STARFISH HAVE NO BRAINS (I KNOW SOME PEOPLE LIKE THAT TOO…)
9 January 2008
Windy Wednesday (24 Degree Celsius)
Lunch @ 1240 (Singapore Time)
Listen: 勇敢 by 张惠妹 (yup, I going to Master this SONG!!)
Mood: *My Cow oh my poor Cow*
Following my social theorem, these days I think it is exceptionally hard and rational to understand what the fuck the world and to that extend, Singapore is heading to. So many policy changes happened and what could have more social impact than say, CPF change (again). Seriously, how could a simple mission and vision of individual retirement planning (in an era where the buzz word has not even been conceived) become so distorted? Affecting just about every citizen.
Then came the mean testing for medical needs and subsidies. Ok, don’t know whether the health minister read my previous post on similar philosophy or what, but in a nutshell, it sound comparable:
On a more philosophical note though, why should the children of rich Malays/Blacks be given a head start over the children of poor Chinese/Indians? (The Wind in the Willow, Jan 2, 2008)
Nevertheless it does give us an insight on their viewpoint and the attitude of the government at large. After all, we do need a broad BIG Picture for obvious reasons. But I have to say, LUCKY Foreign talents! Those bastards! Of course by the Bastard definition, I do not exactly mean it, well, for discussion purpose, lets just say it is like what Capt Barbossa commented before they sail off the coast with Elizabeth Swan (of Pirates of the Caribbean’s fame) , “the code (or in our context, Philosophy) is what you call Guidelines than actual rules”…
Well Mate, Welcome Aboard.
Back tracking a little too much, as promised, here is Bird’s understanding on Democracy and Citizenship. You see, much of our thinking about democracy assumes the existence of a State (as obvious). No State where is democracy? That is true in most instances like those in Western European and northern America… And by “state” I mean a politically organized society, with a central authority, operating over a territory that monopolizes the legitimate use of force (Crushed dissent using ISA, Jail fuckers for Terrorist threats and oh yes, conveniently pairing them up with some outlawed international threat). It also encompass wide range of policy competences from employment, environment, health, domestic security, to say remaking the red-light district (yup, those sort of things).
Our standard conceptions of democracy, current paradigms of democraticness, are therefore linked to this institutional setting. The main idea is, roughly, policy-makers are held accountable to citizens through regular competitive elections (elections… DUh), against a background of basic liberties of speech (Speaker’s Corner at some ulu Chinatown park) and association (remember NTUC?).
In a utopian society like mine, Citizens will need to adhere to a generalized ideal of social good, id est. for the good of everybody. Other than the nation’s favorite pastime of cow-pehing in distinctly very localized setting of a French café; think no smoke, no aircon, no baguettes, no bourgeoisie and usually consisting of proletariats, Some smarty pants could (by principle of law) debate issues openly.
However, they will need to apply permit from the home ministry, scripts being vetted and sign some undertaking form that sells their soul to the devil before they are given the go ahead. And if, a big if, they make it alive to Speaker’s Corner, they could theoretically talk the script. Any deviation will be punished by hey… Law! Some (usually more note worthy ones) are being videotaped by law enforcers for educational purposes; building up the suspense for the speaker before the kill, or which body anatomy cannot whack in case got visible injury. Beside, trust our law enforcer on their promise that videos will be kept without destruction unlike the American. It is for educational purpose right?
So in an ideal situation, such debates will spur competing parties with distinct views; like People’s, Worker’s, Solidarity and Democratic etc. Fundamental element remained; Citizens choose representatives that best holds their views, and those buggers make policies and hold officials, executives and regulators; accountable for the articulation and implementation of such policies. Thus we have a highly mediated form of accountability to citizens as A BODY OF EQUALS! Not Lim Pei 说了就算 type.
