News and views from an unique perspective

‘National Conversation’ is about managing public perception

Posted by temasektimes on September 13, 2012

This ‘national conversation’ is not about any conversation, and neither is about managing expectations as Lee Hsien Loong is now saying.

It is about managing perceptions.

This is about recovering the ground lost to the opposition at the last GE, and the PAP will be fully exploiting this opportunity to make it appear that it is they who are the true architects of any change that might result from this exercise.

(Side note: BTW, the Remaking Singapore report talks about re-drawing of electoral boundaries and why this practice should end!)

The people will then decide that the PAP is fully capable of making the change along the lines of what is good for them and what they want; there will then be no need for more opposition MPs.In the meantime, the PAP will be trying to convince Singaporeans after the ‘national conversation’ is over that real change is afoot, when it is only more likely that only cosmetic ones are.

However, it is those who support the WP’s inaction and deafening silences, while the PAP is appearing to be the only one making the political noises – I am especially thinking about the perspective of the majority of ingaporeans who don’t get their political information online – are also conning others into believing that the WP’s inaction and silences will indeed reverse itself when there are more of them in Parliament.

But at this rate, there is a distinct possibility that not only no more GRCs will be won, there is also a real possibility of losing Aljunied because they electorate is being conned into believing that since change is occurring, no more opposition MPs need be elected.

(The WP also connives against other opposition parties before every elections so that ONLY it can contest in the PAP’s weakholds, and they do this with the support of WP Psychopaths online. That only means that other opposition politicians continue to have a lower chance of getting elected.)

Good luck to those dreams of more opposition in Parliament. But it is opposition supporters who back the WP who should not forget to thank themselves for it.


*The above was first posted as a comment on THe Temasek Times.


7 Responses to “‘National Conversation’ is about managing public perception”

  1. P Koh said

    If National Conversation is about managing perception and recovering lost grounds from the opposition then it defeats the very purpose for which it has been intended. It is about “Change” in the way the country is being run where the citizen’s anger is heightened by policies inappropriately dished out thus creating unhappiness on many fronts. Managing ‘Perception’ may just be an ideal way of looking at things but what are the core issues that touched the very heart and soul of so many citizens and these should be fixed by appropriate actions and not trying to change ‘Perception’ which is intrinsic and does feed the emotions of the populace.

    • Robox said

      Hi P Koh, I think you will be greatly disappointed if you think that sole aim of the national conversation (version PAP) is going to be discussions of specific policies and how they ought to be changed.

      I refer you to and quote from this article:–PM-Lee

      “…Mr Heng outlined the approach of the committee that will spearhead the large-scale effort to involve citizens in charting the basis of future policies, programmes and action plans.”

      Thus, if the rationale for the national conversation (version PAP) is that it needs a new “basis of future policies, programmes and action plans”, then this is the strongest admission to date that the PAP admits that its adherence to fascist philosophy is fundamentally flawed, and also that the PAP government is currently directionless, philosophically speaking.

      It is a direct result of how SDP’s liberalism – which entails egalitarianism and anti-elitism – which many Singaporeans are actually very solidly behind, even if they won’t admit it, has taken strong root in Singapore. (It’s that much sullied “L” word, you see.)

      Even the PAP is trying its best to sound “liberal” (except that a liberal totalitarian political ideology is without precedent).

      So long as the structures of totalitarian government – which can also be viewd as “electoral fraud” – remains in place, there will be no substantve change. That’s is also why I am insistent that the PAP’s institutionalization and practise of electoral fraud must take priority, or there will be no meaningful conversation. That “fraud” has permeated all levels of Singapore society

      And it is also in keeping with the stated aims of the committee: “What kind of Singapore do you want to be living in in 10 or 20 years from now?

      My answer: I don’t want to be living in a country where “fraud” is part of my national character.

      Another evidence of that fraud, and credit goes to Kenneth Jeyaratnam for this observation? If this is, yet again, an exercise in securing the PAP’s electoral fortunes, they are making use of public funds – and not party funds – to advance their party interests. The remain the self serving people that we have come to know them for.

      The PAP is on the hunt for a new political philosophy, but if they care to look it is all there: In the SDP’s policy handbook. (Face-saving is still their priority and they are unlikely to do that.)

      It’s true! The PAP is just playing catchup with the SDP.

      • Naivety said

        If that’s the case, why is it so that SDP did not even manage to capture any single seat at all during GE 2011 as end of the day, it is still results that count right?

  2. distant drums said

    It has all been said that this set-up ‘national convention’ is nothing else or more but an appease to fend off the thunderous rage of our local born Singaporeans that was instilled by the PAP government of the day with willfull enormity

    The PAP government has no moral courage to admit its willfull wrong doings

  3. Jack said

    Why should Singaporeans bother to talk to a “failure”. PAP as failed Singaporeans. Below is the proof:
    (1) low productivity of Singapore economy
    (2) low birth rate which started from LKY’s “Stop at 2” policy
    (3) depressed local wages
    (4) failing to plan for the many foreigners it allowed into Singapore
    (5) shortage, “shrinking” and high cost of public housing
    (6) shortage of public buses and MRT trains
    (7) shortage of hospitals, doctors and nursing homes
    (8) shortage of teachers and places in schools for Singaporeans
    (9) shortage of jobs for Singaporeans
    (10) foreigners taking jobs away from Singaporeans
    (11) frequent breakdowns of MRT trains
    (12) overcrowded public transport (buses and MRT trains)
    (13) bailout of public transport (failed privatisation)
    (14) frequent 50-year “ponding”
    (15) high inflation (Singapore more expensive than Hong Kong)
    (16) high cost of education and healthcare
    (17) high cost of electricity (failed privatisation)
    (18) high cost of private transport and fuel
    (19) poor air quality as per WHO Air Quality Guidelines
    (20) depleted CPF accounts after buying “affordable” HDB flats
    (21) many CPF accounts below CPF Minimum Sum
    (22) massive (billions) losses of taxpayers’ money by Temasek / GIC
    (23) wasteful purchases by Government agencies like NParks
    (24) made Singapore a “tuition nation”
    (25) real income likely to fall this year
    (26) failing to provide Singaporeans with Swiss Standard of Living
    Regime change is the only sensible way forward for Singaporeans.

  4. Naivety said

    Darwin’s law of natural selection am afraid. Singaporeans are TOO WEAK and DOCILE to STAND UP and DEMAND a government that CONFERS BASIC RIGHTS upon them. Leadership acts largely in their own best interests which are at odds with the best interests of the vast majority of the working Singaporean population. Singapore is nothing more than a great big hotel resort – “management” & “shareholders” running the resort, the population at large work to service “guests” driving shareholder return. The money is driven to private banks and management is largely unaccountable for it’s own poor decisions protected by laws that prohibit criticism – which the Singaporean population accepts. Am afraid, no matter how “first world” Singapore thinks it is, WITHOUT TRUE DEMOCRATIC UNIVERSAL RIGHTS – and a POPULATION that has the BALLS to STAND UP for itself – it remains just another family run third world ASIAN BANANA REPUBLIC. Harsh, I know…but if it WALKS like a DUCK, QUACKS like a DUCK…it’s a DUCK!!

  5. sniper said

    basincally national conversation should start with National Service that is killing Sg. FULL STOP.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: