> cognitive dissonance of Americans and Brits Gmerc, you have provided good information and insight - and I myself have noted about 24hrs ago here that if some

> cognitive dissonance of Americans and Brits Gmerc, you have provided good information and insight - and I myself have noted about 24hrs ago here that if someone wants to mention authoritarianism (or oddity, whatever daring idea) in a page about colourfulness some reference about how the two would relate is required -, and I understand that hearing the same in-ways weak ideas past the n-th time can make one edgy, but look: if a Norwegian noted that Swedes have bumpy roads, he is not at all mandated to live somewhere without bumpy roads. The bumpy roads of Sweden are such if it is reasonable to call them so after fair assessment. The bumpy roads of Norway become relevant when somebody is denying that. There are not just «Americans and Brits» in the public, there are not just people interested in defending one specific position in public, and crossfire that gets divergent from substance is not good for the system. Some people may instead look at Singapore with interest (naturally also its counterpart: concern) because they are seeing a crisis in their own environment and may look at apparent champions with hope. Assumptions should be limited. And we should remain coolheaded.