Due to some weird screw up in blogger which prevents me from posting anything new, i have decided to begin shifting to a new website,Winter is Coming. I will transfer some stuff from here to make it less barren for now. Thanks for your support, whoever you might be.


Dan Yuan Ren Chang Jiu

The above is actually the title of a song by Wang Fei. The lyrics of the song are actually from a poem composed by Su Shi. To sum it all up, Su Shi (1037-1101) was a statesman of the Northen Song (960-1127) of China, who was exiled twice due to his political leanings, which went against that of the reformer Wang An Shi (1021-1086). According to folk lore, the poem, entitled "Shui Tiao Ko Tou", was composed during one of his exiles. Su Shi, or Su Dongpo as he is more commonly known, saw the moon and thought of home, or so they say.

Now what has Su Dongpo got to do with Singapore? Just recently I did an article entitled " The Forgotten Past which talked about the fact that even the Old Guard who stood with Mr Lee Kuan Yew have been given short shrift in the media, and it is only after their passing then we will get an idea of their achievements in Singapore Society, as evidenced by Mr S Rajaratnam's passing last year. However in light of the banning of Said Zahari's film we should now turn our attention to a bunch of Singaporeans that people have mostly forgotten. They are definitely in a different league from Mr David Marshall, Dr Toh Chin Chye and others.They are, for lack of a better word, the "Su Dongpos" of Singapore.

No doubt names like Francis Seow, Gopalan Nair, Tan Wah Piow, Tang Liang Hong, Said Zahari and others will leave the typical Singaporean who spends most of his day chasing money scratching his head. In fact while the PAP Old Guard, though given no mention now in our many NE lessons and mainstream media, will probably be remembered at the time of passing or during some National Day special article, the abovementioned people would probably not be mentioned at all, judging by the way ST publishes its editorials. Perhaps the only time people like Francis Seow will be mentioned would be in articles by our dear senior editors (Andy Ho, so on so forth) or Peh Shing Huei, decrying their attempts to "subvert" the system and hailing the system as espoused by the PAP, notwithstanding that such a system has existed in history before and proven to have contributed to the downfall of certain empires .

Ths thing is no matter what their allegiance, these people, like it or not, are also Singaporeans. While they are no longer in Singapore, for obvious reasons, it is highly probably that these exiles could, like Su Dongpo, be spending their nights staring at the moon and wandering about their homeland. While what has happened is past, the least that authorities can do is allow them back to their country of birth. It is rather sad that while the authorities are making attempts to "connect" with Singaporeans and so called talents overseas who seem to be more interested in food rather than the "celebration" of the Singaporean "Identity", on the other hand, we have a group of Singaporeans who have sacrificed their livelihoods in Singapore and yet are still treated as pariah just because they happened to fight under the wrong banner. If by all means the authorities feel that it is too great a leap to make such a move, the least they could do is allow these people a chance to air their views. Remember that Said Zahari was detained without trial, thus it is not fair to paint him as a rebel, which is the impression a person will get after reading the reasons why the film was banned, which went along the lines of it painting the government in a negative light and all. This also reveals something; it is ok for one to paint the opposition and any other person not under the lightning bolt in a negative light but any criticism levied at the men in white must be followed by so called "solutions" as espoused by Ms Bhavani during the unfortunate episode of Mr Brown.

Perhaps the following scenario is not so out of the world, imagine Francis Seow or any other exile staring at the moon and wondering about his country, and one can make it into some kind of music video with Faye Wong's Dan Yuan Ren Chang Jiu playing it the background. The tragedy is that these people probably were not in the fray for money but for their beliefs and their ideals, and that Singapore at that time, perhaps even now, is still not big enough to encompass any ideal except that espoused the ruling party. If that's the case then Singapore will never truly attain a high level of culture for as long as the ruling party continues its methodology, the views and ideals of the non MIWs will continue to be, at best, derided, at worst, they will be deemed as insurgents and "traitors" of the country.

Dan Yuan Ren Chang Jiu

Ming yue ji shi you ba jiou wen qing tian
Bu zhi tian shang gong que jin xi shi he nian
*Wo yu cheng feng gui qu wei kong qiong lou yu yu
Gao chu bu sheng han qi wu nong qing ying
He si zai ren jian
Zhuan zhu ge di qi hu zhao wu mian
Bu ying you hen he shi chang xiang bie shi yuan*
[repeat *]
Ren you bei huan li he yue you ying qing yuan que
Ci shi gu nan quan dan yuan ren chang jiu
Qian li gong chan juan

Man from the Moon?

I think this writer lives on the moon!

Ah well, i guess once in a while the ST has to resort to such letters to remind us "ingrates" that everything is well and we should just STFU and cram ourselves in them MRTs and get on with the never ending rat race.

I find it rather interesting that he feels that he is living a life free of stress. And here I thought Doctors lives are rather stressful. Perhaps he could be one of the lucky few who are earning big bucks, one of them medical directors. I wonder what other doctors will say when such a situation is put to them.

"The younger leadership and its style of governance is the main draw"

I find this interesting because in so far as the younger leadership is concerned, all i have seen is cheerleading. So perhaps their style of governance involves cheerleading? Or yes, now i do recall that their style of governance doesnt come cheap, they are worth every dollar and those who do not believe so are nothing but green eyed monsters, so i guess that makes me a green eyed fellow too.

There are many more things to pick from the letter. It goes against common knowledge, for it is known for a fact that Singapore has one of the most miserable populace in the world (there was some sort of test conducted, but i do not have it with me now.) In fact its believed that its the stressful lifestyle of Singaporeans that has contributed to the sorry state of affairs, and this could have played a part in Singaporeans having less sex and thus less babies and so on so forth because of career stresses. These are definitely bread and butter issues, but here the Dr says,

"I am able to mix work, pleasure, family life and community work without worrying about bread-and-butter issues. "

Of course as said earlier, he could be one of the more successful doctors. While he is entitled to his view, and it being fair as he is speaking from his POV, the fact that ST is publishing it shows that they are on the "Singapore BOLEH, anyone who says otherwise is an ingrate" kind of mode. Just months ago several foreigners were interviewed and all sang praises of Singapore. History has shown that the ST, after any controversial issue, will start to publish such letters or articles.

Anyway with regards to the point the good doctor made, I must add that he is rather lucky. I know my folks worry about bread and butter issues and I guess a majority of Singaporeans worry too.

And to add more flavour to this pseudo ST conspiracy, the last sentence is rather telling,

"I was able to drop my foreign citizenship for a Singaporean one with a clear conscience."

Now did not someone talk about leaving Singapore with a CLEAR CONSCIENCE? IS this mere coincidence or too much of a coincidence?

If you thought life was bad...

You ain't seen nothing yet!!! http://willythecop.blogspot.com/2007/04/no-annual-leave-and-no-sick-leave-for.html

The above has to do with the writer's mom working in some cleaning company. There being a change in management, there was then a corresponding change in working conditions.

" My mom is working at the Tuas South Incineration Plant as a cleaner under the contract of a private cleaning company. The company pays her S$700 a month for a 5-days work week. The pay is not high, but at least reasonable.Now, the cleaning contract has ended for this cleaning company and the contract has been given to another new cleaning company. And so my mom's new boss had a meet-the-people session to tell the cleaners his rules:
1. The pay is reduced to S$500
2. Now it has to be a 5.5 days working week
3. There will be a cut in manpower as there should not be more than 3 people working at an area, regardless how large the area space
4. No annual leave and sick leave for the first year"

And mind you these cleaners are not the run of the mill foreigners (of course i do not advocate such conditions for any human being except those homophobes running ard:P) but our very own 50 years and above ah gong ah ma who have no choice but to work longer because of some fellas aversion to a crutch mentality. Unfortunately they are not so lucky and cannot be consultants or mentors. As can be seen, their conditions are crap.

So much for a caring society and getting more elderly to rejoin the workforce. heh.

The Forgotten Past

While most of us probably know who Lee Kuan Yew is, there is a high possibility that names like Toh Chin Chye, Eddie Barker, Goh Keng Swee, Rajaratnam will elicit a very Singaporean "catch no ball response" from the younger generation. In fact it was only after Rajaratnam passed away last year whereby his achievements were made known to the public, leading many younger Singaporeans to make comments like " I didn't know Mr Rajaratnam penned the National Pledge" and so on so forth. Thus it seems that in so far as the development of modern Singapore is concerned, it was all the effort of one man, Mr Lee Kuan Yew. Even his old guard is slowly being forgotten in society.

If thats the case, what then of those who fought, IN THEIR OWN small way, for Singapore, notwithstanding that they did not fight under the lightning bolt? If even those who fought under the lightning bolt are rarely mentioned, except in their passing, then those who were under a different banner are slowly being removed from the National History. Men like Lim Chin Siong, Lee Siew Choh, CC Tan (of the Progressive Party, chief rival being the Labour Front) among others. Men like Zahari, who's movie was just banned because of the alleged attempt to portray the government in a negative light, Francis Seow, once a rising star, Gopalan Nair, who blogs in his http://www.singaporedissident.blogspot.com/ and Tang Liang Hong have also been, tarred, their memories forever stained. Given time, no one will remember these people who, despite the National Narrative which states the contrary, fought for what they believed in and perhaps have paid the ultimate price.

Putting all the debate on whether those men were given a fair deal, lets look at a certain person, who's name is not there. Leader of the then Labour Front and 1st Chief Minister of Singapore, he is none other than the redoubtable David Saul Marshall (1908-1995).

David Marshall is a rather well known person in both the blogosphere and the legal sphere. In the blogosphere, there are few bloggers who have not seen Dharmandra Yadev's interview with David Marshall. In the legal circle, he was a renowned Criminal Lawyer, having been involved in several of Singapore's very own "trials of the century", to wit, the Joseph Michael Nonis Case, the Watts-Carter Trial, the case of Thanami among others. In fact, one of the rationals Mr Lee used to justify the abolishment of trial by jury was that “David Marshall is responsible for 200 murderers walking freely the streets of Singapore.” However, there are other sides of the David Marshall that not many people talk about.

http://ourstory.asia1.com.sg/independence/ref/david.html This was published in the ST on December 13 1995. While the thing speaks for itself, there are several paragraphs of note.

"When he failed to convince the colonialists to relinquish control to him, he kept his promise to the people and resigned in protest, leaving the seats of power to be filled by more modest men.
By then, he had fired the imagination of a whole generation of post-war nationalists. In his inimitable, innocent and enthusiastic way, he was a populist politician who, more than anyone else in the early 1950s, aroused the interest of the common man in elections. He could mesmerise a crowd with his magnificent oratory -- the commanding, authoritative tone, the measured cadences, the well-chosen words -- or send them into paroxysms of laughter.
His tenure as Chief Minister was, by present standards, not a phenomenal success. He was strong on ideas but poor on details, leading what some hacks of the day called a "walking administration"; policies were formed as he walked along the corridors of power from one department to another.
But even though he failed to follow through on the numerous good ideas he spawned, many were subsequently embellished and translated into policies by the People's Action Party that took over the reins of government in 1959, such as the creed of multi-lingualism and multi-racialism, an education policy for nation-building, meet-the-people sessions and the Central Provident Fund. "

The highlighted portions speak for themselves. As can be seen, David Marshall succeeded in politicising a generation of Singaporeans so that they would start to think of other stuff rather than their rice bowls and whether they were going to get hand outs or not. In fact, it is entirely possible that Marshall's politicising of the populace eventually helped the opposition PAP gain control of the Parliament. I must say that it takes great skill in politicising a populace, and can say that perhaps there are few in these times who can successfully emulate such a feat.

Furthermore, it can be seen that he had many ideas which have become translated to reality in Singapore today. While it is true that as Chief Minister his track record seems to pale in comparison to Lee Kuan Yew's it would be unfair to then write him off as a force during those turbulent times. As Marshall gave PAP credit where credit was due, people should also do likewise, that is to say give Marshall credit for his ideas. In fact a case in note would be the Roman Empire, which "borrowed" from various civilisations such as the Greeks. Unforunately all we hear about Marshall nowadays is how he let "murderers" go free, and even then no one talks about WHY Marshall believed in the thing he did. Marshall's contributions, and that of the abovementioned people, are slowly being forgotten as time goes by. Yes, PAP was the party in power when Singapore made the transformation from Third to First World, but what is PAP? A Party. Who makes up the party? The People in the party, of which Mr Lee Kuan Yew was one of them. BUT to throw everything at Mr Lee feet is to neglect Dr Toh Chin Chye, Mr Rajaratnam, Mr Marshall and the countless others who have, at one point or another, played a part in this Nation's history, be it under the lightning bolt or the hammer or what have you. That, as Heck Tate puts it in To Kill A Mockingbird, is a sin.

* Herein is the article by Thrasymachus on Dr Toh Chin Chye and Mr Rajaratnam.

http://singaporegovt.blogspot.com/2006/02/part-ii-true-founders-of-singapore-man.html
http://singaporegovt.blogspot.com/2006/02/part-iii-tribute-to-s.html

** And this is the David Marshall Interview at Drew and Napier.

http://thinkhappiness.blogspot.com/2006/08/meeting-david-marshall-in-1994.html

Much Ado about the ST forum (Reloaded)

Im actually getting quite tired of this. In fact I tried to tell myself not to talk anymore about the darn forum. Unfortunately circumstances prove otherwise with the example below.

Are Homosexuals Truly Born Gay?
MINISTER Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said in a dialogue with 400 Young PAP members on Saturday that, 'if in fact it is true, and I have asked doctors this, that you are genetically born a homosexual - because that's the nature of the genetic random transmission of genes - you can't help it. So why should we criminalise it?'
Are homosexuals born gay? Why the importance to prove this issue? The reason is simple: If society is convinced that some people are indeed born gay, then there would be a need for the Government to not criminalise this behaviour, and, by extension, even protect homosexuals as a designated minority class.
In the United States, this debate is far from over. While a publication by research journal Science, claiming that we were 'on the verge of proving that homosexuality is innate, genetic and therefore unchangeable, a normal variant of human nature', generated much media interest in the early 1990s, scientific attempts to prove homosexual genes have yet to really bear fruit.
A study conducted in 1991 which attempted to show that homosexuality occurs more frequently among identical twins than fraternal twins actually provided support for environmental factors versus genetics.
If homosexuality were indeed in the genetic code, then both of the twins should be homosexual 100 per cent of the time, yet this was not the case.
The LeVay brain study of 1991, which tried to find differences in the hypothalamuses (a very small part of the brain) of homosexual and heterosexual men found no evidence that there is any genetic cause for homosexuality.
Other prominent researchers concluded that there was a lack of evidence to support a biological theory, but rather that homosexuality could be best explained by an alternative model where 'temperamental and personality traits interact with the familial and social milieu as the individual's sexuality emerges'.
With respect to possibly decriminalising homosexual behaviour in the upcoming Penal Code review, I urge the Government to refrain from proceeding hastily in view of inconclusive findings on 'homosexual genes'.
Agnes Chai Shiang Jen (Ms)

I wonder if the ST would actually publish a letter rebutting this views. Perhaps then they will say that the letter is promoting a homosexual lifestyle, perhaps not. As Yoda would say, hard to see the future is.

"Are homosexuals born gay? Why the importance to prove this issue? "

This statement begs the question, of why there is a need to prove that homosexuals are born gay a not. It appears that the writer believes that whether Section 377A is repealed would be dependent on whether homosexuality is a thing that is inborn or not. As can be seen by the sentence that follows the above and the last sentence of the entire letter (the one in bold).

While i am no psychic, I must say that her argument can be summarised as this:

- Section 377A should not be repealed hastily

- This is because Science has yet to prove that homosexuality is caused by genetics.

