You can’t catch Pokemon in ‘f**king shitty’ Singapore

From ‘Australian expat fired after calling Singapore a shit country for not having Pokemon Go’, 11 July 2016, article in Today

An Australian expat working for property site 99.co has been fired from his job after he called Singapore a “f****** s*** country” on Facebook.

The man, Mr Sonny Truyen, was apparently upset that the game Pokemon GO was not yet available here.

“You can’t f****** catch Pokemon in this piece of f****** s*** country,” he wrote on Facebook.

His comments were screencapped by users of the Hardwarezone forum, who later uncovered that Mr Truyen had been working for 99.co.

Within a day, 99.co’s Chief Executive Darius Cheung published a note on his website and on Hardwarezone that Mr Truyen’s contract had been terminated.

Pokemon GO is sweeping the globe faster than Flappy Bird during its time. Unlike the latter, the ‘augmented reality’ game forces players to actually venture out into the great outdoors to catch virtual Pokemon. It’s like Foursquare meets Tamagotchi. Needless to say it’ll be a massive hit among Singaporean kids. Parents, be afraid. Be very afraid. Your children are going to start hallucinating Pokemon everywhere they go when they’re not engrossed in their phones. Not only would they ‘rage’ like the dick that Sonny Truyen is when they can’t ‘catch them all’, but by blurring the lines between fantasy and reality Pokemon GO will turn gamers into digital zombies and put their lives at risk when they start straying onto busy roads or falling into drains chasing after illusory Pokemon.

If you’re an Ashley Madison addict who thrives off meeting exotic Asian cheating wives, you’re going to be cursing about how fucking shit this country is too. Nothing good comes out of insulting Singapore. We don’t have a Thai king yet the Internet vigilante will unleash its brand of lese majeste when our sovereignty is undermined. Anton Casey was fired and ejected all the way to Perth for complaining about the stench of the poor unwashed masses on the MRT. 

Truyen has since apologised, and though what he ranted about was pretty thoughtless and juvenile, it wasn’t discriminatory or racist, nor was he inciting violence like Bryan ‘open fire’ Lim. A foreigner has every right to think that Singapore sucks balls, and if Sonny genuinely thinks Singapore is shit then so be it. Why waste our time trying to defend it? I reserve my opinions about how awful some of our neighbouring cities can be. If I get spotted walking around in some ghetto pinching my nose with a look of anguish on my face, no one is going to call for my termination. Yet if I verbalise my hate on Facebook that so-and-so place smells worse than llama poop, the shit will surely hit the fan.

Sonny’s just an employee of a company with a spammy name (99.co) that sounds like an knockoff online casino site. A Taiwanese politician once referred to us as – literally – a ‘pi-sai’ (nose shit). Where was the Internet patriot brigade then?

NS Man wants permission to open fire

From ‘Police reports made  on man’s ‘open fire’ comment in response to FB post on Pink Dot’, 13 June 2016, article by Koh Xing Hui, ST

A man’s Facebook comment that he would like to”open fire“, made in response to a post on foreign sponsorship of a recent gay rally in Singapore, has caught the attention of the community on Monday (June 13).

Police reports have been made regarding the comment by a Bryan Lim that read: “I am a Singaporean citizen. I am a NSman. I am a father. And I swore to protect my nation.

Give me the permission to open fire. I would like to see these £@€$^*s die for their causes.”

The comment was made on a post on the We Are Against Pink Dot Facebook page. The post was on foreign sponsorship of the annual lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rally Pink Dot, held at the Hong Lim Park on June 4.

It is not clear who Mr Lim is targeting – the LGBT community or those who support the gay cause.

But in the light of the gay club shooting in Orlando in the United States on Sunday, which left 50 dead and 53 others injured, members of the LGBT community here are spooked and have lodged police reports.

Despite Bryan’s subsequent claims that his ‘threats’ were ‘taken out of context’ and that he was referring to Bloomberg and not the LGBT community, what makes his FB post problematic is how it is framed as a defence of the nation in an imaginary war, whether the enemy are the foreign devils imposing their ‘Western values’ on us, or those advocating a LGBT ‘lifestyle’.

