Anti-establishment propaganda stole my photo
In Singapore, there is this phenomenon called “blame stuff on the government”. It is a national past-time where people free themselves of all social responsibilities and blame everything that goes wrong on the government.
This photo was used in the video without my permission
Someone made a “documentary” called One Nation Under Lee on how Singaporeans are suffering under the iron fist of dictatorship, brutally forced to live in a country with one of Asia’s highest standards of living, and on how it is evil for the government to make money through smart investments.
Normally I wouldn’t be interested in local political squabbling, but apparently these guys used a photo taken by me without my permission.
The photo was taken by me some time ago and placed in my gallery as part of my Haruhi Time Capsule Project. The picture is licensed under a Creative Commons 3.0 license scheme, which requires all usage of it to be non-commercial and properly attributed.
Since no one is likely to pay for this terrible documentary anyway, I guess non-commercial is pretty much guaranteed. However, I was not credited in the video! This makes me sad. :(
Fear, uncertainty and doubt
Moreover, the message of the video is nonsensical, illogical and full of FUD. I’m happy to criticize government policies when it makes sense, such as the completely asinine censorship policies that resulted in my hardcore guro Elfenlied DVDs getting confiscated, but it’s seriously an insult to the viewer’s intelligence for the video to shamelessly blame every social ill in Singapore on the country’s lack of democratic governance.
We all know how American democracy has completely solved the poverty problem and that there are no ghettos anywhere in the States, right? Oh, wait a minute…
And the sad thing is that Singaporean youth buy into these blatant propagandas because it’s “cool” to be rebellious and everyone knows that only intelligent people can see through the “lies and deceit” of the establishment and become anti-government crusaders of democracy, justice and love.
I mean, jeez, is the Singaporean government corrupt or what? Just not too long ago, I had to bribe someone hundreds of dollars to get my passport renewed… Oh wait, no. That was back in China. My bad.
And yeah, isn’t it outrageous that government ministers in Singapore earn millions of dollars a year? Those poor Western politicians have to survive on measly hundreds of thousands! It’s a good thing that they can earn back the difference from lobbyists and corporations through “political contributions”, i.e. legalized bribes, or they would never have been able to afford the same luxuries that Singaporean politicians are allowed.
I guess some people would rather have government policies be dictated by lobbyist money.
Anyway, enough ranting. Go watch the video on YouTube and see for yourself. If this is the best argument that Singaporean opposition parties can come up with, then I hope they never come into power.
June 14th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
…coughcoughglasshousescough…
I think it could be argued that the use of that photo in their documentary is permissible under the fair use doctrine… Especially because in Singapore, there is no concept of ‘moral right’ to a work.
Points in favor:
1. Usage was non-commercial
2. Usage was for educational purposes
3. Amount of use - one photo out of a gallery of many
Points against:
1. Authors blatantly ignored the availability of a very liberal license (creative commons license) and instead used the photo without authorization.
2. Wide distribution of copyrighted material (the internet)
3. No time limit on use (it’s on youtube forever)
Technically you could issue a DCMA takedown request to youtube and possibly get the offending documentary removed, but then again, glass houses…
June 14th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
I was only kidding. Though I am pretty sure that YouTube will comply if I request for a takedown, I am too lazy to actually write a proper-looking takedown notice.
Anyway it was just an excuse to rant about how crappy their video is.
Also, I don’t think this falls under educational. Aren’t there some additional legal restrictions when it comes to the use of copyrighted materials in political propaganda?
At the very least, my reputation is potentially damaged by the implied consent and association of my person with this silly message.
People who know that I was the one who took the picture may now assume that I provided it to the creators because I support their message, which I certainly didn’t and don’t.
June 14th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
I only spotted the Haruhiism poster after reading your post right through. I guess my observational skills aren’t up to scratch.
June 14th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
It won’t be long before the “tsunami” (as they like to call it) from your close neighbour comes to Singaporean shores.
We have yet to assess the capability of the opposition party in the newly controlled states but gone are the days that “one party dominance” be the price to pay for “stability” (or in light of rising inflation and crime, “prosperity”).
The advent and embrace of alternative media has been credited with the recent political changes in Malaysia. So the question remains, will the same thing happen in Singapore?
The Government does a good job…oh sure, the bad news is always hushed up. In a democratically elected government, the state serves the public. Hence, the public should be in the know. The documentary calls specifically for that, freedom of press. If you call that unrealistic, then one might as well change the type of government (to despotism or autocracy or oligarchy). Isn’t it easier to justify things that way? Oh no…you can’t, it’d damage Singapore’s international image.
How will the people know if there is no transparency? How can there be check and balances without an avenue for greater accountability?
It has been said that “the people will be easily misled by unscrupulous individuals or elements”. Singapore has a well educated population, so stop demeaning their intelligence. I am sure they can judge things from themselves. And the basis of an informed decision must include the ability to weigh pro against con.
