Maturity and Politics - mutually exclusive?

Since I finished my paper in the afternoon I have been up to some mischief, spending time online engrossed in some interesting articles. First brought up by Ivan on the issue of education, I went to yawningbread.org and found a few interesting pages about political commentary. And I tell you, they make perfect sense. If I am going to comment on the numerous changes in education policy in Singapore I think I am not gonna be able to finish typing in an hour's time. So I won't. But I have my views on the useless SAT introduced in my time (and luckily I escaped some of the more sweeping changes my juniors got). Read here for Education article (http://www.yawningbread.org/guest_2006/guw-112.htm).

The next part is on the recently-concluded election in Singapore. Again, it was a very sensitive issue a few weeks ago, but in the aftermath, all seems well and good again, and prices look like they are on the up. It's always the case after every PAP election victory (this is also quoted on the SDP's website). In yawningbread's commentary about the apparent elitist and lack of political thought shown by newly-elected Member of Parliament Denise Phua (http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2006/yax-596.htm) in a discussioin held at the University of Singapore recently, I found renewed evidence of tremendous media slant towards the ruling party and against the opposition parties. I expect many of the approaches similar to the situation back home since Malaysia and Singapore is in so many ways inseparable. What really drew me in was that yawningbread suggested the reader to check out the SDP's website for information on what really goes on in Singapore for an oppositio party. And it was indeed a very good read. Click here for the SDP article (http://www.singaporedemocrat.org/articlenussforum.html)

This is an opposition party which has been badly-hit by (I am not saying anything about the truthfulness or otherwise of these) political lawsuits and numerous other accusations about poor character, dishonesty and whatever-else-you-can-think-of. A frequent trump card used by the leading men in PAP is the lawyer card, where they sue the pants off you (literally sometimes). And while they may make legitimate claims in court (I cannot think of a time when they lost a civil lawsuit against opposition politicians), it seems the opposition does not stoop as low when being similarly accused. I don't see politicians in the UK being heckled for saying Tony Blair is rubbish, John Prescott is unfit for office etc etc. If that happened, the entire government of the UK will have sued and outsued itself, generating lots of cash for the lawyers and in the end achieving equilibrium since both sides have said so many bad things about each other. Political maturity is about accepting arguments and viewing words in their context. And all to be taken with a pinch of salt. Gentlemanly conduct often goes far, but sadly this is not the case back home. You rarely see such civilised arguments in parliament as in the UK where opposing MPs don't mince their words at all yet are still well-respected and not cynically-treated. This place may not yet be the epitome of civility but it is certainly getting there.

I read recently on The Star Online (here: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/5/5/parliament/20060505075251&sec=parliament) that Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad, head of the Backbenchers Club in the Malaysian parliament (majority-ruled by the BN) resigned in disgust at the rejection of an opposition motion (he is of the ruling party) that he had supported. It is a fundamental issue about the abuse of power by an elected Member of Parliament and he has shown his integrity by voting for an investigation to be carried out. However, the other MPs (majority are from the ruling party) toed the normal party line which was to reject any motion begun by the opposition. This is utterly senseless and I admire his bravery in walking out immediately after and then tendering his resignation to his own party whip. The next day there was a lot of talk among backbencher MPs to vote him back in as head in a show of support for his leadership. My conclusion? Malaysia has a long way to go to political maturity, or its notions as well.

Back to the SDP article, to conclude. If you read it, you will realise suddenly that
1) Chee Soon Juan didn't get the "Dr." title in front of his name for nothing. His public speaking is good, man!
2) Maybe the Singapore government is not as even-handed (it never was assumed to be so, but for levity I use such words) as we thought it was
3) There is some seriously flawed political thinking in Singapore
4) The public is still very much politically timid in Singapore. In some cases, not much different from the ruling party where they speak one thing and do another (if you read the Denise Phua article you will know what I mean cos she says there seems to be a lot of negativity about the PAP. I say that it still gets the "mandate". So where's the public's voice?).

Read the commentary about MM Lee Kuan Yew's speech too, if you are interested: The Misuse of the State (http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2006/yax-595.htm)

I think I will be yawning to bread in future, as well as continue talking cock!