6 ms·

>If someone criticizes your country, just point out how no country is perfect to deflect the criticism. I'd be the first person to agree on many of the critici

>If someone criticizes your country, just point out how no country is perfect to deflect the criticism. I'd be the first person to agree on many of the criticisms, but still, this: >SG is a dictatorship Is a total lie. And, yes, I will happily compare it to various "not perfect" non-dictatorships to make this point. >it is well known that the Lee family have been running it as their own little fief for awhile now by controlling the press so they can continue to win elections. No, not really. The reason for PAP continually winning elections has more to do with the fact that they dragged the country from being a 3rd world country on a par with Tanzania to being richer than America. That wins elections. Now that the country is largely very wealthy, it has also become very conservative. If you removed all censorship laws, the party would still win, just by a smaller margin. >The dictatorship is completely benevolent, non-brutal, and very business-oriented, so the people tend to be relatively happy (not free but rich!) The restrictions on one's freedoms are not significantly greater than in Europe or the US. >Honestly, I'm not sure real democracy would have worked given the context SG is in. But that still doesn't excuse reality. It is every bit as real a democracy as the United States, which has similarly draconian controls over the press by the business elite, but which has deluded itself into somehow thinking it's the world's gold standard in freedom of expression.

rohshall 13y ago
Sorry, your last claim of Singapore being a real democracy is a lie. In Singapore, you cannot assemble and protest if you want to. You need to apply for a permission before. Opposition parties cannot organise rallies f they want to because it becomes 'unlawful assembly'. Newspapers cannot publish an article criticising government unless they can support it with a proof that can stand in a court and win a case, when the government sues them for libel with thousands and millions in penalties. (And Singapore government has not lost a single case against newspapers or opposition parties, be it NY times, Straits times). If opposition criticises the ruling leaders, government sues them and some courageous leaders who did that before became bankrupt. Singapore leaders are obsessed with stability and have managed to convince the general public that it is for the good of the people. So, many Singaporeans will defend this, if you say that this is not right. Similar thing exists in China where people are convinced that democracy will lead to instability in a large country like theirs and one-party rule is better for China.
- crdoconnor 13y ago
  >Sorry, your last claim of Singapore being a real democracy is a lie. No. I'm not claiming it is a "real" democracy. I'm not even sure what a "real" democracy is. What I'm claiming is that it's no less a democracy than the United States or most of Europe. Most of what you've written here is either downright false (e.g. "you can't protest" - there was a protest on immigration reform just a few weeks ago), OR, it is something that I could find an equally, maybe worse anti-democratic equivalent to in the United States or Europe.
- rohshall 13y ago
  I am saying 'you cannot protest without applying for a permission'. And I am not talking about gathering of hundreds of people, even 3-4 people cannot protest unless they have been permitted by the government. You said that 'most of what I have written is false'. Let me ask you - which court cases have been won by Newspapers and opposition parties against the government. Straits times reported back in 1990s that Prime minister Goh may be taking directions from then ex-prime minister Lee Kuan Yew and they were sued and had to pay hefty sum of money, even though even the hardcore PAP loyalists will agree that he may indeed be taking directions from LKY. But, Straits times could not gather sufficient evidence to support the claim and had to suffer (and since then it hardly publishes anything that criticises the government.)
  - crdoconnor 13y ago