Therefore, if science proves that homosexuality is not caused by genetics, then Section 377A should stay.

But the above begets the question, WHY?

Why must such a law which sticks its proverbial nose into what you do in your bedroom be in force? Perhaps she subscribes to the view that homosexuality is immoral and unnatural, as can be inferred from this line;

"If society is convinced that some people are indeed born gay, then there would be a need for the Government to not criminalise this behaviour,"

Well if that is the case then i must say i find it worrying that society should have a say in the laws of the land. Such a situation has, in the past, resulted in persecution and discrimination against people society outcast. To Kill A Mockingbird shows us how the legal system, whilst supposing to dispense justice, instead causes injustice for an innocent men precisely because Society is against afro americans. There are many instances where what society believes is right has resulted in death and suffering; for example, the Persecutions of the Jews, eventually culminating in the holocaust and the Persecutions of the Early Christians. The Law should be the tool to regulate society and not be twisted by society.

Furthermore, even if homosexuality is "unnatural" in humans, why then should it be punishable with life imprisonment? Can someone tell me the "harm" if any, that is caused by homosexuals who have consented to doing their thing? If harm there be, then is it more serious than rape, as the punishment seems to be harsher?

Ahah! But what about morals then? There will be those who will declare " Homosexuality is IMMORAL!" But of course morality depends on which religion to subscribe to doesnt it? And if it does then why do you want to impose your morality using through the laws of a SECULAR state? And the morality thing is a dangerous area to go into; the Inquisition and the persecution of Jews during the middle ages stand as testament to that.

The crux of the matter is this; in so far as those other groups have the right to push for legislation, odious though that may seem, the government of any country should and must not allow themselves to be influenced by such lobbying. In my opinion whether something should be criminalised a not should be determined by the harm caused, among other things. As the bedroom acts of 2 consenting homosexuals does not appear to cause any harm, then it is only fair that Section 377A should be repealed.

* with regards to the writers take on genes, i do not think being twins may necessary mean that ur genetic make up is 100% the same. In fact i know of twins who are rather different in behaviour.

** Homosexuality was actually rather prevalent in the past. In Ancient Greece, the City of Thebes has a special elite unit known as the Sacred Band. They followed a buddy system as seen in the military, just that the buddies happened to be gay buddies, an older man paired with a younger. They called it pedrasty if i remember correctly. It was said that the men will fight harder for their lover's sake. Oh and btw, Alexander the Great was said to be gay.

Artificial Dynamism?

Once again, the Minister Mentor speaks, this time to a crowd of ypap fellas at St James Powerstation. http://news.asiaone.com.sg/st/st_20070423_113313.html

Suffice to say, there was the usual thing about how Singapore will sink into the bottom of the South China sea and what have you should Singapore get a "dumb" government, in this sense it seems to be that a "dumb" government is any government whereby the PAP is not in control.

But ignoring the "my way or your sis becomes a maid" kind of talk, his point about Singapore embarking on the pathway to be a dynamic international city is a sound one, and as this one has said somewhere in the depths of the past, such a solution is the only tenable one in the long run since there is no way Singapore can continue to compete with China and India just by relying on workers, no matter how skilled or unskilled they may be. However, as the saying goes, saying is one thing, doing is another.

It appears that despite the progress Singapore has made in the economic frontier, the progress in the socio-political frontier still leaves much to be desired. The ST, which continues to be a mouthpiece of the ruling party, the fact that Mr Brown got whacked and low blowed, the a/m "my way or your sis becomes a maid" kind off talk inter alia. It seems that while the MIW believes that a dynamic city is the way for Singapore to go, they have purely deigned to make cosmetic changes; for example the Speaker's Corner, the wooing of foreigners to add "diversity" to the society, the introduction of Crazy Horse and the IRs, so on so forth.

The above are similar by virtue of the fact that they are initiated by the PAP government. The "dynamism" is artificial more than it is spontaneous. At the end of the day the "chaos" in society will be the "chaos" that either they approve of or the "chaos" that they engineer. In a sense is this not similiar to the past where engineering society was the norm?