The army does in fact, train us to ‘open fire’, and that really is what NSmen are supposed to do when the sovereignty of the nation is at stake. It’s just unfortunate that Bryan’s lamentable remark came in the light of the deadly Orlando hate-crime shooting, which was spookily attributed to the alleged killer flying into a rage after seeing two men kissing in public. No wonder MDA decided to cut the Les Miserables gay kiss scene. We don’t want to have anti-gay psychotics barging into the Esplanade theatre slashing random people with parangs (Thank goodness for our strict assault rifle laws!). Maybe it was all for our own safety.

Arrests have been made against tough guys acting our their violent fantasies on Facebook. This one was more specific, in reference to the Benjamin Lim suicide case:

Please reveal the identity of the 5 plain clothes officers and we go handle them ourselves. Kill them.

As if hunting down police officers wasn’t enough, some vow to set Ministers and the PAP on fire, like this guy:

It is time to burn Vivian Balakrishnan and the PAP! Rally together and vote them out!

As far as I know, no one has actually been charged and imprisoned for expressing murderous intent through social media (though one 16 year old boy has been jailed for far lesser crimes), and it’s unlikely that Bryan Lim, father, NSman, WAAPD (We are against Pink Dot) fan, will be punished under the law for inciting violence. But this is just one man speaking for himself. The analogy of war between all things good and pure and the LGBT ‘movement’ was started in the first place by men of substantial influence who are supposed to lead by example, in particular Christian pastors.

In 2013, pastor Yang Tuck Loong of the Cornerstone Community church was reported to the Police for his call to arms, urging his flock to prepare for war and be ‘battle ready’ against the ‘powers of darkness‘. God knows what a preacher with a shotgun would do given the circumstances. There is already a villain on the pro-family side of this war, and the surname of this man that the more passionate members of Team LGBT love to hate rhymes with ‘Wrong’.

It is because of such powerful war metaphors, delivered in blatant contrast to Christian teachings of love and compassion, that those on either side of the sexuality divide form factions, be it Pink Dot, WAAPD or the Wear White campaign. It’s like those petty House wars in Game of Thrones, when the real threat of the Undead is knocking right outside our defenses. Ignorance, a mob mentality and a supervillian-magician in the form of a megachurch pastor make a potent, explosive mix, and we’re going nowhere fast in this gay debate if people on both camps keep lobbing firebombs at each other. For every Bryan Lim homophobe threatening to shoot innocent people, there’s someone in support of the LGBT cause flaming Bryan in return, even bringing his children into it (What if your child turns out gay etc). You guys should just organise arm wrestling matches among yourselves as an outlet for your anger before ejaculating all this ridiculous machismo over Facebook.

So much hate, and to what end? Whether it’s Bloom-goddamn-berg or Pink Dot supporters, wishing violent death upon people through public announcements, whatever your religious inclinations, is a step backward in our move towards a compassionate, forgiving society. It’s ironic that Bryan Lim references little ‘Buddha’ and ‘Jesus’ in one of his previous posts because surely they wouldn’t approve of bigotry or resolving problems with guns. You know nothing about religion, Bryan Lim. A true patriot would never harbour ill feelings toward his fellow Singaporeans, whatever their sexual orientation.

As an employer I would frown upon such behaviour calling for violence just because something contravenes my principles.  Such anger should be channeled to more productive ends rather than ‘opening fire’ and instead shooting yourself in the foot. I hope Bryan Lim learns his lesson, becomes a kinder father and NSMan and the only instance when he should ever ‘open fire’ is at a backyward BBQ where all his LGBT friends are invited. Or if he’s really serious about protecting the nation from collapsing into a moral war he could do everyone a favour and quit Facebook altogether.

Parents setting up social media accounts for babies

From ‘Never too young for social media’, 1 May 2016, article by Venessa Lee, Sunday Times

One-year-old Kallista Choo has several social media accounts, including Instagram, Facebook and Tumblr. When she is old enough to access those accounts herself, she will see herself growing up via the photographs her parents have uploaded over the years.

They set up an Instagram account for her when she was two months old, and then a Facebook page and Tumblr blog.

…On Instagram, Kallista has more than 1,300 followers. Mr Choo says: “We wanted to give her a voice before she could even talk.”

babies-on-instagram-size-xxlarge-original

Kallista Choo, Instagram talking baby, social media darling, is an influencer extraordinaire in the making. While other parents set up bank accounts, enrol their toddlers into modelling classes, or sign them up for cutest baby competitions, our ‘millennial’ parents have created the modern equivalent of the ‘Truman Show’ around their oblivious children.

We know how that movie ended. The protagonist, sick of having his life documented to micro-detail and shown off to the world by a father figure-dictator named Christof, walks out of his manufactured stage, saying ‘Kthxbye’ to surrogate Daddy and his tens of thousands of followers. Today, Harry Truman lives on among our children thanks to their over-enthusiastic, controlling Christofs.

In the neglected recesses of my old house my parents keep an endearing nude pic of me as a baby, among an embarrassment of forgotten memories like me dolled up for a kindergarten play. It’s the kind of stuff you would dig up only once in a while and laugh at the sheer stupidity of it. And that’s all it’s meant to be, as a private family joke, away from prying eyes of kaypoh relatives and pedophiles. Mentioned once or twice and then we move on. If it’s bad enough you will remember it FOREVER. You don’t need Facebook to send you random throwbacks. If they had put me on Instagram, or worse, Tumblr (renown for its porn blogs), with the caption ‘I’M TOO SEXY FOR MY DIAPERS’, for over 1000 buggers to scoff at, my teenage years would have gone beyond pustulant acne, exam stress and thoughts of cutting. I could be picked on at school because the first friends I have on Facebook are my damn parents.

Social media is a rose-tinted filter. You don’t see the likes of Kallista throwing a fit, bawling and giving them hell in the middle of the night. Her parents have presented her to the world as a cute-as-a-button bundle of joy. When the time comes for Mom and Dad to hand over the accounts to their teenage kid, she would have been drilled into believing that ‘I post, therefore I am’. She risks being overdependent on Likes, Facebook Reactions, the opinion of others, affected by ‘Unfollows’, and growing up constantly seeking mass approval, an ingratiating mess. On the flipside, if your kid screws up his life and ends up in the papers some day for felony, people would go ‘OMG that’s @hamsumboiboi! He used to be SOOOO adorable!’ But breeding a narcissistic complex, attention-seeking behaviour, a rebellious streak or generally annoying the heck out of singles or couples trying for kids are probably the least of your worries.

Over-sharing your children’s pics puts their safety on the line. For anyone with ill intentions, your baby photo could end up as a link to a paedo porn site. If some psychopath wants to steal your baby, stalking has never been easier with social media tagging. In the past, if I wanted to kidnap your baby I would have to physically get out of my house and follow you around, peep around corners and even buy a pair of binoculars. Today, all I need to do is log into Instagram from the comfort of my home in my dirty underwear. Grudging baby-haters may cyberbully her before she could even walk. And if you think you own the right to your pictures and they should never be reproduced without permission, think again.

But the absolute shittiest thing you could do to a baby online is Faceswap away whatever dignity’s left in your child. What kind of sick, creepy-ass parent are you, really. I formally disown you, Faceswap Father!

I’m sure parents would have thought all this through and adjusted their privacy settings accordingly. Except that most of us get so excited when our babies express their first sentences or emit farts louder than Grandpa’s that we lose our minds and let our fingers and thumbs take over. I don’t know how many of Kallista’s 1300-odd followers are friends, random admirers, spambots or lurking sickos. I don’t know how many of those would remain loyal followers when the kid grows up to be a boring as hell teen. It’s a good time, nonetheless, to be a child psychologist. My Dad abused me as a baby – by putting his ugly mug over mine for laughs and I haven’t been sleeping well since.