    >I am saying 'you cannot protest without applying for a permission'. Only somewhat true: In Singapore, Speakers' Corner is an area located within Hong Lim Park where people can demonstrate, hold exhibitions and performances, and speak freely on most topics. It was launched on 1 September 2000 as a "free speech area" where speaking events could be held without the need to apply for a licence under the Public Entertainments Act (Cap. 257, 1985 Rev. Ed.), now the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act (Cap. 257, 2001 Rev. Ed.) ("PEMA"). However, it was necessary for people to register their intention to speak at the venue with a police officer at the Kreta Ayer Neighbourhood Police Post any time within 30 days before the event, though there was no requirement for the police to be informed of the topic of the proposed speech. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speakers%27_Corner,_Singapore http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speakers%27_Corner,_Singapore Now contrast this with the orwellian "free speech zones" that were set up around the time of the Republican convention. Or the violent beatings protestors in Zuccotti park got. I think the difference between the kinds of protest possible in the US and Singapore are largely academic. There are onerous restrictions on both. >Let me ask you - which court cases have been won by Newspapers and opposition parties against the government. Straits times reported back in 1990s that Prime minister Goh may be taking directions from then ex-prime minister Lee Kuan Yew and they were sued and had to pay hefty sum of money, even though even the hardcore PAP loyalists will agree that he may indeed be taking directions from LKY. But, Straits times could not gather sufficient evidence to support the claim and had to suffer (and since then it hardly publishes anything that criticises the government.) If the same lawsuit was launched in the UK (which has similarly onerous libel laws which Singapore's derive from), it would likely have been successful too.
seanmcdirmid 13y ago
> Is a total lie. And, yes, I will happily compare it to various "not perfect" non-dictatorships to make this point. Fair enough. The question is whether or not the Lee family qualifies as a dictatorship. Outwardly at least, it would appear as if they control much of the government. > The reason for PAP continually winning elections has more to do with the fact that they dragged the country from being a 3rd world country on a par with Tanzania to being richer than America. That wins elections. Great, they get a cookie! But I would feel better if there was some successful transition of government that involved someone opposing the previous. There has been no such transition in Singapore yet, and its not clear that such a transition is even permitted under the current political system. > It is every bit as real a democracy as the United States, which has similarly draconian controls over the press by the business elite, but which has deluded itself into somehow thinking it's the world's gold standard in freedom of expression. Bull. The US and most of the western democracies have a much more free press than Signapore does, and they have healthy adversarial political systems to boot to ensure that power isn't concentrated in one place for too long. These two features are not unrelated.
nairteashop 13y ago
> The restrictions on one's freedoms are not significantly greater than in Europe or the US. Is that really true? If I lived in singapore, I would be worried about saying anything critical of the government, to avoid things like this happening to me: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5g_-nIBIauDZSr9xDuY8K2Ja8usOw http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5g_-nIBIauDZSr9xDuY8K2Ja8... I live in the US (but not American), and I have and will say things critical of the government, and I do not fear any repercussions. I think this is fantastic. Mind you I'm not talking about extreme things that will warrant investigation from the secret service, but stuff like what the blogger mentioned in the article said. Are you saying that what's mentioned in the AFP article above doesn't happen? Or that I will indeed face repercussions for similar speech in the US, but I'm just too naive?
- crdoconnor 13y ago
  In Singapore I fear this much less: http://rt.com/usa/mortgage-fargo-wells-syldor-964/ http://rt.com/usa/mortgage-fargo-wells-syldor-964/ Swings and roundabouts. Both societies have their horrible points, and infringe on people's liberties in horrific ways. In the case of blogging, though, yeah, the US has it better.
  - nairteashop 13y ago
    I'm not sure what wells fargo foreclosing on someone has anything to do with freedom to criticize your government, but ok.
    - crdoconnor 13y ago
      We were discussing general freedom in the thread below, not just freedom of expression. I think the freedom to keep one's home which you paid for from being stolen based upon a ridiculous technicality is a pretty important one. And it is one, where, sadly, the US is not currently doing so well.
      - jlgreco 13y ago

