In this type of culture where everyone is equal, they feel responsible for the outcome of collective decisions and hence think for others. Everyone must also be respected and treated equally even though they have differing view from the majority. Having this sense of collectivism will ensure that the society will stay united and work together as one.


 * //[Your response basically captures the gist/ heart of the matter. A little more substantiation would have been helpful.- LokeLF]//**

**Wang Tianjie 3B130**
Part Four - A Place In The Sun: Race and National Identity 19. The writer is of the opinion that the Singapore government "has shown strikingly little interest in cultivating Singaporean's appreciation for one another's cultures." To what extent do you think he is right? [chapter 19]

I agree with the author to a certain extent that the Singapore government "has shown strikingly little interest in cultivating Singaporean's appreciation for one another's cultures." In a reply to one of the author's columns about racial integration, the government replied that, quote 'While the different communities do identify themselves as Singaporeans, **they do not want to be forced together and lose their distinct characteristics.** ’ As this is a direct quote, a reply to the author’s article about integration of cultures, it would be quite accurate in expressing the government’s stand on the topic.

Government support of SAP schools, which, while elite, also serves to isolate Chinese students, has also shown that the government places more emphasis on academia that the potential drawbacks of isolating Chinese students for up to six years from their other racial counterparts. Another example would be the ‘Speak Mandarin’ campaigns held a few years back. This campaign, while meant to encourage Chinese citizens to speak better mandarin instead of dialect or English, has actually served to leave the impression on minorities like Indians the assumption that the government did not care for their culture and race, or even worse, that the government was trying to turn Singapore into another China. While the government did make an attempt to clarify that the campaign was solely targeted at Chinese Singaporeans, the fact that the government foresaw but chose to neglect the potential ramifications of the campaign on minority races shows that developing each culture as it is was higher up on the government’s agenda than cultivating mutual appreciation.

20. "Singapore is one of the most Westernised cities in Asia. (Yet) in some respects, Singaporeans are not westernised enough." Do you agree with this opinion? [chapter 20]

I agree with this opinion. From architecture preferences to entertainment tastes, and even from the general vibe around the city area, Singaporeans are no doubt a Westernised people. Hotels are the most representative of this. The Fullerton Hotel, one of the most distinguished and classy of Singapore’s hotels, is a fine example. Garment brands like Gucci, Gap and Abercrombie dominate the clothing market. More economical clothing stores sell styles hip in New York a few months back. Singapore news broadcasters speak with voices tinged very lightly with Caucasian accents, and mispronunciation of Asian names has become acceptable. Singapore has two major political parties, like most democracies, and citizens get to vote which would be the ruling party every four years.

And yet, the author is right to claim that in some respects, Singaporeans are not westernised enough. One such evidence of this is the government’s censorship over material ‘deemed harmful to family values and wholesome living’ (pg 171). Censorship standards are particularly stricter for local content than for foreign, giving a message that the Singapore government was a lot more touchy with their own people. In order to promote racial harmony and multi-culturalism, as well as to escape the social unrest present in many countries with diverse races, expressions and works of multi-culturalism in Singapore has to be channeled into rigid administrative categories, and subject to political judgment, before they are deemed to be acceptable, leading to compromises on the parts of Singaporeans of all ethnic groups, in order to conform to the government ideal. This is not characteristic of fully-Western countries, which pride themselves on their emphasis on human rights, stating that the individual was the basis of all law and policies. Singapore’s ideals are very much Confucian in nature, asking that the individual sacrifice to give in to the greater good, an ideal not very accepted in Western culture. And so despite Singapore’s many Western styles and tastes, Westernisation has yet to come to the furthest reaches of governing ideals and social management.

21. Why does the writer think that political issues are key considerations behind debates over language education? [chapter 21]

The writer thinks this way as while sciences and math are factual subjects, that is, subjects that do not vary and are unbiased no matter how you teach them, language is a subject that is highly diverse and can be taught in many ways. As the writer says on page 176, ‘Language teaching turns educational policy into cultural policy…education is never only about what’s in the best interests of the child as judged by his or her parents…’ The teaching of languages goes far beyond merely telling students which formulas are important or why something works this way – languages are representative of a culture, and it serves as a part of what makes that culture unique. Ethnic Chinese can hardly be considered ‘true Chinese’ without knowing how to speak mandarin or at least one of the dialects. The importance – and complication – of teaching languages were perhaps some of the reasons why the MOE set up special SAP schools too, to allow able students to study Chinese at the level of a first language. Also, when the government stated that it wanted to use SAP schools to create ‘Chinese Cultural Elite’, it sparked off a controversy, as people misunderstood it for that the government wanted more of the nation’s cultural elite to be more Chinese. Initiatives like SAP schools could only be pushed through with government backing, and are a direct representative of government policy towards language education. Hence, political issues are quite evidently key considerations behind debates over language education.

22.Do you think that opening our doors to foreigners would depreciate the value of citizenship? Why or why not? [chapter 22]

I do not think that opening our doors to foreigners would depreciate the value of citizenship. Firstly, a very fundamental principle – exclusivity breeds a sense of inclusivity. If the members of elite Ivy League colleges were not selected from the crème de la crème of the world’s students, what then, would make Ivy League colleges any different from any other college? The key is not to fear inclusion in a national sense – it is to make it such that the more foreigners there were in Singapore, the more proud one would be to be Singaporean. Contrast and national pride are the keys. Foreigners do not enjoy the many perks of being Singaporean, like subsidised fees when visiting national polyclinics, or having priority when being considered for academic scholarships. Since so many initiatives are already in place for Singaporeans, the next step would be to create awareness, which would ultimately lead to a sense of national pride inspired by being included as part of the essential citizens of the nation. When objections are voiced out over the possibility of Singapore becoming too ‘diluted’ culturally by the influx of foreigners, the government had naught but to remind citizens of the perks they enjoyed with their red passports and pink ICs.

Opening doors to foreigners would not only not depreciate the value of citizenship, it would actually lift the prospect of it. As Singapore’s populace grows, it would be natural that more and more foreigners who have found their calling in Singapore want to be citizens, and soon the selection process would be stricter and stricter, creating a sense of inclusivity in the people already included. Also, bringing in foreigners would also raise the bar for competition standards for jobs, prizes, etc. This would grant citizens a healthy level of competition, and through that, raise the standard of education of current citizens, making them truly an elite bunch. Hence, opening our doors to foreigners would definitely escalate the value of citizenship.

23. George Cherian calls the national urge to upgrade "an unsettling impermanence." What is your opinion on this? [chapter 23]

Personally, I am conflicted over my views of upgrading. Whilst it is true that upgrading (renovating, demolishing and rebuilding) would totally change the face of a city or town, and may destroy the landmarks there and cause it to lose its cultural value, what we must remember is that we are, after all, //up// grading. While old landmarks are destroyed, new ones are created. While old places of value are wiped off, new ones are created. Old memories and mementoes vanish, but new memories will be forged in new places, and they will become new mementoes, for the new memories. But the author is right to call it “an unsettling impermanence” too. If we upgrade too fast, and too often, we may totally lose our attachments and roots to a particular place, and ultimately, lose part of ourselves and what makes us unique. Practice breeds habit too. If living in a continuously-morphing world, and adapting ourselves to suit the current settings and identity of the place becomes a habit, then what will happen to us, as people? Would it make us phantoms, without true identity, anonymous after becoming dead to the ever-changing environment? Or would it make us clones, without unique traits or characteristics, going about our daily business in a world we do not understand, do not care to understand, and have no attachments to anymore?

But the alternative would be equally daunting. Continuity breeds impassiveness, and maybe even repulsion. How many times have teenagers of the modern era chided their grandparents for being ‘old-fashioned’ for hanging onto their memories, and the mementoes that come with them? How many times have we seen teenagers gathered in national heritage centers on school trips, laughing and making jokes out of the artifacts that have defined generations before ours? Sticking to the old would do no good for the new, and yet too much ‘newness’ would make ‘new’ lose its shine. To strike a perfect balance between the two would be hard too. Who can be the judge of when an area was too modernised, or too traditional? Many areas in many countries have become the victims of such poor judgment. Even within Singapore’s borders, in some areas of the Geylang district, we can see the new rising out from within the old. But the result compliments neither – the new buildings look starkly out of place, and the old ones by contrast look their age. Such a conglomeration of the old and the new do no favours to the area it resides in. China is a good example of this – in many areas and districts, skyscrapers, business buildings, all touted as the signs of rapid modernisation, have been sprouting up all over China. But the rest of it can’t keep up – the old housing areas, the small, darkly lit wet markets and the dingy neighbourhoods, survivor of less than a few hundred years of Chinese history – too young to be considered national landmarks and too old to be appealing. Most of such places, the government leaves to themselves, concentrating on building their skyscrapers and office blocks first, then worrying about the surrounding environment. The result? Dusty cement-laid pavements leading to squat, brick houses beside shiny skyscrapers with full-glass facades.

So indeed, it is true that upgrading is good. But upgrading has to be opportune, it has to be appropriate, and most importantly of all, it has to be timely. Not too soon, not too late, or the result would be disastrous. But who can judge when the time is right for upgrading? Hence, my views on upgrading are conflicted, with neither sides of the argument outweighing the other. Till we find a foolproof way to judge and control the need for upgrading, then.


 * //[Tian Jie//**, **//I enjoy reading your take on the value of citizenship and the effect of upgrading. - LokeLF]//

Chen Shenghui 3B103 //Part Three - In the Banyan's Shade: Civil Society Re-emerges// ** **13. What is civil society and why is it important for democratic progress?** //**[chapter 14]**// Civil society is a concept located at the cross-section of intellectual developments in the social sciences. To see civil society is to achieve something like a "third sector," distinct from government and business. In this view, civil society refers to the essential "intermediary institutions" such as professional associations, religious groups, labour unions and more, that give voice to various sectors of society and enrich public participation in democracies. They form the basis of a functioning society as opposed to the force-backed systems of a state and considering shared interests, purposes and values, they brought about a series of voluntary collective action and ultimately a society with civility. Civil society too promotes a civic culture which most people think their government is legitimate and that their institutions can be trusted instead. ** Civil society is important for democratic progress as it strengthens the idea of democracy and the democratic ideas in the countries. Soaring through pre-modern and the modern history till the day today, by the end of the 1990s, civil society was increasingly called on to justify its legitimacy and democratic credentials in some countries including Singapore. The political element of many voluntary organizations facilitates better awareness and a more informed citizenry, who make better voting choices, participate in politics, and hold government more accountable as a result. Not only are they accustoming participants to the formalities of democratic decision making, they build social capital, trust and shared values, which are transferred into the political sphere and help to hold society together, facilitating an understanding of the interconnectedness of society and interests within it, linked to the nationality. Furthermore, civil society organizations can help to develop the other values of democratic life: tolerance, moderation, compromise, and respect for opposing points of view. Without this deeper culture of accommodation, democracy cannot be stable. **

**14** //**.**// **Why do you think there is general apathy towards civic society amongst young Singaporeans and how do you think we can develop such an interest amongst them?** //**[chapter 14]**// // ** In my opinion, it may be because they are exposed little to this concept and few portals are available for young Singaporeans to know more. Furthermore, the idea of caring of the politics is not strong from the start; the foundation for the keen interest in basic review of governance policies is absent in many young Singaporeans. They do not find a need to do something out of their hands for a civic society, which to many is an unfamiliar term. For those who have the idea and are consistently updating themselves, they might see "civil society" as a fiction that holds marginalised communities back, and hold that the only recourse is political mobilisation along self-    serving, apparently primordial lines. ** // They might also think that people who are engaged in public affairs from whatever angle sow intolerance instead, will reap cynicism from the wider public. They would know they had to listen to bully talk by those with power or histrionics and analyse them carefully. To save the hassle and trouble, with the addition of the busy and hectic lifestyle one young Singaporean will have, they choose the apathy way. // ** The legislative honeymoon period did no last long when the Singapore Broadcasting Authority came out with its list of rules for the Internet in July 1996. On the list of taboo material which some of them exist in Sintercom were contents that jeopardised public security or national defence; excited disaffection against the government; undetermined public confidence in the administration of justice; satirised any race or religion; and which encouraged permissivemness or promiscuity. This make it impossible for Sintercom to carry on as before. Furthermore he had to register the website under the ‘Singapore Broadcasting Authority (Class License) Notification 1996’ as registration was a procedural requirement the intention of which was to emphasize the need for content providers to be responsible and transparent when engaging in Singapore’s political issues. ** // ** Once this announcement was made, individuals associated with Sintercom at the forefront came out to oppose in public to the new regulations. These words are rather harsh and are issued public for everyone to see. Sintercome then went ahead to pursue primarily though private organisations with the authorities, such as Philip Yeo, the top civil servant and Internet advocate and Yeo offered to host Sintercom on his newly launched Pacific Internet. Tan did remind the SBA that Sintercom was hosted in Singapore because Yeo invited the site in. He even commented to serve it out overseas and host it on the servers on foreign lands. His one statement “They would look very silly if they blocked these sites” made criticism to the government’s policies and all of the above factors posed as threatens for the government. Therefore they decided to treat her as a “special case”. **
 * Firstly one possible method will be to strike a foundation for the study of politics in the education system for Singaporeans to learn the importance of politics from when they were young. Parliament hearings also can build public interest in important policy issues. In these ways, hearings can begin to create constituencies for change within parliament, civil society and the media. Most importantly is to provide platforms for young Singaporeans to come into contact with politics. Possible voluntary organisations which have set up their base in Singapore can consider coming out with a television show introducing different thoughts and ideas, rolling out website and an informal forum (similar to Sintercom) for young Singaporeans to discuss issues from time to time or even a newspaper section or a magazine to feature updates to generate interest in readers through reading. **
 * 15. What problems did Sintercom face when legislative rules for the Internet were implemented in 1996 and why do you think the government decided to treat her as a "special case"?** //**[chapter 15]**//

**16. How has the "non-confrontational" image cultivated by the Nature Society of Singapore helped her achieve her goals?** //**[chapter 16]**// “We are a lobby group, but we are not a pressure group,” was how one of leaders approached this image. The society tries to gain influence by enlarging its membership, but eschews public demonstrations or the publicity stunts that environmental groups overseas are famous for. The letters to the press and its mass petitions are emphatic but respective in tone. It gives up gloating rights to maintain its limited access to the decision-makers. They consistently downplay their profiles, to appeal quietly to the men in charge and to win over public opinion gradually, rather than try to challenge the government’s legitimacy head-on to survive on the lands of Singapore. // ** Singapore government, however enthusiastic in establishing a vibrant arts scene, a Renaissance city, still feels the need to assert periodically its continued control. So far as the government expand their allowance limit, they must be able to balance control over culture to avoid the complete loss and sacrifice of value behind the revolution of arts in Singapore. With local films, television programmes, movies and plays getting more and more popular in cinemas, theatres and even at home, Singapore government allows cable TV to enter the local channels, packed mainly with imported fare. However, they do look into the types of shows and acknowledging it whether to be suitable for broadcasting or not before they are shown in front of everyone’s eyes. Also they revised censorship standards and procedures to better suit the people’s interests, but however they are mindful not to cross the boundaries. For example, the introduction of the rating R(A) is to allow adults watch movies which are not suitable for children. They assured the adults’ mature minds and therefore allow this in Singapore. However, some policies like stopping short of ushering in a new era of artistic freedom and ceasing to consider requests to fund plays are tailored according to Singapore’s situation. Therefore we can see that their main aim is to transform local arts and entertainment into an industry in its own right, which they can control and develop at the same time. ** // // ** The idea of setting up Community Development Councils (CDCs) is mistaken as a political ploy to entrench the then ruling party. The initial plans of setting up CDCs are to attempt to bond Singaporeans to the nation and to allow Singaporeans to get involved in the affairs of their community and do more volunteer work. However these vehicles for bringing people together were suddenly instruments of division. It was made the impression that CDCs were engineered to sharpen the divide between PAP wards and opposition wards. It was thought to be an instrument to tilt the politics playing field in the PAP’s favour. ** //
 * 17. How do you think** **Singapore can balance control over culture with the development of a vibrant arts scene?** //**[chapter 17]**//
 * 18. How did initial plans to set up Community Development Councils (CDCs) appear positive for civil society and yet end up being viewed with suspicion by some Singaporeans?** //**[chapter 18]**//

[You are well-versed with textual details which I may not rate as highly as your personal opinion on specific issues raised in this section of the book. Within the context of qn 15, who is the 'Tan' you are referring to? - LokeLF] // ** Joshua Tan (3B125) ** //

//** Introduction: The Politics of an Air-Conditioned Nation & Conclusion: Air-conditioned Underwear and the Future of Politics **//

1. In your opinion, what do the terms 'authoritarian democracy' and 'benevolent dictatorship refer to. How are they different? //[Introduction]// Authoritarian democracy refers to a form of governance whereby strict rules and regulations are enforced and individual freedom is compromised. However, the people have the power to elect their government and the government is the one who has the support of the majority of the population. Benevolent dictatorship refers to a form of governance whereby a person exercises complete control or power over a country. However, this leader governs the country and wields his power for the benefit of his people instead of being driven by his own interest. Authoritarian democracy and benevolent dictatorship are different in several aspects. The term benevolent dictatorship suggests that only one person is ruling the country, whereas a country governed by authoritarian democracy may be ruled by one or more people. Benevolent dictatorship also means that the leader has absolute power over the country while authoritarian democracy means that the people have the power to elect their leaders.

2. Why do you think the term 'The Air-Conditioned Nation' is an apt description of Singapore? //[Introduction]// In an air-conditioned environment, we control and adjust the temperature until we feel comfortable with the temperature. Similarly, Singapore is a comfortable environment to live in and her standard of living surpasses that of Japan, Hong Kong and even her formal colonial master, Britain. In addition, it can be said that Singapore is a controlled environment, closely monitored and shaped into under the watchful eyes of the government. This was exactly the “strategy” that the government had adopted to mould Singapore to its present state. The government has taken charge of almost everything; from Singapore’s economy to housing and even education is under the control and planning of the government to ensure that there is hardly any room for chaos. One quintessential example would be Singapore government’s zero tolerance towards political dissent. On top of that, staying in an air-conditioned room can be very comfortable and this can also be seen in Singapore. Singapore is a “pampered nation” and she enjoys a higher standard of living as compared to many of her neighbouring countries as well as developed countries. Singapore is also a relatively safe, peaceful and stable society.

3. What do you think the terms 'autonomy as consumers' and 'autonomy to challenge' suggest about the nature of Singaporeans? //[Introduction]// It is in my opinion that the term “autonomy as consumers” accurately depicts Singaporeans in general while the term “autonomy to challenge” may seem to be a little far-fetch. Most Singaporeans are contented with the “deal” the government is giving them and become their “consumers”. Some, however, may not be agreeable with the government’s decision, yet they are tolerant and still choose to be the consumers. For dissidents who are critical of the government and voice their opinions, the PAP would either give them a stern warning or adopt a forceful coercion-- to imprison them without trial. Hence, this suggests that Singaporeans are generally tolerant or submissive to the government, even if they may be unhappy with or skeptical of the government’s decision. Ultimately, the government wields and enforces a strong control over Singaporeans political involvement.

4. The writer thinks that the advent of the 21st century may require a new kind of politics (p 196). What did he envisage this new politics to be like? //[Conclusion]// The most important shift in Singapore politics that the writer had envisaged was Lee Kuan Yew’s withdrawal from the politics. Since Mr. Lee had been an influential and dominant figure in Singapore’s public affairs and had a considerable weight in Singapore’s politics, owing to his many years of experience and he, himself, who once glamourised the PAP’s past. Will Singaporeans remain confident of the next generation leaders? Will the new leaders be able to run the country efficiently without Mr. Lee? Inevitably, such questions will arise after the former influential leader had decided to step out of political affairs. The internet also posed as a threat to the government. In the past, the government adopted a forceful coercion to dissidents. Now, however, it will be more challenging to do so with the power of the internet. The government can imprison journalist and editors, yet they will be unable to track individuals who “voice their opinions” online via private e-mails. People will be able to stir public opinions of the government and it will be almost impossible to stop them. Hence, the writer felt that conventional notions of control would have to be revised under the new politics. In the contemporary era of rapid economic development, the writer had envisaged that the government would give more autonomy to the private enterprise. This means that the government officials would no longer supervise them as they did back then. This will help to attract private sector investment which is vital in the competitiveness of Singapore’s economy as more developing countries are offering “better deals” for investors.

5. Lee's air-conditioned underwear seems to be a concept that challenges national unity (p 207). In your own words, explain how this is so. // [Conclusion] // Lee’s notion of air-conditioned underwear is a personal air-conditioning device whereby people could put it on and adjust the temperature of the device to suit them. This concept also means that Singaporeans will progressively become more egoistic and self-centered, as opposed to the “Asian” society of collective interest. It also suggest that Singaporeans will be given more individual autonomy and rigid hierarchical relationships will be abolish. This, however, also means that the more individualistic Singaporeans will not offer their assistance to those in their society who are in need of help; needless to mention sacrificing oneself for the benefits of a larger group of people as well as compromising to work towards a common goal. In addition, Singapore’s notion of meritocracy rewards only those who are capable and not those who are socially conscious. All of these bring about the rise of individualism, while disputing the concept of national unity.

6. How can Singapore arrest the "privatisation of its public"? //[Conclusion]// Singapore can arrest the “privatisation of the public” by treating everyone fairly and that everyone will be given the respect even if his or her ideologies differ from the majority. Ultimately, no matter how powerful the government may be, it is almost impossible that they will come up with policies to suit and cater to the needs of every citizen. What they can do, however, is to minimize conflicts. This can done only when the mindset of Singaporeans evolved into one which is complaisant and everyone allows their fellow countrymen to air their views freely without being mock at. Singaporeans should also know that the people around them matters and the society does not exist with an individual. With that positive mindset, everyone will, therefore, brainstorm and work towards a common goal and as a nation.


 * //[In your response, you have taken great effort to relate all your ideas to issues of governance and politics in or country. You have also shown clarity and succinctness in your thoughts/opinions. - LokeLF]//**

Zhang Shuofei (3B137)

1. In your opinion, what do the terms 'authoritarian democracy' and 'benevolent dictatorship refer to. How are they different? //[Introduction]// In my opinion, the term authoritarian democracy is a form of an elected government with an emphasis on the authority of the state. It is a political system controlled by elected rulers who permit only some degree of individual freedom. The term “Benevolent dictatorship” is the modern version of enlightened absolutism. It is an undemocratic or authoritarian leader who uses his nearly limitless political power for the benefit of majority, such as healthcare, education, population control, or general city infrastructure. His policy is not necessarily to be popular and welcomed by the people, but it is for their own good. Authoritarian democracy grants people freedoms and rights that benevolent dictatorship can never give. For instance, authoritarian democracy allows multiple parties to participate freely and fairly in an election and people get to choose their desired government based on each party’s political credibility. Thus basic political freedom is allowed and power is shared between parties. This is not the case in benevolent dictatorship, no matter how benevolent its intents are, it focuses on absolute political power in one person or a small group, there is no sharing of power with other parties. Thus there is a lack of political freedom in a society with benevolent dictatorship. 2. Why do you think the term 'The Air-Conditioned Nation' is an apt description of Singapore? //[Introduction]// Yes. I find it to be an accurate description of Singapore. Air-condition, after all is all about controlling the environment and making it more physically comfortable and appealing in a selfish and expensive way. This is much similar with the situation in Singapore: a rich capitalist that is designed for the material comfort of her citizens. The government of Singapore functions as a giant air-condition for the people, striving to provide people a secure and comfortable environment in which that they can pursue prosaic material comforts and other personal interests. At the same time, government is doing their best to shield Singaporean from the “heat” of outside such as the rising threat of terrorism, economic crisis and so on. Currently, inhabitants of Singapore are enjoying high living standard that surpasses all of the neighboring countries. Similarly as the air-conditioning technology, Singapore’s political air-conditioning is often selfish usually at the expense of the welfare of poor and foreigners. As a capitalist nation, Singapore never seeks to redistribute wealth in an egalitarian way. “The poor are not promised comfort beyond their means” suggests that the government constant maintain a natural wealth gradient in the society to Singapore’s comfort is not too dispersed (Like insulating the air-condition’s coolness from heat). Singapore also ensured that the priority and comfort of her citizens is not compromised my cheap and sometimes better foreign labors and talents by practicing strict border control. Indeed Singapore is an air-conditioned room standing under the blistering heat of the tropic.

3. What do you think the terms 'autonomy as consumers' and 'autonomy to challenge' suggest about the nature of Singaporeans? //[Introduction]// I think 'autonomy as consumers' means that Singaporeans are yearning for more individual freedoms and rights in daily life from the control PAP government. In the book, it specifically suggested about autonomous consumerism in the areas of “cultural product”. Cultural product is defined by WTO as products of films, radio and books. In this case, I feel that Singaporeans are annoyed and rebellious towards certain censorship of media by the PAP government without the consent from public. Singaporeans feel that they have the right to choose their consumption of such product and the availability of such product should not be determined by the government. The “autonomy to challenge” means Singaporeans are overly satisfied and content with the government as they are not prepared to challenge the distribution of social and political power by the government. 4. The writer thinks that the advent of the 21st century may require a new kind of politics (p 196). What did he envisage this new politics to be like? //[Conclusion]// The government will have to rethink its whole approach to censorship and conventional notions of control due to the advent of information age. With the internet becoming more and more popular, people are able to spread across their messages and opinions beyond the means of mainstream media like radio and TV, which are controlled by the government. There may be occasional crackdown or lawsuits against inappropriate sites but the government cannot monitor and control the enormous flow of information on internet effectively. The writer envisages the fragmentation of public sector, giving way to the rise of more private enterprise. This means that the government will not supervise and interfere into the internal affair of certain public sectors companies. The companies will be given more freedom to pursue their market aims. The deregulated state monopoly will be able to generate more economic activities. Subsequently, it will attract more investment from private enterprises. 5. Lee's air-conditioned underwear seems to be a concept that challenges national unity (p 207). In your own words, explain how this is so. //[Conclusion]// People with “air-conditioned underwear” may develop into highly selfish individual who will protect their personal interest at the cost of their social responsibility. Such kind of extreme individual liberty is harmful as people no longer work together hand in hand with the government as a nation to achieve a stable and harmonious society. Instead, they will just be obsessed in their own selfish interest and refuse to sacrifice their resources to fulfill their necessary social responsibility. The entire nation will be just like a pile of loose sands with its society broken down into shards of individuals who constantly battled each others for individual benefits. 6. How can Singapore arrest the "privatisation of its public"? //[Conclusion]// //In order to arrest the privatization of the public, Singapore government needs a concrete plan to be set into motion to complement its nice-sounding speech. Government must be more transparent to give assurance of its sincerity in wanting people to contribute to public affairs. The government can moderate the level of contentiousness in people by introducing a new culture of tolerance, centered on human rights. It is a culture that emphasis on the significance and equality of every member of the society, thus making no one feels left out.//

[ **//The quality of your response tends to differ - while some of your answers are backed by personal observations and original examples, others tend to be based on the text. One fact remains - you are well-versed with details in the book. - LokeLF]

Part Four - A Place In The Sun: Race and National Identity//** Lim Mingxun (15)

19. The writer is of the opinion that the Singapore government "has shown strikingly little interest in cultivating Singaporean's appreciation for one another's cultures." To what extent do you think he is right? //[Chapter 19]//

//**I believe the author is right to a small extent. Perhaps the author believes that the government has not been cultivating Singapore’s appreciation for one another’s cultures in the correct way. I find that the government has been doing quite a fair bit in creating a “Singaporean Singapore” and forging a sense of national identity in all Singaporeans, probably with the mindset that with a national identity as a Singaporean and not a Chinese, Malay, Indian or Eurasian, the people of Singapore will live harmoniously as one. For example, the government has included Social Studies in the curriculum from primary one to educate the children of Singapore about the importance of harmony in Singapore. Moral education and pastoral care also instil in students how respect is a vital part of interacting with others. In this respect, the government has done quite a good job. However, though the government celebrates racial harmony day and has set up community centres around Singapore for people of different races to know each other better, the author might think that this is not enough for people to “cultivate Singaporean’s appreciation for one another’s cultures”. He mentions that though the government has set up the National Youth Council, the National Arts Council and many others, there is no organisation promoting multiculturalism in Singapore. Perhaps the government does not show its interests in an extremely clear cut manner. However, as mentioned above, I believe that this does not mean that the government shows little interest, but instead the government is merely taking another approach.**//

20. "Singapore is one of the most Westernised cities in Asia. (Yet) in some respects, Singaporeans are not westernised enough." Do you agree with this opinion? //[Chapter 20]//


 * Yes, I agree to this opinion to some extent. The writer believes that Singaporeans are not westernised enough, because of our mentality. Since Singaporeans are brought up on traditional Asian values, it is only natural that the way we think and the way we act are affected by them. Even the governance system is not entirely western. Therefore, Singaporeans are not completely westernised. However, I do not see any underlying issue in not being westernised enough. Being Singaporean is often associated with having an extremely diverse culture, and thus it makes us special. I do agree with the writer on his take that some Singaporeans are more westernised than others, though, but this is could just be due to the different upbringing they have gone through.**

21. Why does the writer think that political issues are key considerations behind debates over language education? //[Chapter 21]//

//**The writer thinks so because of as a multi-racial society, language and culture are extremely sensitive topics. Since the government believes that it is important to maintain racial harmony, their policy is that education should be conducted in English, except for the mother tongue language. Also, due to the different ministers’ backgrounds, some may be more concerned with the teaching of the Chinese language, for example, and this may cause some disputes between the members of parliament. The government wants to keep to its word and be fair to all Singaporeans, with no favouritism toward a certain race. Therefore, these are all the political considerations that they face and constantly debate about—the feelings of the different races and the members of parliament. They have to maintain their image and keep to their principles of governance and thus political issues will always be key considerations behind debates over language education.**//

22. Do you think that opening our doors to foreigners would depreciate the value of citizenship? Why or why not? //[Chapter 22]//

//**No, I do not think that opening our doors to foreigners would depreciate the value of citizenship. Citizens of Singapore do still hold some more privileges such as government subsidies in healthcare, education and housing. Many scholarships are only applicable to Singaporeans, for example. Although I think that it is fair for people to consider the benefits when deciding their citizenship, it is not just the benefits, but the sense of attachment to Singapore that matter. If people do not feel anything for Singapore, it is only right that they change their citizenship status. However, in this pragmatic society, benefits of a citizenship will certainly be one of the key factors. A main thing people are unhappy about the foreigners getting away with many benefits without serving National Service, and therefore the government is changing its approach to appeal to them more. I think that introducing foreigners to Singapore will in a way increase the value of citizenship as the government is also trying to increase the number of citizens of Singapore. Perhaps opening our door to foreigners will also increase our sense of nationalism as citizens will feel good about being Singaporean when they can see they receive benefits that foreigners do not.**//

23. George Cherian calls the national urge to upgrade "an unsettling impermanence." What is your opinion on this? //[Chapter 23]//

//**I do not think that the national urge to upgrade is “unsettling”, nor do I think that it is an “impermanence”. Everywhere in Singapore, upgrading works can be seen. The upgrading of housing estates, parks and even the people themselves is a common sight. The government constantly urges people in the workforce to “upgrade themselves”. I believe that in today’s extremely competitive society, upgrading is a must, or we will fall behind others. Singaporeans are known to be “kiasu”, or afraid to lose, and thus are very competitive. We are also a country which practices meritocracy, and thus we have to be the best to do well in this society. I believe that this is a good sign for Singapore as we will constantly be on the road to improvement, and there will be no chance for standards to fall. Singapore is a small country, therefore, the process and the effects of upgrading can be seen very clearly. Of course, George Cherian is unhappy about the negative impacts of the constant upgrading, such as where many traditional places and practices are lost. However, this is an inevitable part of upgrading. The government is obviously trying its best to conserve as many cultural and historical relics or sites, such as Chinatown and fort canning hill and thus we can see that this impermanence is more positive than negative. In fact, in other countries, like in China for example, they are also constantly revamping and upgrading, thus it is not just in Singapore, in most countries around the world are also upgrading.**//

//[Mingxun, you have read this segment of the book well and have been able to share your personal opinions. Sometimes, you need to probe deeper if you wish to read in between the lines. - LokeLF]//

//** Introduction: The Politics of an Air-Conditioned Nation & Conclusion: Air-conditioned Underwear and the Future of Politics **//

Yeo Kai Yuan (35)

**1. In your opinion, what do the terms 'authoritarian democracy' and 'benevolent dictatorship refer to? How are they different?** // **[Introduction]** // In my opinion, the term “authoritarian democracy” refers to a democratic governing system whereby governance by the people is absolute and unquestionable and policies are put into effect through the elected representatives in possession of political power. Plans and policies are being implemented with a notion of pragmatism. In a nutshell, the government has complete control over people and things do not go in accordance with the people’s will usually. On the other hand, the term “benevolent dictatorship” denotes a form of governance whereby the absolute ruler exercises unrestricted control while paying attention to the public's interests and serving for the greater good. As the caretakers of people’s welfare, independent judgment is exercised with the consideration of the long-term interest of the community. In many cases, dictators who serve in office for a very long period are more likely to be regarded as “benevolent dictators” as they tend to look into matter arising among the public such as health care and education system, concerning about the welfare of the community and paying attention to the current affairs. I think that one distinct difference between the two political systems of governance would be the extent of authority of which one can possess. In an authoritarian democracy, a group of elected representatives shares the power so as to ensure that one does not abuse his authority as the sole dictator. However, it is taken into account that the liberty and freedom presented by the government is inadequate and the fatherly love for the public can be considered somewhat smothering. In a benevolent dictatorship, the power lies mainly in unquestionable ruler and this person has the final say in the decisions. Yet, this person makes full use of his authority to serve the public and look into problems that the general public has encountered and think of radical solutions.

**2. Why do you think the term 'The Air-Conditioned Nation' is an apt description of Singapore?** //**[Introduction]**// “The Air-Conditioned Nation” is a pertinent description of Singapore which is evident from the many examples that are transparent to the general public at every corner of this red-dot island. Many Singaporeans might have overlooked this fact since they are all inclined to staying inside a cooling environment. To the Singaporeans who are born with silver spoons in their mouth, the birth of air-conditioners is simply another conventional invention that is very common nowadays. We can actually look at this apt description from the two different perspectives: the literary and the metaphorical. Let’s take a closer look at the literally level. Air conditioners have become bare necessities for Singaporeans living in a tropical island. Be it in shopping malls, restaurants or washrooms, air-conditioners are established fittingly in such locations. Undeniably, Singapore is portrayed as an Air-Conditioned Nation. Despite being a little red dot on the geographical map and having high standards of living, Singapore is relatively well-off compared to neighboring Asian countries. Air- conditioning is neither a basic necessity nor an inaccessible luxury. Rather, it is acquired as a matter of fact when they can afford it as their expectations of material comfort levels up. At the metaphorical level, Singapore is thought to be a society with a unique blend of comfort and central control, where people have mastered their environment, but the at the cost of individual autonomy, and at the risk of unsustainability. The air conditioner is a selfish technology: the irony lies in its net increase in heat resulting in global warming while keeping the inside environment cool at the same time. Singapore’s comfort depends partly on effective insulation, to ensure that the wealth gradient is not flattened by the socialist impulse to equalize outcomes. The means by which Singapore’s government take care of the country is akin to that of an air-conditioner. Managing the temperature of a habitat through air-conditioning requires covering up openings, providing adequate power supply, and ensuring regular servicing. Similarly, Singapore’s development model is a total systematic approach to economic management. It is highly infrastructure-intensive, and demands fine planning and constant management. All in all, the “Air-Conditioned Nation” describes Singapore fittingly.

**3. What do you think the terms 'autonomy as consumers' and 'autonomy to challenge' suggest about the nature of Singaporeans?** //**[Introduction]**// The terms ‘autonomy as consumers’ suggest that the pusillanimous Singaporeans are aware of the rights and claims that they have and thus, seek more direct control of their lives and freedom while choosing the cultural products that they would like to consume. However, the Singaporeans aren’t that courageous to challenge “the distribution of social and political power in Singapore society”. They remained tolerant because they feel that the PAP style actually helps to maintain control and stability even with the use of coercion. These two terms actually indicate that the lily-livered Singaporeans care more about themselves on the whole rather than considering about the collective’s interest. Even when they are unhappy or unsatisfied about something, their desire for autonomy to challenge isn’t that great after all. Even when each of them has a mindset of his own, none of very few of them is willing to step out and voice out his opinions.

**4. The writer thinks that the advent of the 21st century may require a new kind of politics (p 196). What did he envisage this new politics to be like?** //**[Conclusion]**// The PAP government will encounter a changed political landscape whose management will demand new skills and resources to solve critical issues. The main shift is towards a more openly controversial form of public debate, as an intricacy in issues and interests replaces the hierarchical policies that the PAP has been used to. As the economy prospers further day by day, it is very likely that Singaporeans’ shared values and consensus would result in conflicts as they become more demanding and trends such as ageing population and water security will become more common. Significant transformations are also on the way that will make it impossible for the PAP government to progress as before. All these have to do with the government's diminishing capability to manage information, and its internal shift away from top-down control.

Firstly, Singapore's information revolution is expanding the space for self-expression and the sharing of ideas. The information and resources on the Internet are all opened to everyone and explicit content would have corrupted the surfers’ minds. The internet’s pervasive omnipresence as a medium for unofficial communication makes it impossible for the government to control the flow of information. This issue needs immediate remedy or the consequences would be dire. Secondly, the fragmentation of the public sector will bring about a new political landscape. Government departments handed over functions to new statutory boards were turned into government–owned companies with the goal of subjecting these organizations’ corporate governance to market discipline and thus, making them more responsive to changing needs.

**5. Lee's air-conditioned underwear seems to be a concept that challenges national unity (p 207). In your own words, explain how this is so.** //**[Conclusion]**// // The collective interest in Asian societies is forgotten as our economy prospers and standards of living heighten. Each individual cools himself in his own space while transferring the heat out into the environment, without considering the dire consequences that would thus result in global warming. Singaporeans nowadays practice individualism instead of collectivism. It is evident that Confucianism has lost its impact in our modernized society. Each individual only cares about his private comfort zone and chooses to ignore the people around him while enjoying a high degree of individual liberty. This can actually be illustrated by the simple act of avoiding eye contact with a beggar on the street. Nonetheless, a minority of them still believes that a society is a gift to be kept alive and it’s much more than an economy of individualistic, materialistic households. Thus, this new concept of the air-conditioned underwear challenges national unity, for it only results in one becoming more oblivious to the society and the needs of other people. //

**6. How can Singapore arrest the "privatization of its public"?** //**[Conclusion]**// In order to stop the “privatization of its public”, barriers to social and political life have to be removed. For one thing, action speaks louder than words. Therefore, concrete plans must be put into action such that the impact is great enough to “brain-wash” the Singaporeans. Giving repeated assurances of its sincerity in wanting people to contribute to public affairs would not be adequate to change the mindset of the Singaporeans. With admired decisiveness, reviews and regulations change, introduction of incentives would deal enough damage to arrest the “privatization of its public”. The desired outcome should not be that difficult to achieve if the issue above can be solved. Furthermore, Singaporeans are prone to be more stubborn, and thus, coercing them into a consensus will not solve the problem. Moderate contentiousness should be introduced instead. This will require a new culture of tolerance, centered on human rights and democratic values. Their views matter because everyone’s does. In such a culture, your right to take part in collective decisions entails the responsibility to respect the outcome even when it goes against you; and you would have the reassurance that even when the majority disagrees with you, you will be treated fairly and with respect.


 * //[You have based your response largely on the book, showing your familiarity with its content - LokeLF]//**

Lim Hong Yao 3B1(14)
 * //Part One - Climate Control: Politics Under The New Guard//**

Mr Goh became the Prime Minister when Mr Lee Kuan Yew handed the position to him, but the public doubted him and thought that he was just a seat warmer for Mr Lee Hsien Loong, but Mr Goh drew his support by his own actions and gained the Singaporeans’ trust. His impact on Singapore politics can be seen in many contexts, locally-helping establish Edusave and promoting the benefits of growth, internationally-helping Singapore increase its sources and destinations for trade and investments, politically-establishing a more democratic and collegial government, and on the issue of equality when he ordered an investigation on the Lee’s property when it was suspected to be discounted. In contrast to Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Mr Goh was more of a average Singaporean than the ‘impossibly articulate and frighteningly intelligent’ Lees. Mr Goh appealed to the public as Singaporeans sensed that he could understand them.
 * 1. In your own words, explain how Mr Goh Chok Tong's impact on Singapore politics "was seen at several levels" and how he was different from Mr Lee Kuan Yew as a Prime Minister. //[Chapter 1//** //]//

The intention of depoliticisation was to suppress communists Depoliticisation caused the limitation of all political activity other than the leading party and risks a nation that is weak and underdeveloped in political culture that will result in little capable leaders and Singaporeans who are unable to cope with democratic citizenship in the future.
 * 2. What was the original intention of the 'depoliticisation' of the Singapore public and what were the negative effects of such depoliticisation? //[Chapter 2]//**

//**3**// **. What do you understand about the 'Singapore School of Thought'? Why and how is it different from Western democracy? //[Chapter 3]//** The Singapore school of thought emphasises the lack of universality of many Western political norms, and believes that economic growth is the necessary foundation of any system that claims to advance human dignity and that order and stability are essential for development, and the government must govern effectively and fairly. Unlike the West trying to put democracy before economy in Asia, the Singapore school of thought preferred China’s strategy to put market reform before political reform as it would produce more lasting benefits. The PAP has also sure that they had their fundamentals right and did not want to be the guinea pig for their political experiments.


 * 4. "The directly elected character of the President adds a new and unfamiliar dimension to Singapore's political matrix." In what way is this true? //[Chapter 4] It is so as the president is the head of state but has only the negative power of denying vetoing the drawing of reserves, and is not even supposed to voice his opinions to the public. He is such an important figure but he is regarded as a nuisance even and does not have the power to change much. //**

The principle of press freedom in Singapore is almost the opposite of that of a Western democracy. In Singapore, the press system is sustained by coercion and consent, and various licensing and national security laws play their part. The government itself is the embodiment of democratic expression, and must be protected from the press. On the other hand in western democratic societies the press is seen as a pure expression of democracy and must be protected from the government. Thus as said in the book, in liberal democracies, it is all about freedom of the press from the government, but in Singapore, it’s all about freedom of the government from the press.
 * 5. Explain the difference between the principle of press freedom in Singapore and that of a Western democratic country //. [Chapter 5]//**

The strategy was at first used in the 1950s to describe using the militant pro-communists to come to power in the struggle for Merdeka, but later the term was used in the 1990s to describe the using of capitalism to bring Singapore to greater heights and a better economy, making profitable investments and businesses.
 * 6. What do you understand by the strategy 'riding the tiger' in the 1950s and that in the 1990s? //[Chapter 6]//**


 * //[Hong Yao, your response reminds me of the factual/direct type of comprehension answers that we are so familiar with. Do refrain from merely giving a straightforward explanation of terminology. - LokeLF]//**

=Xichen 3B113=
 * // Introduction: The Politics of an Air-Conditioned Nation & Conclusion: Air-conditioned Underwear and the Future of Politics //**

1. In your opinion, what do the terms 'authoritarian democracy' and 'benevolent dictatorship refer to. How are they different? //[Introduction]//

Authoritarian democracy refers to a democracy that lacks certain democratic features. It fulfils the basic needs of the people while sparing them from other high-minded political principles. The government essentially controls all of the organizations on the island; the press, the police, the military, housing, the electoral, trade unions. The political atmosphere in this kind of country is relatively lopsided, with one party dominating the others. For example, in Singapore, the PAP pretty much destroys and humiliates anyone who dares to oppose. Chee Soo Juan was repeatedly sued and fined for writing articles criticizing Singapore’s government, and sent to serve a sentence in jail from a legal system that is biased towards the PAP. The former Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, said that he would isolate the opposition leaders, ridicule them and get them exposed. The state-controlled media and press pretty much provide a big help. Citizens do get to vote, but the ballot system is often tailored to the advantage of the ruling party. Still, in an authoritarian democracy, opposition parties are not banned. They do exist. However, their existence is just to sustain the fiction that genuine politics are possible. The current party in power would just use their powers to completely keep the opposition down. Benevolent dictatorship refers to a style of government where the country is ruled by an undemocratic government or leader; however, unlike dictators, they exercise their political powers for the benefit of their people and not for personal interest. A benevolent dictator is relatively peaceful, and puts utmost importance in the maintaining of cordial relationships with other countries. The fundamental difference between benevolent dictatorship and authoritarian democracy is that the latter has several parties, while the formal only has one. Citizens still get to vote in an authoritarian democracy, and probably have a higher degree of freedom than in a benevolent dictatorship. However, the results of both types of ideology are basically the same; one central, powerful party has almost complete control over the whole country.

2. Why do you think the term 'The Air-Conditioned Nation' is an apt description of Singapore? //[Introduction]//

The air-conditioner’s primary function is to give people a comfortable environment during a hot day. Similarly, Singapore is designed for the comfort of its citizens, giving them a safe, stable society where they can pursue material comforts and have a happy life. Secondly, though air conditioners gives us comfort, it contributes to global warming at the same time. The heat from indoors is channeled outdoors; the doors and windows are shut to maintain the unequal temperatures. Metaphorically, this represents Singapore’s capitalistic approach, where the wealth gradient is insulated from the tendency to equalize outcomes. The rich do not need to give out their wealth, while the poor, though cared for, rarely live beyond their means. The restrictions on foreign labor entering the country can be likened to heat entering an air-conditioned room; it disrupts the comfort of the people inside the room. To effectively use an air-conditioning system, openings need to be covered, adequate power needs to be provided and the air conditioners should be regularly serviced. For example, Singapore’s uses its natural advantages combined with efficient information technology and business-friendly policies to attract foreigners to use her ports. Last but not least, an air conditioner provides comfort by control; controlling the temperature. This could be the most defining characteristic of Singapore; a system where the government controls almost everything in order to provide a happy life for the people.

3. What do you think the terms 'autonomy as consumers' and 'autonomy to challenge' suggest about the nature of Singaporeans? //[Introduction]//

These 2 terms suggest that Singaporeans prefer individual profit and gain rather than to challenge the hierarchical structure of Singapore. Therefore, when the Singaporeans are well-cared for and living in comfort, they pretty much do not care about, or are simply tolerant, about the stifling control of the PAP. They also highlight Singaporean’s indifference to politics. 4. The writer thinks that the advent of the 21st century may require a new kind of politics (p 196). What did he envisage this new politics to be like? // [Conclusion] //

The writer envisages the new political landscape to be one where the management would require new skills and new methods, and where Singaporeans debate more openly about issues pertaining to their own interests rather than listening to the government the whole time. The complexity in issues and politics would replace the top-down hierarchical politics that the PAP has grown accustomed to. This is basically an effect of Singapore’s economic progress. As the citizens become more affluent, they become more aware of their own rights and interests, and thus would be more critical of the government. Economic prosperity acts as a strong base for the development of groups with varying interests and agendas, making the political scene more exciting and probably posting a threat to the PAP. Also, the PAP would definitely have to change their ways of stifling control if they are to remain in power due to their diminishing control of information flow around the country. Newspapers and mainstream media, though controlled by the government, are not the only sources of information for Singaporeans. With the dawn of the computer age, Singaporeans would be able to share their views openly online within discussions forums, and get more exposure to different political ideologies around the world. Due to the massive scale of the Web, it is impossible for the Singapore government to censor or close down every website that damages the PAP’s reputation. On the contrary, the more the PAP tries to control the citizens, the more the citizens would tend to rebel. Blocking sites and forums would just fuel the citizens’ desire to express their own feelings and they would tend to look for other means; even if you close down 1 website, another 2 may pop up tomorrow. In the Information Age, the PAP would need to change its conventional notions of control, and instead aim for liberalization. Another important change in Singapore’s political landscape would be Lee’s imminent departure from Office in probably a few years’ time. Lee Kuan Yew, the first Prime Minister of Singapore, has played a pivotal role in creating the Singapore we all know today. Though he has groomed new leaders who are probably as capable as him, such as Goh Chok Tong and Lee Hsien Loong, his influence in the political arena is still unmatched. In 1994, when the ministerial pay scheme was debated in Parliament, and the government did not have any progress in convincing the public that the salary hike was necessary, Lee used his influence to squash any opposing viewpoints. It is evident that Lee plays a big role in Singaporean politics. The political atmosphere in Singapore would definitely be different after Lee’s departure, and with a growing percentage of citizens not satisfied with economic success alone.

5. Lee's air-conditioned underwear seems to be a concept that challenges national unity (p 207). In your own words, explain how this is so. //[Conclusion]//

Lee’s air-conditioned underwear concept basically entails three fundamental shifts in Singapore’s political landscape: Centralized control to individual autonomy, steep hierarchy to flat structure and standardization to diversity. His concept poses a threat to national unity as it, in a way, promotes self-centeredness. As we know, air-conditioners work by transferring heat from a hotter region to a cooler region. In the past, when the country was ‘air-conditioned’ as a whole, the nation was unified as everyone has a fair share of comfortable living. However, if every citizen was to wear ‘air-conditioned underwear’, they would start transferring heat, or in realistic terms, become inconsiderate to the people around them. Everyone wants to keep themselves cool, and the only way to do this, as in this scenario, would be to transfer their heat to others. The constant conflicts between groups of opposing interests would no doubt threaten national unity. Air-conditioning also requires an enclosed environment, and thus people with air-conditioned underwear would need to segregate themselves from others to keep themselves cool. When the whole country was air-conditioned, national unity wasn’t a challenge as everyone, as a whole, was kept cool. People are more friendly and sociable as everyone’s interests are met. However, with air-conditioned underwear, people become too engrossed in protecting the temperature in their own room. Citizens with high social status would become oblivious to the plight of the less fortunate, and might just concentrate on increasing their fame and wealth. The wealthy people would not want to contribute back to the ‘big room’, as it would make their own ‘room’ hotter and less comfortable. In a sense, air-conditioned underwear makes every Singaporean more individualistc and materialistic, and undermines the importance of society. Thus, we can see that the increasing disparity between different classes and the prevalence of the indifferent attitude among Singaporeans would be a serious threat to national unity.

6. How can Singapore arrest the "privatisation of its public"? //[Conclusion]// The government would need to look for a new breed of public sector leaders who remain politically loyal while maintaining market competitiveness at the same time. A good example would be Tommy Koh, who publicly admonished the LTA’s lack of concern for wheelchair users. This breed of leaders would be able to contribute greatly at the public level by making the lives of the citizens better, while at the same time contribute at the market level by maintaining market competitiveness. When government statutory boards and other government organizations are deregulated to generate income, the government would need to put professional regulatory agencies in charge of these ‘private’ public companies to ensure that they serve their fundamental purpose to the public and generate economic income as well.


 * //[Your tone and comments on the politics of Singapore can be rather stinging. While your observations are rather opinionated, they are thought-provoking at the same time. - LokeLF]//**

//**Max Yoong 3B119 Introduction: The Politics of an Air-Conditioned Nation & Conclusion: Air-conditioned Underwear and the Future of Politics**//

1. In your opinion, what do the terms 'authoritarian democracy' and 'benevolent dictatorship refer to. How are they different? //[Introduction]// 1. In an "authoritarian democracy", the people are deprived of some civil liberties such as freedom of speech and press, but they are allowed to elect their government. However, after the government is elected, it has much control over the people and strict rules are imposed to rule the people. A benevolent dictatorship is when the people have completely no say in the politics of a country, and all decisions are made by the ruler who has absolute control over the people. However, this dictator uses his authority to improve the welfare of the people and he is capable and talented enough such that the people are not actively demanding for him to step down. The main difference between these two terms is that an "authoritarian democracy" is ruled by a government comprising of elites, leading to a greater distribution of power. A "benevolent dictatorship", on the other hand, is ruled by one extraordinary man, and nobody can question him even if he makes a mistake.

2. Why do you think the term 'The Air-Conditioned Nation' is an apt description of Singapore? //[Introduction]// 2. Singapore is an "Air-Conditioned Nation" both literally and metaphorically. Literally, the air-conditioner has become a basic necessity of most Singaporeans and it can be found at almost every corner of the country. Metaphorically, while Singapore enjoys steady economic growth, it is disregarding the condition of other countries and is never willing to pace down its footsteps to aid others. This is very similar to the way an air-conditioner works as it insulates heat to the environment when it cools the people indoor. Also, Singaporeans are mostly "pampered" as they are enjoying high standards of life, and this is very similar to an air-conditioner as it provides comfort to its user.

3. What do you think the terms 'autonomy as consumers' and 'autonomy to challenge' suggest about the nature of Singaporeans? //[Introduction]// 3. These terms suggest that most Singaporeans put more emphasis on their individual benefits than collective interest. As long as Singapore is able to achieve steady economic growth, the people do not mind if the government restricts them from voicing opposing opinions. This can be further seen in their reluctance to enter the political arena just to prevent themselves from getting into trouble.

4. The writer thinks that the advent of the 21st century may require a new kind of politics (p 196). What did he envisage this new politics to be like? //[Conclusion]// 4. The writer envisages this new politics to liberalise censorship as the introduction of the Internet has expanded the circulation of information and the government is no longer able to decide what adult citizens are allowed to read or view. The public sector will be fragmented in order to subject these organisations' corporate governance to market discipline and to make them more responsive to changing needs. Also, with Lee Kuan Yew's impending departure from government, leadership may not be able to cope as he has always and is still the dominant pillar in Singapore's politics.

5. Lee's air-conditioned underwear seems to be a concept that challenges national unity (p 207). In your own words, explain how this is so. //[Conclusion]// 5. By switching from a centrally controlled air-conditioner unit to an air-conditioned underwear, centralised control must give way to individual autonomy, steep hierarchy to flat structure, and standardisation to diversity. An air-conditioner unit cools the country as a whole, whereas the air-conditioned underwear cools each individual separately, increasing the temperature of others while cooling oneself. This means Singaporeans are becoming increasingly individualistic and self-centered, and they care more about their personal benefit than the collective interest.

6. How can Singapore arrest the "privatisation of its public"? //[Conclusion]// 6. Singapore can arrest the "privatisation of its public" by removing some barriers to social and political life. Although consensus cannot be forced, we can moderate contentiousness. A new culture of tolerance, centered on human rights and democratic values which Singaporeans know that they matter only because everyone matters, that their views count because everyone's does is required. By having such a culture, Singaporeans will become less self-centered and start to realise the importance of collective interest.


 * //[Max, your assessment of the typical Singaporean (for the Introduction section) is pretty harsh. Perhaps you are indeed hitting too close to the truth - LokeLF]//**

Sean Ong (23) & Cheong Rong Hao (04) //**<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">Part Four - A Place In The Sun: Race and National Identity **//

19. The writer is of the opinion that the Singapore government "has shown strikingly little interest in cultivating Singaporean's appreciation for one another's cultures." To what extent do you think he is right? //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">[Chapter 19] //

//**<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">I do not wholly agree with the writer. **// //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">Over the recent years, the government has opted to adopt a “return to roots” emphasis on each of the country’s respective component cultures. The government’s tilt towards the revisiting of these cultural ghettos is denoted by the formation of several ethnic based self-help groups. Examples of these are the Singapore Indian Development Association (Sinda), the Chinese Development Assistance Council (CDAC) and the Eurasian Association. These various communities provided for their respective ethnic population help in the form of tuition and social services. This actually serves as a platform to //// bestow a sense of responsibility for the various communities; a sense of providing for their own creed and race. The government has implications for racial integration. Through these self-help groups, the government can reach out to the different races and establish a universally accepted common ground between Singapore’s various. This is evidence of a plan the government is planning to undertake to cultivate Singaporean’s appreciation for one another’s cultures. //

//Despite the materialization of self-help groups, implications for racial integration caused great distress to certain sections of the populations. Educated Singaporeans saw those groups as a trend towards greater ethnic polarisation, less of the Singaporean Singapore where races are integrated. A couple of decades ago, the Singapore mainstream were dominated by the English-educated. Today, the mainstream has widened to accommodate other communities. The government has done little to welcome this change. Therefore, the different classes hold little appreciation for the other classes in the mainstream.// // Yet another problem is the delicacy with which the government handles its various policies. “Speak Mandarin” campaign commercials and posters failed to specify target audiences. They were also frequently over the top. The failure to communicate properly the position of Chinese language and culture in our country came across to the general public to make the country as a whole more Chinese. What impressions would this create among the non-Chinese? They appeared to encourage Chinese to use Mandarin instead of English in any setting and regardless of the people present. Ethnic diversity is also discussed in alarmist terms. Surveys on multi-racialism drew “selective conclusions from lead questions”. It described uprisings as race riots and classifies the given situation as a racial conflict. Doing this will cause the people to think more racially and this alarmist attitude towards race issues will ultimately hurt more than help, introducing a sense of distrust between races. Our country is like a package with “fragile” labels plastered all over it, it is up to the government to unpack this package and implement any changes delicately. //
 * // However, Cherian George is correct to a greater extent. //**

20. "Singapore is one of the most Westernised cities in Asia. (Yet) in some respects, Singaporeans are not westernised enough." Do you agree with this opinion? //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">[Chapter 20] //

// Freedom of expression, despite being acknowledged as a right in Singapore’s Constitution, has never truly been assumed high regard here. It is treated as an exceedingly conditional right, which effectively means that it is not a right in any sense of the word, merely a kind of privilege subject to extension by the state to certain types of communication that conforms to whatever standards the government chooses to impose. In Singapore, unlike liberal societies, there is certainly no wish to provide avenues for the voicing of dissent. //
 * // Yes, I absolutely agree that in some respects, Singapore is not westernized enough. This is apparent in the paucity of freedom of expression, one of the imperative aspects of the western model. //**

**//But to say that Singaporeans are not westernized enough? I do not concur.//** // Singaporeans have longed for the freedom of expression that they are deprived of. Through scouring for opportunities for this freedom, several Singaporeans have selected the internet as a platform. However, the communities on the internet have only further hardened conservative values. The possibilities of the internet unveil the foul, offensive and noxious instincts that lie within human beings. Here, however, I would like to propose a counter- perspective: Singaporeans are westernized enough to realize that socially irresponsible expression on the internet is exactly what would prod Singapore towards a rights-based western approach to free speech.

The internet means that the practical policy choice is no longer between freedom and non-freedom. The government has elucidated that //[|//censorship is not a//]// choice. Therefore the real option is sandwiched between the amount of freedom taken and given. Currently, Singapore falls straight into the former. Singaporeans understand that the freedom they enjoy was not substantiated by // //any recognized rights. Instead, they have simply seized the freedom provided by technologies that they acquire. Therefore, I say Singaporeans are westernized enough to realize the importance of freedom to express.

Freedoms achieved in this manner are not burdened by any sense of social responsibility. Singaporeans exercising their freedom on the internet stand by the fact that it is their own individual cleverness that earned them this freedom. They bought their computers, subscribed for the internet, downloaded the programs and possessed the gumption, initiative and resourcefulness.

Maybe the government play a role by supplying the infrastructure for internet access and the high quality of education that makes Singaporeans so clever. However, the government has repetitively said that such investments are chiefly for economic development. It is a more vocal, more westernized population which caused this unintended negative side-effect of Singapore’s development. Therefore, the Singapore government is not westernized enough in this aspect, but Singaporeans themselves are.

Western societies with a deep tradition of free speech constantly remind their members that this individual human right is secured for its value to society. It is said that free speech has to be available because a civilized society is a working system of ideas. In the political culture of liberal societies, the moral basis of free speech is a profoundly social one. This is why, in the field of journalism, it is the free societies that have generated the most meaningful professional codes of ethics. Today, when journalists and journalism students in unfree societies need guidance on thorny ethical issues concerning, say, respect for privacy or dealing with children, they turn to literature developed by professional associations and news organizations operating in free societies. Their own industry is ethically untrained because they traditionally outsource moral judgments to the government.

Government dogma has divorced Singapore from a rich international current of discussion about free speech, its role in society and its limits. Singapore positions itself as an exceptional case that can learn nothing from this wider debate, yet none of Singapore’s concerns – about racial harmony, for example – are unique to Singapore, and all feature in the on-going global discussion. In the rhetoric that passes for debate in Singapore, the choices are polarised as “individual versus collective” or “freedom versus responsibility”, implying that free speech is inherently selfish and irresponsible. The danger now is that this may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. By failing to enshrine free speech has a fundamentally social good, young Singaporeans are growing up seizing that freedom on their own terms, impervious to being lectured about their social obligations.//

21. Why does the writer think that political issues are key considerations behind debates over language education? //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">[Chapter 21] //

**// I would like to craft my answer to this question upon the issue of debate over SAP schools that the writer has constructed. SAP schools are critical instruments in language education. //**// The writer asserts the fact that SAP schools, like our very own institution, exist as ‘political footballs’. This is indeed, due to the fact that language teaching turns education policy into cultural policy, and since culture is at once a personal and societal resource, education is never only about what is best in the interests of the child as judged by his or her parents; schools also have a responsibility to society at large. // // Special Assistance Plan schools allow competent students to swot Chinese at the level of a first language. However, these institutions are the focus of political debate as they are regarded with deep unease by many Malays and Indians, for whom the schools embody the minorities’ fear of being marginalised in the land they call home. Even some English-educated Chinese question the government’s investment in SAP schools, viewing it as part of a trend towards ethnic polarisation. // // The author also feels that one of the contributing factors why unlike Christian schools, SAP schools are under the siege of political debate is because the latter are founded by the government, whereas the former are founded by missionaries. **As a matter of fact, this is not clear-cut as Christian schools are government aided and accept state funding.** // // Albeit this, there might be another factor for the extensive acceptance of Christian schools: they are not exclusionary. Non-Christian students are not pressured into becoming Christians as a price of admission. But as for SAP schools, they are set up to facilitate the learning of Chinese and ministry policy stipulates that each child learn his or her mother tongue, so Malays and Indians are effectively excluded. //

22. Do you think that opening our doors to foreigners would depreciate the value of citizenship? Why or why not? //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">[Chapter 22] //

//<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">By tradition, Singaporeans with their own migratory history have been amenable about foreigners from east or west, which has led to a recent accumulation of settlers and visitors. More than a million have arrived, for the most part during the past decade, and even though they have jazzed up the economy, they are also starting to incur a social cost — increasingly sparking friction with locals. // //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">In spite of land reclamation, Singapore remains a small city, one of the densest in the world. This pressure is taxing on the tolerance gauge of Singaporeans, who are struggling to cope with a broadening income disparity and mounting prices. Already one third of the people here are foreigners, not to point out the nine million tourists who turn up yearly. // //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">Cracks are already surfacing between Singaporeans and the recent settlers who have come as permanent residents not just between diverse ethnic groups, but also within races themselves. People are displaying less trust towards one another. The new residents do not blend easily with Singaporeans and the latter, in turn, tend to eschew or shun the new-comers. // //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">Singapore should think twice before pushing for a 6.5 million population as we do not need numbers but talent is a ////<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">crucial factor, the skills of immigrants play a vital role in the development of Singapore. // //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">There remains a need to appeal to the citizens’ hearts. Singapore’s largely middle class, frazzled by a widening wealth divide, is extremely worried about the large flood of foreigners. Today, foreigners are considered as threats to locals’ livelihoods, they are viewed with suspicion and envy. // //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">A pivotal part of immigration is the successful luring of wealthy foreigners to settle here. Yes, it does wonders for the economy, but is also aggravates inflation and effectively widens the income divide. If Singapore is not chary, one nation could be ripped into two or three fractions, standing as a divided nation. // //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">Several incidents between foreigners and locals have stirred emotions, revealing the current sensitivities. These are trivial everyday happenings in a teeming city that would have attracted little attention if they had involved only locals, but were blown up into hot issues because foreigners were involved. // //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">In 2006 a record 70,000 foreigners were admitted; within the next few years, the figure is set to be higher. Verbal insults have become a frequent phenomenon on the Internet between Singaporeans and some of the better-educated permanent residents. So far there have been no major incidents but the underlying umbrage has given rise to fears that a small incident may one day flare up into big trouble. Some aliens find it challenging to find accommodation; yet others get a nonchalant reception from office colleagues. The government and community representatives have organized citizenship ceremonies and social gatherings to make the newcomers feel welcome. Leaders often extol the role of foreign talent in nation building. //
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">Ill feelings toward foreigners are beginning to emerge in cosmopolitan Singapore, attributed to the recent influx of immigrants. //**
 * //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 11pt;">For those who have to confront the foreigners daily in all his living activities, when every citizen has to contest for his space and the very air he inhales, tension is liable to accumulate and break out. //**

23. Cherian George calls the national urge to upgrade "an unsettling impermanence." What is your opinion on this? //<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">[Chapter 23] //

//**<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">The writer states that the cost of having an extraordinary pace and scale of transformation and re-transformation in Singapore is an unsettling impermanence. **////<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">The writer’s definition of this is that Singaporean’s will build and build, faster and more efficiently than other cities, but the upgrading of the country will never be complete. I will address this issue in reference to the National Day Rally this year. // // I feel that if we remain cohesive then we can trounce our economic challenges and continue to advance. We can strengthen our society safety nets. We can shape Singapore together. And this is how we've transformed Singapore over the last half century- solving problems together, growing together, and improving our lives. // // Decades ago, there were coolies on the Singapore River toiling away, heaving heavy loads, slogging for a better life for themselves, at the same time the basis of prosperity for Singapore's entrepot. Today, this common sight years ago has vanished. What we have today are electric boats drifting on the water. Boat Quay has no more coolies — we go there to enjoy ourselves and have a meal, vibrantly. This must be early in the evening because everybody still looks sober! Memories of our forefathers that plodded it out under the hot sun to construct the very foundation of Singapore seem to have been left in the lurch. We seldom think of the coolies that had trudged around the quay while we enjoy and prosper from their hard labour. This may be the detrimental effect of the fast pace of upgrading. However, upgrading has done a lot for our country. // // Housing has transformed entirely. Singaporeans used to subsist in appalling living conditions. People were very much poor and families often crammed into miserable puny cubicles. But transformation and upgrading has solved all this: today we live in the comfort of HDB flats. In the 1970s, the PAP was rather resolute in moving people out of slums and to construct public housing units for every Singaporean and one of the first projects built was Tanjong Pagar Duxton Plain situated at Cantonment Road, to show the voters in Tanjong Pagar and in Singapore what the PAP government could accomplish. And these buildings began springing up in 1963 during the elections. // // Today we even have the Pinnacle, glistening in all its magnificent splendour and beauty. The building will be ready by the end of the year, the tallest of HDB flats in Singapore.Our government went ahead to establish entire new towns to facilitate the citizens in Singapore. // // The HDB and our MPs sure laboured hard to develop the streets, to elevate the standards of social behaviour (behaviours such as squatting and sleeping on the streets). Today, the PAP is still striving but what is important is that Singapore has made progress and with continuous upgrading, districts now have vibrant town centres. // // So all I have stated are the upgrading of Singapore physically. As the economy prospered our lives have also improved. For the residents of the HDB flats, what's most significant is not merely the simple furnishing of flats but what is inside those flats. This is the closest to our hearts. //

// Toilets tell an even more dramatic story. Then, fifty metres into any house there is a tiny space, a hole in the ground and a bucket. The only remaining bucket in Singapore is exhibited in a museum. To bath back then, the families would just use an open area. Now, contrast this with a standard issue HDB toilet today, and we get the result of upgrading. // // To build a nation, not only housing of the people is required but also the strengthening of ties between Singaporeans. So there were community centres appearing all over Singapore. The early ones were very spartan, just a simple building, basic roof and inside stands a ping pong table, a community hall, and maybe a games area for interaction. The outstanding attraction was a black and white TV set surrounded with benches, and entire families, entire groups congregated because people didn't have TV sets during that period. They came to watch what we do not even broadcast on mainstream television today. If you take a glimpse into today's Community Centres, you will notice people doing line dancing and wine tasting. There are the sport competitions held there and gyms for public use and many other exotic things. It's very different. // // So Singapore has changed. Our country prospered in peace, managed to maintain confidence in our nation and deterred any potential aggressors. Yet, the government is continuing to renew this city, to build the future Singapore. Even in the midst of economic recession they are going hard at it. Once again, it is not the architectural structures but the nationalistic sentiments that make our nation tick. // // Even now, Singapore is delivering a first-class education system. The government made weighty investments in education at all stages, setting up new schools, equipping them with computers, labs and so on. Schools such as our own institution are set to become future schools. // // But even beyond schools the government requires not only the young, but the old to seek out and absorb knowledge because we must keep on learning and relearning to keep the economy functioning. Therefore they are constructing newer libraries in our already new towns. // // Because of the constant upgrading, we have a Singapore that is tidy, competent, dependable, and secure. We have a train system like no other. MRTs are very safe and punctual. The government has opened 5 Circle Line stations. The Circle Line will be completed within the subsequent years. // // From the Singapore River to Marina Bay, Singapore is completely transformed through the last half century. 1959 was a moment of great change but nobody at the Padang in June 1959 contemplated the idea of change in today's Singapore. It just did not seem possible then. So, an unsettling impermanence? I beg to differ. What constant upgrading and change has done for Singapore, words fail to express. //

[|<< First] [|< Previous] [|Next >] [|Last >>] Help · About · Blog · Terms · Privacy · [|**Support**] · [|**Upgrade**]Contributions to http://lokelf.wikispaces.com are licensed under a [|Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 3.0 License]. Portions not contributed by visitors are Copyright 2009 Tangient LLC. in the content of your page here.
 * //[Sean and Ronghao, I am not sure why you have decided on a collaborative effort here. I am sure I did not invite pair work for this. it is obvious both of you have done some research, especially for the issue on freedom of expression. But for//** **//most pair work, disparity in quality and style can be obvious. - LokeLF]//** Change 0 of 0