Maybe all this isn’t about the baby at all, but a vanity showcase of ourselves as awesome parents. Some folks have been known to even set up accounts for their unborn foetus. If I insist on documenting the birth of my child from scratch I may post a photo of Mummy’s positive pregnancy test, right down to the graphic details of how I pumped our shared DNA into Mommy’s cervix.  I long for the old days when parents remain as parents and do normal parenting stuff like teaching their kid how to ride a bike so that kids can, well, be kids, and grow up in a world where their development isn’t being constantly hampered by the pressures of being an unwilling Internet celebrity, where a memory doesn’t need to be hashtagged and commented on for it to exist.

 

 

 

Lee Wei Ling caught plagiarising in LKY hero worship article

From ‘Why ST did not publish Dr Lee Wei Ling’s column’, article by Ivan Fernandez, 9 April 2016, ST

Several issues of serious journalistic concern arose from recent allegations by Dr Lee Wei Ling, a former columnist of The Sunday Times, after she blogged about events last month to commemorate the death of her father, Mr Lee Kuan Yew.

In a Facebook post on April 1, Dr Lee wrote: “i will no longer write for SPH as the editors there do not allow me freedom of speech. in fact, that was the reason why i posted the article on LKY would not want to be hero-worshipped.”

I had been editing Dr Lee’s columns since last November. So it pained me when she also alleged that those who edited her columns had been “commanded to edit certain issues out, and they are to (sic) timid to disobey, and too embarrassed by their timidness to tell me the truth”.

…On March 25, I received another version of the column with substantial additions that I found distracting at first reading because of repeated references to China (Mao Zedong’s China had already been mentioned higher up in her piece).

But there was another issue as well. Upon checking the accuracy of a quote she cited from British Prime Minister David Cameron, and other further checks, I found that almost three quarters of the additions had been plagiarised.

I had learnt from experience with Dr Lee’s columns that her sources needed to be double-checked.

Ivan Fernandez has just joined Team Janadas in this kerfuffle, armed with evidence of wholesale copying and a serious allegation of LWL’s integrity as a columnist. While JD had insinuated that LWL wasn’t a very good writer as reading her work was like ‘sailing through a fog’,  it looks like the fangs, claws and knives are out with this latest exchange. Meanwhile, her book ‘A Hakka Woman’s Singapore Stories’, happily compiled together by the ST team, continues to receive rave reviews as a ‘page turner‘. It’s telling that only 75 out of 180 essays made the cut according to one reader.

LWL won’t let the matter rest of course, having inherited the more renown character traits of her deceased father, including those in the looks department. Upon this reveal and reading the hero-worship post again, the historical bits about Churchill or Mao Tse Tung do stick out from her usual style like a sore thumb. In fact, they’re conspicuously BORING compared to rest of the post.

It’s one thing to label a prominent figure ungrateful as Janadas did when he sarcastically wrote ‘At the conclusion of that prolonged period of agony, she lovingly gathered the products of her oppression into a best-selling collection of essays’. It’s another to accuse one of intellectual thievery, no less someone who’s both a neurologist by training and a member of a powerful family. I believe LWL’s smart enough to wiggle her way out of this situation. My censorship is your editing. Your plagiarism is my paraphrasing. Potato, tomato. Not that plagiarism is anything new in academic circles. 

Through their censorship, I mean EDITING, ST has tried to sell LWL as an honest, down to earth voice speaking from beyond the ivory tower, someone who could give precious insight into the private lives of the Lees. But this debacle has made it appear that ST were somehow ‘tolerating’ LWL’s requests all these time, and that she’s not as simple as she sounds on paper. Until the death of her father that led to the hero-worship piece that is. Now we’re seeing the true power of a spurned Hakka woman without the moderating, some say manipulative, lens of the ST. As for ST, it’s hard to tell if this is a last-ditch attempt for eyeballs following LWL’s departure, or a genuine statement of how professional they really are.