Thus, the documentary does highlight some truths that should be considered by all despite it appearing as reactionist or “a rant by rebellious intelligensia”.
All things said and done, I move for a motion of One Nation Under Haruhi too. Seconds?
June 14th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Singapore > Malaysia.
If anyone should be trashing their governments political agendas its us (malaysians)! D=
June 14th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
I actually wish that American government bureaucrats got paid more. The private sector (especially finance) pays so much more money than the government that we can never get a good core of bureaucrats like in places like Europe and Singapore. I keep thinking of stuff like the Manhattan Project or the Apollo Project and how nowadays it seems like anyone that would be skilled enough to be involved a government project like that has been hired by Wall Street already to think of new ways to say that the company has made money (as opposed to you know, actually MAKING the money…)
June 14th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
“Just not too long ago, I had to bribe someone hundreds of dollars to get my passport renewed… Oh wait, no. That was back in China. My bad.”
LOL
June 14th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
Oh hey, I’ve been to Singapore before but it was really humid
June 14th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
Now you know how SUNRISE feels about you using screenshots of their anime material! :V
June 14th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Yeah. I use Gundam 00 in my anti-government propaganda all the time.
June 14th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Don’t know about the West in general, but the absolute maximum a civil servant can be paid here in France is about US$15,000/month, and only a few high-profile executives ever reach even half that. Well, there’s a very small number of exceptions to that rule (e.g. the President used to have a salary of just over US$10,000/month until 2007, but the newly elected guy had the Parliament vote him a 140% pay rise; a few officials of the Budget Ministry also have salaries that can reach an average $20,000 depending on the circumstances), but nobody gets paid millions, by a large margin.
June 14th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
I’m just shocked that DM didn’t blame the unauthorized use of his picture on the government.
June 14th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
The_Observer:
I don’t think that a government has to be democratically elected to serve the people, and I certainly don’t think that Singapore is a democracy.
It’s pretty silly to blame things like rising inflation on the government, when the economic downturn is a result of international market forces. If there were “true democracy”, inflation would still be rising now and that little video would be complaining about corporate lobbying instead.
Do you honestly believe that any of the problems the video talks about will be solved simply by having a free media and a democratic system? Do you believe that somehow having a mass of people voting for politicians they barely know will produce superior results to a system that promotes bureaucrats based on performance?
This isn’t a fight for the people’s welfare. This is a fight for a political ideology.
On the other hand, I don’t really care if democracy is actually realized. It’s not like I hate it or anything, I just don’t see it producing any substantial benefits. It certainly isn’t a miracle all-in-one cure like its proponents claim.
June 14th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Wait, there are people who believe that video? Serious?
June 14th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Yes, they are all on YouTube.
June 14th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Serving people is giving them what they want based on fair constitutional basis. Dictatorships can’t allow that unless they themselves are recognised as gods by the people. If international market forces are indeed the cause of economic slowdown, then your government has failed to present a case for themselves, and with all the resources they have at hand, does such a government really deserve to stay in power?
June 14th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
I fail to see your point. So whenever there’s an economic downturn, the government in power ought to be kicked out? And that is supposed to be an effective solution in preventing future economic downturns?
Do you know that there is rising inflation in Slovenia too? Democracy has really solved that problem, hasn’t it? Yes, no matter how crappy the world economy gets, it’s always the fault of the ruling government.
And you seem to assume that Singapore is a dictatorship simply because it is not fully democratic. Contrary to popular belief, there is actually a gradient between totalitarian and anarchism. It would be a terrible insult to rulers like Kim Jung-Il and the Burmese junta, and an affront to their years of hard work, to suggest that Singapore is a dictatorship. :)
Also, democracy is not a prerequisite for respecting the rule of law.
June 14th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Those kids just buy into those opposition party election speeches, like what you said, just to be cool. It is now a good time to blame the Ministry of Education for not teaching “critical thinking” in schools.
Anyway we should be looking forward to Cosfest 08 next month rather than this.
June 14th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
“In Singapore, there is this phenomenon called “blame stuff on the government”. It is a national past-time where people free themselves of all social responsibilities and blame everything that goes wrong on the government.”
I’m happy/sad/amused (Delete to your preference) to report that England has just as much of this floating around, though some is deserved. My favourite screw up is how Gordon Brown, once Chancellor of the Exchequer, now PM, managed to lose about 2 billion pounds on gold sales. Good times.
“All things said and done, I move for a motion of One Nation Under Haruhi too. Seconds?”
Seconded.
June 14th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
So whenever there’s an economic downturn, the government in power ought to be kicked out? And that is supposed to be an effective solution in preventing future economic downturns?
Of course it’s not, but when a government who even controls mainstream media (if I understood you correctly) fails to present the situation as out of their hands, then I have to question their competence.