I would think the best example of such democracy (best, I did not say PERFECT) would be US of A. It has a distinct avenue of check and balances. Judiciary Arm to implement whatever cheebye laws the Legislative Arm such as Senators (ala people representatives) can come up, the Executive Arm to run the Country (like our Ministries). Each in turn will check the other proceedings and make some noise if they are deem unconstitutional. As the days go by, it tends to get a little chaotic, messy and pork barrel-ly. But hey, even a Blind Squirrel sometime also found its nuts. I found mine too… sometime…
Democracy names a class of arrangements through which the interests, beliefs, principles, and ideals of persons who are subject to collective decisions are brought to bear on making those decisions: ways that the authorization to exercise power results from the collective decisions of the members of a society who are governed by that power (as cited)
Hence, in summary, this modern conception, with representation and party competition, meets the demands on responsiveness and accountability in the setting of a modern state. Of course, those are in an ideal situation, but knowing the ambiguity of mankind and its liking (some say obsession) for Lim Pei 说了就算 behavior, we have all sort of hybrids form of governance. It is perfectly (to a fault) fine with me, as long as the basic principles of Justice, Equality and Peace are adhere to.
Oh silly me, progressive government also has this “thousand and one reasons” to back their decisions, remember the “You Wrong, Hence Me Right” theory? Yup, those fuckers are perverting the fundamentals of democracy. We could argue till cow become oil, and you are still fucking wrong.
Moving on, let’s discuss the generalized ideal on citizenship. The lofty, very chim-itology ideals aside, basically the rights and responsibilities can be surmise as follow:
Citizen pays taxes (ok, Foreign trash also).
Obey criminal laws enacted even while abroad (right, so everybody is doing it, big deal…)
But Citizen served in the country's armed forces and when called upon, fight for motherland. It is our Rights and our obligation to defend the independence and freedom of our land.
Windy Wednesday (24 Degree Celsius)
Lunch @ 1240 (Singapore Time)
Listen: 勇敢 by 张惠妹 (yup, I going to Master this SONG!!)
Mood: *My Cow oh my poor Cow*
Following my social theorem, these days I think it is exceptionally hard and rational to understand what the fuck the world and to that extend, Singapore is heading to. So many policy changes happened and what could have more social impact than say, CPF change (again). Seriously, how could a simple mission and vision of individual retirement planning (in an era where the buzz word has not even been conceived) become so distorted? Affecting just about every citizen.
Then came the mean testing for medical needs and subsidies. Ok, don’t know whether the health minister read my previous post on similar philosophy or what, but in a nutshell, it sound comparable:
On a more philosophical note though, why should the children of rich Malays/Blacks be given a head start over the children of poor Chinese/Indians? (The Wind in the Willow, Jan 2, 2008)
Nevertheless it does give us an insight on their viewpoint and the attitude of the government at large. After all, we do need a broad BIG Picture for obvious reasons. But I have to say, LUCKY Foreign talents! Those bastards! Of course by the Bastard definition, I do not exactly mean it, well, for discussion purpose, lets just say it is like what Capt Barbossa commented before they sail off the coast with Elizabeth Swan (of Pirates of the Caribbean’s fame) , “the code (or in our context, Philosophy) is what you call Guidelines than actual rules”…
Well Mate, Welcome Aboard.
Back tracking a little too much, as promised, here is Bird’s understanding on Democracy and Citizenship. You see, much of our thinking about democracy assumes the existence of a State (as obvious). No State where is democracy? That is true in most instances like those in Western European and northern America… And by “state” I mean a politically organized society, with a central authority, operating over a territory that monopolizes the legitimate use of force (Crushed dissent using ISA, Jail fuckers for Terrorist threats and oh yes, conveniently pairing them up with some outlawed international threat). It also encompass wide range of policy competences from employment, environment, health, domestic security, to say remaking the red-light district (yup, those sort of things).
Our standard conceptions of democracy, current paradigms of democraticness, are therefore linked to this institutional setting. The main idea is, roughly, policy-makers are held accountable to citizens through regular competitive elections (elections… DUh), against a background of basic liberties of speech (Speaker’s Corner at some ulu Chinatown park) and association (remember NTUC?).
In a utopian society like mine, Citizens will need to adhere to a generalized ideal of social good, id est. for the good of everybody. Other than the nation’s favorite pastime of cow-pehing in distinctly very localized setting of a French café; think no smoke, no aircon, no baguettes, no bourgeoisie and usually consisting of proletariats, Some smarty pants could (by principle of law) debate issues openly.
However, they will need to apply permit from the home ministry, scripts being vetted and sign some undertaking form that sells their soul to the devil before they are given the go ahead. And if, a big if, they make it alive to Speaker’s Corner, they could theoretically talk the script. Any deviation will be punished by hey… Law! Some (usually more note worthy ones) are being videotaped by law enforcers for educational purposes; building up the suspense for the speaker before the kill, or which body anatomy cannot whack in case got visible injury. Beside, trust our law enforcer on their promise that videos will be kept without destruction unlike the American. It is for educational purpose right?
So in an ideal situation, such debates will spur competing parties with distinct views; like People’s, Worker’s, Solidarity and Democratic etc. Fundamental element remained; Citizens choose representatives that best holds their views, and those buggers make policies and hold officials, executives and regulators; accountable for the articulation and implementation of such policies. Thus we have a highly mediated form of accountability to citizens as A BODY OF EQUALS! Not Lim Pei 说了就算 type.
I would think the best example of such democracy (best, I did not say PERFECT) would be US of A. It has a distinct avenue of check and balances. Judiciary Arm to implement whatever cheebye laws the Legislative Arm such as Senators (ala people representatives) can come up, the Executive Arm to run the Country (like our Ministries). Each in turn will check the other proceedings and make some noise if they are deem unconstitutional. As the days go by, it tends to get a little chaotic, messy and pork barrel-ly. But hey, even a Blind Squirrel sometime also found its nuts. I found mine too… sometime…
Democracy names a class of arrangements through which the interests, beliefs, principles, and ideals of persons who are subject to collective decisions are brought to bear on making those decisions: ways that the authorization to exercise power results from the collective decisions of the members of a society who are governed by that power (as cited)
Hence, in summary, this modern conception, with representation and party competition, meets the demands on responsiveness and accountability in the setting of a modern state. Of course, those are in an ideal situation, but knowing the ambiguity of mankind and its liking (some say obsession) for Lim Pei 说了就算 behavior, we have all sort of hybrids form of governance. It is perfectly (to a fault) fine with me, as long as the basic principles of Justice, Equality and Peace are adhere to.
Oh silly me, progressive government also has this “thousand and one reasons” to back their decisions, remember the “You Wrong, Hence Me Right” theory? Yup, those fuckers are perverting the fundamentals of democracy. We could argue till cow become oil, and you are still fucking wrong.
Moving on, let’s discuss the generalized ideal on citizenship. The lofty, very chim-itology ideals aside, basically the rights and responsibilities can be surmise as follow:
Citizen pays taxes (ok, Foreign trash also).
Obey criminal laws enacted even while abroad (right, so everybody is doing it, big deal…)
But Citizen served in the country's armed forces and when called upon, fight for motherland. It is our Rights and our obligation to defend the independence and freedom of our land.
Now, try telling that to Foreign Talents. Don’t say NS, tell those fucker to fuck spider they also complain.
On a more philosophical note, citizenship should also be based on ethical and moral duties; first and foremost, demonstrating commitment and loyalty to the state. Then while you are at it, constructively criticizing the conditions of political and civic life (bad example of what NOT to do while vacationing here). Of course, all talk and no action makes Jack an impotent boy, hence should actively participate improving the quality of political and civic life, ok, maybe not political life. For your sake, really.
Then come the moral higher ground thingy; Exercising one's rights and respecting the rights of others and even defending one's own rights and the rights of others against those who would abuse them. Told you it is a lofty ideology, that is why I call it philosophical, meaning, say say only, why would anyone want to achieve that… wait got lock up under ISA how?
To prolong my entries, my aches have slowly but surely recovering. Sexually, I am pretty ok, not too much sex (non at the moment), not too much stress (non too…) and not too much thrill (yup, zero at last count). Hey, that pretty much summed up everything in my life.
Next stop, our unique problem of Immigration and its BIGGIEST QUESTION;
Assimilation versus Integration.
No comments:
Post a Comment