While one can argue that it doesnt matter what colour the cat is as long as it catches the mice, the fact of the matter is artificial dynamism has a rather poor track record. The Speaker's Corner remains rather empty and Crazy Horse has gone back to France. Meanwhile we have the MDA coming after Singapore's own talents such as Martyn See and the fella who created that book with Aaron Kwok, among other things. There are also the veiled threats against the netizens and the labelling of dissenters as ingrates, dummkopfs with no sense of proportion, etc etc. Thus it appears that while they are pushing for a dynamic cosmopolitan society, they have no tolerance for those who do not toe the line. This is rather contradictory.

While there are those who will throw the report card in this one's face, declaring that Singapore has a high GDP, largest reserves, so on so forth, this one will also throw another report card, of kingdoms and dynasties long gone, the Qin Dynasty http://aaron-ng.info/blog/lessons-from-the-qin-dynasty.html, the Byzantine Empire http://nedstark.blogspot.com/2007/04/blast-from-past-discussion-on-aarons.html, Imperial China, among others. The examples of these show that overwheliming concentration of power in the hands of one or a few men will and has resulted in disastrous consequences for the nation/state/ kingdom as a whole. It could be as short as 20+ years (Qin) or it could be 300+ years (Byzantine Empire) but one cannot deny the fact that there is merit in the idea of an alternative elite as espoused by Ngiam Tong Dow.

* This one wrote a long rambling post on Singapore http://nedstark.blogspot.com/2007/01/thoughts-on-singapore-singapore-is-like.html here.

** With regards to the oft mentioned point that Singapore has no natural resources but its people, there is one point which few have discussed. Namely, Singapore's location as a gateway, which was one of the reasons why Raffles decided to set up shop here, and the fact that Singapore is not subject to any natural disasters, thus adding to a certain level of safety in the country. For example a business man who sets up shop in Singapore does not need to worry about earthquakes and typhoons and tsunamis.

*** With regards to the use of long short cuts, this is because this one has no idea how to make it shorter. Perhaps someone would be kind enough to offer advice?:P

Ode to Ben and Kit

" For ever, and for ever, farewell, Cassius!If we do meet again, why, we shall smile;If not, why, then, this parting was well made"

Ben and Kitana have been the "main stay" of the blogosphere for quite a long time. If one's attention is diverted to the links one can find their blogs on it. However if one is not mistaken then Ben's blog (1MoreSG) was taken down a week ago and Kitana has just announced the closure of her blog. http://kitana.wordpress.com/

Though this one cannot conclude that the withdrawal was due to the accumulation of much pent up anger and bitterness over the way things have been going on, the way people like to slam the label ingrate whenever one does not share the view espoused by the men in white, the way some fellas like to go " my way or the high way (or your mother become maid)!!! inter alia.

But one is rambling...anyway this one would miss Ben's blog for it is mind boggling in the extreme and requires many many rereads. In fact the last few posts became more and more confusing and the brain had to recharge for some time. Nevertheless Ben's blog has been a rather interesting read and hopefully he will pop up in the net and give his two percent worth.

With regards to Kitana, though she doesn't always have the cheemness of the aforementioned Ben's blog, this in no way detracts from the beauty of the posts. While Ben's blog is often an exercise of mental power, Kitana's posts are more of a personal view of how she sees things. In fact it is rather easy to relate to her as this one also happens to be a pessimist and idealist depending on the time of the day/month/...

And so the blogosphere changes again. Even the Legal Janitor seems to be in semi retirement. This one remembers talking about this to Aaron and he told this one its ok as there will be others who will take up the swords of those who have gone. There is merit to what he says but as this one is a sentimental fella this one will still feel sad that the pillars of yesterday have disappeared. Ah well.

" The bloggers three have vanished as if in a dream, this useless misery is the blogosphere's to grieve"

The third blogger is Gayle.

*Update: I just found out that Zyberzitizen is also retiring from the blogosphere. This is rather sad; however read his post carefully and one will find that hope still remains in Pandora's box.