Yes, no matter how crappy the world economy gets, it’s always the fault of the ruling government.
See above.
And you seem to assume that Singapore is a dictatorship simply because it is not fully democratic.
I didn’t say it was; I don’t know how the Singaporean government operates, just what was said about it in this post. You are under a mistaken impression that I joined into this debate as someone who’s already opinionated on the issue. Nothing could be further from the truth.
P.S.: And yes, Slovenia ha a bunch of economic issues at hand and the current government has failed to present a case for themselves (even though I support them), so they will get replaced in the upcoming elections this year.
June 15th, 2008 at 12:20 am
“Those poor Western politicians have to survive on measly hundreds of thousands! It’s a good thing that they can earn back the difference from lobbyists and corporations through “political contributions”, i.e. legalized bribes, or they would never have been able to afford the same luxuries that Singaporean politicians are allowed.”
Not to rain on your American hate parade, but “Western Politicians” really don’t make very much money. The vast majority of State legislatures make around 40k per year and are only part time, which is barely anything considering their costs. If you are talking about the Federal legislators, they make ~170k per year. No small potatoes, but it’s actually pretty expensive to maintain a residence in Washington DC (which has ridiculous real estate prices) and at home, as well as fly cross country (for those that represent such districts) back home to your constituents. Basically, American politicians do not do it for the money. Most of them already have money from their previous jobs. And bureaucrats (the guys doing your passports) get paid much much less, so be careful where you direct your anger.
And political contributions? Come on, stop reading conspiracy and propaganda. Yes, there have been a couple instances of bribes (my former Congressman for example), and guess what, they’re in jail. But political contributions go to their campaigns, not to their personal accounts. President Bush has a huge ranch because he was a multi-millionaire long before he became president. In addition to being from a rich family he did own a baseball team (the Texas Rangers).
I know non-Americans love to think they know everything about American politics and enjoy ragging on it, but they should actually know some more before they start spouting.
June 15th, 2008 at 12:45 am
Miha:
Let’s say whoever is replacing the current government were in power today. What could they have done better? Furthermore, the method through which the government is replaced gives no guarantee that the next government will be any better.
The democratic process itself is largely symbolic. What matters the most is actually the rule of law, and the Western idea of democracy is not the only way to achieve it.
Anyway, I think I’ve been giving you the wrong impression. While I personally don’t think that Singapore is a democracy, it does have democratic elections that are generally credible in the sense that votes are not rigged, and there are checks and balances inherent in the system.
According to Transparency International, Singapore is ranked 4th in the world for lack of corruption, higher than most Scandinavian countries, which are generally considered the role models of democracy. The difference is that Singapore government maintains this mostly through an internal system of cross-regulations and checks, and does not depend so much on the democratic process of elections.
The government operates on the concept of meritocracy, and anyone with proven talent and ability is able to rise up the bureaucratic ladder, regardless of background. The system is therefore geared towards attracting and keeping people who are capable of running the country.
As such, considering the lack of corruption and the general success of Singapore as a nation as compared to our neighbours, the system has proven itself to be quite on par with traditional Western democratic systems. I don’t see the point of having to go through the trouble to replace it. That is not to say that it cannot be improved upon.
Calawain:
American politicians are paid less than what they would get for a similar position in the corporate world. They also happen to have influence over a great deal of government spendings and tax break bills. In fact, the amount of political influence they wield is highly disproportional to the amount of money they earn. (Which is the point I was getting at.)
This is not a problem because… politicians are the most moral people in the world and therefore will not abuse their influence over decisions that can affect the pockets of large multibillion-dollar corporations?
Just because there’s no blatant bribing doesn’t mean corruption is not happening.
June 15th, 2008 at 1:11 am
And suddenly I regret giving you more hits. ^^; You’ve completely misread what I wrote and, well, just feels like I’ve wasted a lot of time on populist anti-western propaganda.
June 15th, 2008 at 1:24 am
So all this blabber is the reason why you can’t concentrate on your EJU.
And this Miha is not speaking any sense. I’m surprised you even bothered to reply him.
June 15th, 2008 at 1:50 am
Miha:
Yes, I see what you meant to say now.
You are saying that the Singapore government has proven itself ineffective in manipulating public opinions (particularly with regards to the economy) despite being in de facto control of the media, and therefore is unworthy of governing the country.
Okay, I guess I misread your point and my last comment was for naught. But it now appears to me that you are basically saying that Singapore should let people who are competent at lying run the country instead.
Uh. Yeah. Okay.
Anyway, I don’t see how my stand is “populist”. I find that a weird choice of word…
June 15th, 2008 at 2:15 am
It’s fashionable in Malaysia too!
And by the way, it’s pastime, not past-time.