rohshall 13y ago

Sorry, your last claim of Singapore being a real democracy is a lie. In Singapore, you cannot assemble and protest if you want to. You need to apply for a permission before. Opposition parties cannot organise rallies f they want to because it becomes 'unlawful assembly'. Newspapers cannot publish an article criticising government unless they can support it with a proof that can stand in a court and win a case, when the government sues them for libel with thousands and millions in penalties. (And Singapore government has not lost a single case against newspapers or opposition parties, be it NY times, Straits times). If opposition criticises the ruling leaders, government sues them and some courageous leaders who did that before became bankrupt. Singapore leaders are obsessed with stability and have managed to convince the general public that it is for the good of the people. So, many Singaporeans will defend this, if you say that this is not right. Similar thing exists in China where people are convinced that democracy will lead to instability in a large country like theirs and one-party rule is better for China.

crdoconnor 13y ago
>Sorry, your last claim of Singapore being a real democracy is a lie. No. I'm not claiming it is a "real" democracy. I'm not even sure what a "real" democracy is. What I'm claiming is that it's no less a democracy than the United States or most of Europe. Most of what you've written here is either downright false (e.g. "you can't protest" - there was a protest on immigration reform just a few weeks ago), OR, it is something that I could find an equally, maybe worse anti-democratic equivalent to in the United States or Europe.
rohshall 13y ago
I am saying 'you cannot protest without applying for a permission'. And I am not talking about gathering of hundreds of people, even 3-4 people cannot protest unless they have been permitted by the government. You said that 'most of what I have written is false'. Let me ask you - which court cases have been won by Newspapers and opposition parties against the government. Straits times reported back in 1990s that Prime minister Goh may be taking directions from then ex-prime minister Lee Kuan Yew and they were sued and had to pay hefty sum of money, even though even the hardcore PAP loyalists will agree that he may indeed be taking directions from LKY. But, Straits times could not gather sufficient evidence to support the claim and had to suffer (and since then it hardly publishes anything that criticises the government.)
- crdoconnor 13y ago
  >I am saying 'you cannot protest without applying for a permission'. Only somewhat true: In Singapore, Speakers' Corner is an area located within Hong Lim Park where people can demonstrate, hold exhibitions and performances, and speak freely on most topics. It was launched on 1 September 2000 as a "free speech area" where speaking events could be held without the need to apply for a licence under the Public Entertainments Act (Cap. 257, 1985 Rev. Ed.), now the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act (Cap. 257, 2001 Rev. Ed.) ("PEMA"). However, it was necessary for people to register their intention to speak at the venue with a police officer at the Kreta Ayer Neighbourhood Police Post any time within 30 days before the event, though there was no requirement for the police to be informed of the topic of the proposed speech. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speakers%27_Corner,_Singapore http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speakers%27_Corner,_Singapore Now contrast this with the orwellian "free speech zones" that were set up around the time of the Republican convention. Or the violent beatings protestors in Zuccotti park got. I think the difference between the kinds of protest possible in the US and Singapore are largely academic. There are onerous restrictions on both. >Let me ask you - which court cases have been won by Newspapers and opposition parties against the government. Straits times reported back in 1990s that Prime minister Goh may be taking directions from then ex-prime minister Lee Kuan Yew and they were sued and had to pay hefty sum of money, even though even the hardcore PAP loyalists will agree that he may indeed be taking directions from LKY. But, Straits times could not gather sufficient evidence to support the claim and had to suffer (and since then it hardly publishes anything that criticises the government.) If the same lawsuit was launched in the UK (which has similarly onerous libel laws which Singapore's derive from), it would likely have been successful too.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago

> Is a total lie. And, yes, I will happily compare it to various "not perfect" non-dictatorships to make this point. Fair enough. The question is whether or not the Lee family qualifies as a dictatorship. Outwardly at least, it would appear as if they control much of the government. > The reason for PAP continually winning elections has more to do with the fact that they dragged the country from being a 3rd world country on a par with Tanzania to being richer than America. That wins elections. Great, they get a cookie! But I would feel better if there was some successful transition of government that involved someone opposing the previous. There has been no such transition in Singapore yet, and its not clear that such a transition is even permitted under the current political system. > It is every bit as real a democracy as the United States, which has similarly draconian controls over the press by the business elite, but which has deluded itself into somehow thinking it's the world's gold standard in freedom of expression. Bull. The US and most of the western democracies have a much more free press than Signapore does, and they have healthy adversarial political systems to boot to ensure that power isn't concentrated in one place for too long. These two features are not unrelated.

nairteashop 13y ago

> The restrictions on one's freedoms are not significantly greater than in Europe or the US. Is that really true? If I lived in singapore, I would be worried about saying anything critical of the government, to avoid things like this happening to me: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5g_-nIBIauDZSr9xDuY8K2Ja8usOw http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5g_-nIBIauDZSr9xDuY8K2Ja8... I live in the US (but not American), and I have and will say things critical of the government, and I do not fear any repercussions. I think this is fantastic. Mind you I'm not talking about extreme things that will warrant investigation from the secret service, but stuff like what the blogger mentioned in the article said. Are you saying that what's mentioned in the AFP article above doesn't happen? Or that I will indeed face repercussions for similar speech in the US, but I'm just too naive?

crdoconnor 13y ago
In Singapore I fear this much less: http://rt.com/usa/mortgage-fargo-wells-syldor-964/ http://rt.com/usa/mortgage-fargo-wells-syldor-964/ Swings and roundabouts. Both societies have their horrible points, and infringe on people's liberties in horrific ways. In the case of blogging, though, yeah, the US has it better.
- nairteashop 13y ago
  I'm not sure what wells fargo foreclosing on someone has anything to do with freedom to criticize your government, but ok.
  - crdoconnor 13y ago
    We were discussing general freedom in the thread below, not just freedom of expression. I think the freedom to keep one's home which you paid for from being stolen based upon a ridiculous technicality is a pretty important one. And it is one, where, sadly, the US is not currently doing so well.
    - jlgreco 13y ago