June 15th, 2008 at 5:04 am
“American politicians are paid less than what they would get for a similar position in the corporate world. They also happen to have influence over a great deal of government spendings and tax break bills. In fact, the amount of political influence they wield is highly disproportional to the amount of money they earn. (Which is the point I was getting at.)
This is not a problem because… politicians are the most moral people in the world and therefore will not abuse their influence over decisions that can affect the pockets of large multibillion-dollar corporations?
Just because there’s no blatant bribing doesn’t mean corruption is not happening.”
I think you are trying to change your point. Your paragraph that I quoted before suggested that American politicians were getting money on the side from “political contributions,” a pretty baseless generalization. Now you are saying they aren’t doing it for money and instead to wield political influence? That’s different.
I’ve worked for 4 mayors and a state Senator in my working career, and I’ve been engaged in politics since I was in my teens, and I can tell you your pessimism about American politics is off base. You’re looking at it the wrong way, it’s not corporations buying politicians off like some mob movie. It’s corporations donating money to candidates who want to cut corporate taxes, or give them tax breaks. On the other side it’s unions and trial lawyers donating to politicians that support union rights and are against tort reform. It’s a system of free speech and capitalism, not vast corruption.
June 15th, 2008 at 5:29 am
God, that was one boring video. They won’t win any prices like Michael Moore with that stuff…
Normaly I enjoy ranting about not-so-democratic countries. But I just got back from a 5 days seminar I was forced to attend (by our great german governemnt -.-) where they tried to bore me to death with lectures about human rights (as if I didnt know all that stuff from school already…) so I’m all out of politics for this month.
I don’t think a non-democratic system is bad as long as it works. There is nothing wrong with having a leader who wasnt elected as long as he does whats good. It’s just risky cuz you can’t do much if he doesnt do whats good.
And i kinda don’t care either way. We have democracy (and all the lobbist stuff…) and personaly I like my country as is (though it has its downsides, but there is no perfect country i guess) and i wouldn’t wanna live anywhere else. But I’m not one who’d try to force my ideals on other countries like the US does.
If a governemnt is that bad, it’s up to the people to change it.
….ok, thats enough from me i guess.
June 15th, 2008 at 5:31 am
Id actually say my country is as perfect as any country is going to get the way it is now. If only the weather was worth a damn, i would never leave.
June 15th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Calawain:
So how does it serve the interest of the people for politicians to promise tax breaks to corporations that helped to secure their re-elections? And how exactly does the end result differ from outright bribing?
I’m not saying that politicians shouldn’t wield influence. But the fact is that people of ambition join politics despite getting paid crappier than the private sector. Yet they hold great influence over decisions that can cost billions of dollars, decisions that large corporations have a vested interest in.
If you see nothing wrong with this, then good for you? But personally I think bureaucrats ought to be paid private sector rates so that they have less incentives to pander to the rich and influential.
June 15th, 2008 at 7:35 am
So basically, this whole discussion is the main theme of Legend of the Galactic Heroes :P
June 15th, 2008 at 7:51 am
Whoops ran out of time for editing. Anyway, for bigger offices with more power and bigger decisions, politicians tend to be people who already are filthy rich. Some of them are really in it for the public interest (like our mayor here in NYC who is worth about $6 billion and collects a paycheck of $1), while the rest are either in it because they love power or because while our public servants aren’t paid much, they become insanely coveted by the private sector once they’re finished with their term. The president is paid about $400,000 (which includes some other benefits other than pay), but last year the Clintons earned $16 million.
(I think if we were to have highly paid public servants, we’d need publicly financed campaigns. Then again, we should have those anyway…)
Also, Calawain’s point isn’t really a kind of excuse. Some people favor unions, some favor corporations. So even if you’re not corrupt, those groups will have a vested interest in who would get elected. Similarly, if there’s a bridge-building company in my state/district and there’s a big bridge in the next budget, of course I’d try to favor them. They probably employee a lot of the people that voted for me.
June 15th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Eh, just deal with it. They’re like punk rockers; they think they’re different, but they’re just one big hive mind.
June 15th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Well, most politicians (no matter which country) are corrupted which is why the economic crisis is worsen. If being corrupt but capable of developing the country and maintain the stability of the economy and the standard of living is still acceptable. However, there are those who are so corrupted but doesn’t contribute much or anything at all are the worse.
Human can’t be given too much power cause they’ll always end up being corrupted by it. History has shown it but mankind doesn’t learn from it.
Anyway, let’s get back to animes and figure ;) Shall we?
June 15th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
“So how does it serve the interest of the people for politicians to promise tax breaks to corporations that helped to secure their re-elections? And how exactly does the end result differ from outright bribing?”
You have it backwards. US politicians don’t give tax breaks to the corporations BECAUSE they get the money from them. They would do the tax breaks no matter what, as general Republican economic theory is giving tax breaks to corporations (trickle down). The corporations are just giving money to help the candidate with the views that benefit them the most.
June 15th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
“So how does it serve the interest of the people for politicians to promise tax breaks to corporations that helped to secure their re-elections? And how exactly does the end result differ from outright bribing?
I’m not saying that politicians shouldn’t wield influence. But the fact is that people of ambition join politics despite getting paid crappier than the private sector. Yet they hold great influence over decisions that can cost billions of dollars, decisions that large corporations have a vested interest in.
If you see nothing wrong with this, then good for you? But personally I think bureaucrats ought to be paid private sector rates so that they have less incentives to pander to the rich and influential.”
It serves the interest of the people because it preserves free speech. People with money have always had advantages over people without money, that’s the very nature of capitalism. So it’s impossible to make it so everyone is equal, nor is it even a goal (socialism and communism=bad). Thus, people are free to use their money to “speak” through political donations. Bribing is paying the passport guy a few hundred bucks to get a renewal or pass through a border checkpoint. Activities like that are leagues away from political speech (campaign contributions) in my country.
You’re taking the fact that corporations donate a lot of money to politics and assuming that politicians are corrupt in the US, without much to back that up except for a pessimistic outsider’s view of the system. Maybe, I know this is hard for you to imagine, that most politicians actually want to serve the public good, and take campaign contributions because the costs of a modern day campaign are really really high? You do know that a majority of Congress is vehemently against your evil corporate tax breaks right? In fact, Democrats generally support a fairly anti-corporate legislative agenda and last time I checked they were in the majority. And on the other side, there’s actually good economic evidence behind lowering corporate tax rates during economic slowdowns. Supporting corporate tax breaks is something a large portion of the population really supports. So your linking support of tax breaks for corporation and corruption is missing some important factual bridges.
And you’re totally off your rocker if you think the government should be paying yearly salaries in the millions for each member of Congress and believe that will solve the problems you see. Then people would go into it because it makes them a lot of money. The lower pay means that they do it mostly because of a drive to public service or merely a love of importance and power.
June 15th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Went to watch that video, and I’m not sure what you feel is so asinine about the points they make.
Their main argument appears to be in favor of freedom of speech and assembly, which seem to me to be entirely valid causes to campaign for in and of themselves. I’m certainly not going to deny that Western democracies have their faults, because those faults are all over the press every day. Some other, non-democratic systems may work just as well or better for the common good; however, if the system’s reaction to dissenting opinions and fair criticism is intimidation and legal violence instead of, you know, proving them wrong, I’m not terribly inclined to believe things work as well as claimed.
As for social ills, the documentary didn’t do much more than gloss over the subject. It doesn’t seem unfair to say that a government that has been continuously in office for 50+ years bears a large responsibility in the social organization of the country. Global economic trends are one thing, but welfare spendings and other forms of economic regulation and redistribution can curb inequalities as well as soften the effects of a global downturn.
The UNDP human development report indicates that Singapore has a comparatively high Gini index (i.e. large poverty gap), a GDI rank significantly higher than its HDI rank, low health expenditures, heavy military spendings, a large prison population, etc. All of those social indicators are greatly influenced by government policy, and relate to the concerns voiced in that documentary. Expressing dissatisfaction over this is neither fear-mongering nor whiny antisocial rebellious thinking or whatnot. It’s legitimate criticism. If, as they claim, the authorities tried to suppress that video, *they* are the one acting in an overly defensive and politically immature fashion.
June 16th, 2008 at 12:26 am
im sadded to read this post of yours DM.
even thou you’ve lived in singapore you are just blind to what they have done. yes the PAP was good in the past.yes i agree without them we wouldn’t be where are are. but what about the present?do you really still believe that they are still as good as they were?you are just another typical pap supporter and is blind to whats going on.
why do you think the NKF scandal could last so long in the first place.did you really believe that it was a secret??!!??
June 16th, 2008 at 12:47 am
Wow, the video is long
too bad, i don`t really understand the videos.
looks like i`m going back to the books
June 16th, 2008 at 1:39 am
@DarkMirage:
I’m going to take a jab at this: Inferring from your comments, is it correct to say that Singaporeans, by and large, are not worthy of control and say on how the country is to run? Then the Government’s job is to take care of its citizens in exchange for shutting up?
I see, then. Singaporeans have become a sort of an immaculate juvenile, then. Since the Government has put in place all the necessary controls to prevent questioning of the symbols of authority (the legislative, the executive and the judiciary) in order to maintain “order.”
Then, I should declare for the whole world, then: Singapore adopts the philosophy of “Legalism.”
Oh, for the rest of the commenters here, fire away your philosophical rant.
June 16th, 2008 at 3:18 am
A lot of the video was bullshit. And I still have no idea why they had to use your picture.
June 16th, 2008 at 3:19 am
@TP
The reason is simple. The opposition is mostly a bunch of jokers.
I can’t really vote for jokers as my government can I? I mean, if war breaks out and the best some guy can do is go on hunger strike and martyrdom, I think this country is fucked.
It isn’t about how Singaporeans are not worthy of taking control, it’s just that those who are capable have already been quickly absorbed by the government and the resisting rejects are unable to come up with a decent front for us to vote for them. It isn’t the government that’s restricting our choice, but ironically, it’s the incapability of the opposition.
June 16th, 2008 at 4:05 am
If the Pappies stop cocking blocking the opposition, then perhaps we’ll see people of greater caliber actually becoming politicians, rather than just being completely apathetic to it and focus on other thing else like anime blogging or whatever.
Those that have stayed in the ring all these while have already gone mad from consuming the poison. CSJ lost his direction imo. He started well long before of the defamation suits came in and then turned to performing circus acts for the pro-government media to bash on.
June 16th, 2008 at 6:20 am
So you’re content with:
1) The opinion that democracy is not required to respect the rule of law.
2) A government that does its job is all that matters. It’s origin doesn’t have to be democratic.
Let me put it this way. You are saying that you want to be in a society where, if you want to see a change, you would have to behave like Suzaku and try to change the system from within. (I think this is probably already in your mind, eh?) As such, unless you have l33t piloting skills AND a mad scientist/rich aristocrat to give you uber gears, your cause is lost. While, in a democratic system, you can be more like Zero. You only need leadership to go on your way to gather a group of loyal followers and seize government power directly through an election. OR you can support those who think like you to take office like how the Black Knights support Zero. The point is, you are entitled to power in a democratic system. That power is very small indeed, but you don’t have to earn it. Democracy gives you the power to push for changes you care about, and I think this is very important.
Oh, and Zero is much cooler than Suzaku, by a million miles.
June 16th, 2008 at 6:21 am
This is interesting…
June 16th, 2008 at 6:26 am
“And there’s the problem of legitimacy. Are you willing to respect the law that some smart people simply say “We think this is the best for the country. Obey or face the consequence”? Democracy, as I understand it, gives you a say on what the law should be.”
I would. Why? Firstly, as you stated, they are smart. They’re the ones with political expertise, not us. Unless some of us here have held a government position at some time or another, which I believe nobody here has.
Yes, you deserve your say in regards to a law. I agree with that completely. Still, that doesn’t mean your say has to be listened to. It could be completely flawed, and wouldn’t work in the long run. The way I see it, say or no say, there is no difference, aside from the personal satisfaction that you put your ideas out there. I would prefer being able to voice my opinion on a law, but, if the laws work and I don’t have a say in them, I wouldn’t have a problem with that, either. As long as the government works and benefits the people, I’m down with that.
June 16th, 2008 at 6:32 am
Sorry, but I don’t seem to be able to edit my last post to put this little bit in.
“While, in a democratic system, you can be more like Zero. You only need leadership to go on your way to gather a group of loyal followers and seize government power directly through an election.”
You forgot the violent rebellion, and trust me, violence only complicates matters further, creating lasting conflicts which shall never end. Just look at Israel and Palestine. As the saying goes, if the whole world keeps taking an eye for an eye, the whole world will go blind.
“As such, unless you have l33t piloting skills AND a mad scientist/rich aristocrat to give you uber gears, your cause is lost.”
Really? What about Civil Rights in the US? MLK gained so much support from the white and black communities, as well as from the government, that he was able to make all peoples in the US, regardless of race, equal. He didn’t have great combat skills, or a rich scientist/aristocrat to aid him…plus he was non-violent (w00t)
June 16th, 2008 at 7:05 am
Woohoo! Someone actually read my long post. I decided to cut it short. For your reference, here’s what it was in its full glory.
So you’re content with:
1) The opinion that democracy is not required to respect the rule of law.
2) A government that does its job is all that matters. It’s origin doesn’t have to be democratic.
Sure, Singapore is blessed with visionary leaders who took the nation as far as it is today. You’re able to live in a peaceful and prospering country thanks to them. This is something I as a Thai don’t have, but I totally disagree with you.
Where are you in such a political system? If you disagree with the law, what would you do? Say, what if the Singaporean government makes writing blog posts about eroge illegal? (I know they wouldn’t do such a thing, but, in Thailand, I will be jailed if I write a blog like Mou Yamete.) You flamed “One Nation Under Lee,” but do you think the government has the legitimacy to seize it (as reported by LianYL over at Riuva)?
The bad of such a system is that it is very hard for your voice to be heard. Those competent bureaucrats have their own ideas of how the nation should be run. You may agree with them in general, but the law is more complicated. Copyrights are good, right? But how far should it be enforced? Preventing kids from accessing porn on the Internet is good, right? But should you install age or ID verification system on all computers? As we know it, the fine points of law can make big impact on society. The world is changing everyday, and no one knows for certain which option is good for the country. I cannot leave decisions I care about to others, and I’m sure you think the same.
And there’s the problem of legitimacy. Are you willing to respect the law that some smart people simply say “We think this is the best for the country. Obey or face the consequence”? Democracy, as I understand it, gives you a say on what the law should be. You probably are going to say that just one vote won’t make any difference. But, what if you can’t vote at all? What if you can’t campaign for the policy you want to see happen, or if you can but it doesn’t make any difference? What if those competent bureaucrats are so sure about their policies that they just wouldn’t respond to you? Don’t say that you don’t care about democracy. You don’t mean it.
Let me put it this way. You are saying that you want to be in a society where, if you want to see a change, you would have to behave like Suzaku and try to change the system from within. (I think this is probably already in your mind, eh?) As such, unless you have l33t piloting skills AND a mad scientist/rich aristocrat to give you uber gears, your cause is lost. While, in a democratic system, you can be more like Zero. You only need leadership to go on your way to gather a group of loyal followers and seize government power directly through an election. OR you can support those who think like you to take office like how the Black Knights support Zero. The point is, you are entitled to power in a democratic system. That power is very small indeed, but you don’t have to earn it. Democracy gives you the power to push for changes you care about, and I think this is very important.
Oh, and Zero is much cooler than Suzaku, by a million miles.
@dan Are you really from America?
June 16th, 2008 at 7:09 am
Yes. What, am I not the stereotypical American to you? Every group of people has a spectrum, from the far left to the far right.
June 16th, 2008 at 7:32 am
If CG was not an anime we would be calling Zero a terrorist along with the rest of the world. Suzaku is the one who is taking the (relatively) democratic route to change, while Zero is using force.
June 16th, 2008 at 7:49 am
The cameo was totally random… the whole 5 seconds plus
One thing to note, they removed your watermark on the picture.
I do not really want to discuss politics, but I just want to say that I do not like it, but it works and I am not complaining. I would really want to say “I have no interest in an ordinary government”; but Singapore’s political system is far from ordinary, so I have to replace “ordinary with “boring”. lol
June 16th, 2008 at 7:52 am
As they say, if you want to start an argument fast, bring up politics and religion.
June 16th, 2008 at 8:27 am
don’t go there darkmirage.
dictatorship is never the answer(just for you to know Brazil had 21 years of that, and didn’t leave a good impression).
And by the way, keep writing,you’re good(first comment,but aways checking in your site)
June 16th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Singapore is not as bad as people like to think it is. It’s far from a dictatorship. Elections are held regularly and it’s not the ruling party’s fault that people vote for them in light of their proven track records.
Foreigners have a skewed perspective of things because there is prevailing sentiment that anything that is not a full Western democracy is unacceptable.
Media coverage of political oppression in China, Myanmar and North Korea has programmed into the people an automatic preference for the message of those who claim to be fighting for democracy around the world. There are real dictatorships in this world and there are political dissenters who are genuinely popular, such as Aung San Suu Kyi. Singapore has neither.
The mainstream media bias in Singapore is a lot less severe than Fox News. Furthermore, internet penetration is at 70%, on par with America, and connections are not censored. Literacy rate is 95% and education is basically free. Politicians and public servants whom I have met in public appearances have no qualms in answering questions about free speech and political freedom. There is simply no room for a dictatorship to exist under such conditions.
It’s one thing to claim that Singapore needs to allow greater freedom of expression and another altogether to claim that it is a dictatorship. The problem with political dissenters in Singapore is that they like to be overly dramatic with their claims and stir up trouble that is greatly disproportional to the actual problems they are supposedly trying to solve. Yet from a foreigner’s perspective, these people are no different from Aung San Suu Kyi, and the Singapore government is some kind of evil dictatorship. That kind of sentiment is not helping anything.
The LDP has been running Japan for 50 years except for a short break in 1993 and no one accuses Japan of being a dictatorship, despite the fact that a portion of the political system is plagued with cronyism and criminal influence, and there are active attempts by the right to censor certain political and social topics. Give Singapore a break.
June 16th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
A little nitpicking…
“But personally I think bureaucrats ought to be paid private sector rates so that they have less incentives to pander to the rich and influential.”
“Greed is eternal.” If they are corruptible, they will be corrupt, regardless of the pay. Besides, I would not trust people who run for political offices for money.
I would not take this video too seriously. Sure, it reiterates some issues with regards to the ruling party, and there are some times that I think the government is full of fools/evil, but I have to admit, overall, they have done quite a good job. The opposition, quite naturally, targets their flaws.
As a side note, I feel that the merits of democracy is overrated. I mean, I’m sure anyone can think of at least one evil/useless leader that came to power because of democracy, right?
June 16th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
As you say, corruptible people will be corrupt, and conversely non-corruptible people will be upright. Higher pay does not change that.
The difference is that people whose selfish desires manifest into corruption do so out of personal interest. If punishments for corruption are severe and the pay is already high, there is little to be gained from taking such risks. This reduces the incentives for certain selfish individuals to succumb to temptation, with the additional benefit of staying competitive in a free market economy against the private sectors when it comes to attracting talented people.
People who become politicians out of their true desire to serve the people will still continue do so. They don’t give that up just because the pay is high.
It’s also not true to say that because the pay is low, people who join politics therefore have noble intents. Politicians wield an enormous amounts of influence after all, and the fact is that there are corrupted politicians everywhere in spite of the low (legitimate) pay.
June 16th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
My point is that the pay rise is more likely to attract the wrong kind of people to the jobs: the added lure of money combined with the power & influence that comes with the job attracts those that value money & power more than the responsibilities and duties of the job.
Like you said, those with the desire to serve will still do so, and perhaps the pay rise does reduce the incentives for people to by corrupt, but I feel that human greed knows no limits, and subsequently this move is unlikely to significantly curb corruption, if such is the case.
June 16th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Increased pay will certainly attract a lot of people into considering politics as a career. They certainly won’t all be your so called “wrong kind of people”. There are plenty of honest, hard working people out there who simply aren’t idealistic enough to give up a 7 figure salary for position in public office. Does that necessarily make them the wrong kind of people? If a pay rise can attract the CEOs of multi national corporations, who make their companies billions in profit every year, into running the country’s economy, it can’t be a bad thing. At the very least it may provide the voters with a candidate that has more skills than simply evading questions at press conferences.
As far as corruption goes, it really boils down to the effectiveness of the internal control of the political system. Any corruption in the system should really be seen as a failure in the system, and not as whether or not the politicians are being paid too much.
June 16th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Maybe the guy intended to produce a crappy documentary just to insert in a subliminal message about haruhiism and rebelliousness. heh.
Just as this post is nothing but a subliminal message for us readers to push darkmirage as the next Great Leader of Singapore :D
June 16th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
A minor point but education is not free for the majority of the population. Malays get it free up to uni-level and if you are not Malay, there are various other scholarships and various other schemes, but 70% of the population still pay for their education; granted it is still relatively cheap, besides private schools.
I agree with much of what has been posted; the opposition makes a great deal of noise considering what means they have available and a little extra, but they offer little to back things up.
The SDP site makes it seem like the government can “come down” on you at any time; that is really not the case unless you’ve done something to warrant that. Granted, there is a great deal of Byzantine red-tape, but few (I daresay none at all) governments in the world are void of it.
I am dissatisfied with some of the current policies (conscription) but the opposition does not seem like it will solve any of those problems. Granted, I still hope that I can migrate by the age of 30, primarily because of the climate and the food.
June 16th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
The film is quite spot-on with its criticisms. I don’t see anything wrong with offering a different view on how life is in Singapore so the film should be praised for trying to be different. The film should not be praised for being very one-sided.
Some of the stuff said in the film, particularly about people being detained as so-called Marxist Conspirators actually being innocent, is true but account of their close family. I don’t agree with everything in the film, but I think that this one bit of ugly S’porean history isn’t something which can be ignored or glossed over. The ISA was used to detain people who were, according to their close family, perfectly innocent.
That’s all I have to say.
June 17th, 2008 at 12:24 am
You are saying that the Singapore government has proven itself ineffective in manipulating public opinions
Uhh, no, can you please stop twisting my words? Can I twist yours a bit too, just to get even? Here it goes: So you’re now saying your government is unable to win over Singaporean citizens without lying to them? Basically, the truth they’re offering isn’t enough to keep them on their side?
I was talking about presenting their case in the right way. No need for lies, all they need to employ is competent people who will be able to effectively tell your countrymen that outside forces are simply out of their control, and with them having mainstream media down on their knees, this should be a relatively simple task.
Your government is actually very lucky; we have the press working against our governments no matter who’s in charge, because populist tunes bring in higher ratings. You’re good at this yourself. *pachi pachi pachi*
June 17th, 2008 at 6:28 am
The difference between Singapore and the US, is that Singapore government ministers in top positions have personalities suited to that of scientists and engineers, while the US have guys who are better suited to being erm politicians and lawyers. Because to gain power in the US, you have to be pretty smooth thanks to the democracy, which is essentially a race to charm the clueless people and greedy corporations.
Would a scientist make a better logical decision than a politician? Most probably. At least there wouldn’t be issues like OMG WE HAVE TO TEACH CREATIONISM!
June 17th, 2008 at 11:10 am
As long we can poke fun at the dysfunctional, I’m happy.
But we aren’t allowed to do that outright, unlike the US.