Still, ST shouldn’t have worried about LWL’s accusation that they do not allow freedom of speech because EVERYONE knows how ST is viewed as a shameless mouthpiece for the ruling party, despite the irony that they’re sticking to sacred journalistic principles when making sure LWL doesn’t get what she wants. As Fernandez writes: “No newspaper editor would accept columns on that basis (ultimatums), however illustrious the writers.” Ouch.

UPDATE: LWL’s FB response was that Fernandez was not upfront on the plagiarism during their correspondence, and continued to emphasise that her intention was to downplay the LKY hagiographies. She also said as a doctor, she had nothing to gain professionally from her contributions. In other words, borrowing material is no big deal. You didn’t tell me clearly about ST’s position on copying.

Though a bad article indeed does nothing to hurt LWL’s career, it would reflect badly on an ‘award-winning’ newspaper if they gave in to an ‘illustrious character’ and allowed the copy-and-pasting to get through. I figure LWL was too impatient with the to-ing and fro-ing, and decided to post her unedited version anyway. I guess shortcuts are fine if you’re a really busy neurologist who needs to save people’s lives.

Tampines 1 reported to police for racial discrimination

From ‘Women files police report against Tampines 1 for alleged racial discrimination; mall issues apology’, 9 April 2016, ST

A woman filed a police report on Friday (April 8) against Tampines 1 shopping mall, alleging that she was subjected to racial discrimination by an employee of the mall.

The mall had earlier issued a public apology to businesswoman Diana Hairul, and told The Straits Times it had counselled the employee about her actions.

Ms Diana, 36, who uploaded on Facebook on Thursday (April 7) evening a screenshot of an e-mail she received from the employee, wrote that she had felt discriminated by the reply.

The e-mail read: “Hi Dee, We are not so keen to run a Malay road show as our target audience are mainly Chinese. Thus, we regret to inform you that we are unable to rent a space to you.”

What’s shocking to me is not so much that a police report is being filed, since the police have been activated for more petty things, like a child getting scolded by a teacher. What’s unnerving is Diana’s FB post and Tampines MP Masagos Zulkifli’s follow up.

Screen Shot 2016-04-09 at 8.02.30 AM

First, she specifically addressed the Malay Muslim community. She didn’t say ‘Hey hey everyone’.  Then there’s ‘rejected US’, which by implication to her first sentence suggests that Tampines 1 wasn’t just declining her business, but Malays in general. The use of CAPS on ‘mainly the chinese’ is to emphasise that this is a race issue. And oh, you should feel discriminated ‘against’, not ‘feel discriminated’, but I think people would have been drowned in CAPS by then to notice. People complain about how Tampines 1’s email was worded but in all fairness, the complainant’s rant and its capacity to incite negative feelings is worth looking into as well.

From a business standpoint, Tampines 1 should have done its calculations and decided that a Hari Raya road show simply would not be profitable. The trick is fudging the answer to make it seem like such road shows are not compatible with the mall’s ‘theme’ or ‘direction’ (They eventually gave the excuse that they were fully booked). We also should not expect businesses to patronise a certain race at the expense of their bottom line. If I were to propose to those in charge at Geylang Serai market that I want to sell Chinese new year decorations, it’s likely that I’ll get rejected because of the obvious ‘target audience’ in the area. Likewise if I were a real estate agent intending to sell a house in Kampong Glam, I’m not going to ‘feel discriminated’ if my boss decides it’s better for my Malay colleague to pitch the sale.

Fine if a member of public makes a commotion over something businesses have to manage discreetly on a daily basis. Anyone who’s mature and sensible enough wouldn’t be riled by Diana’s outburst into believing that Tampines 1 is anti-Malay and doesn’t want their money. When news broke that a Chinese man attacked 3 madrasah students we didn’t descend into a mob. So yes, we can be certain that Singaporeans are rational people and will not boycott Tampines 1 over an isolated incident, no matter how someone tries to assault our senses with complaints in CAPS.

I’m also not too sure about MP Masagos’ strongly worded response on his FB. (Post was deleted at time of writing. Hmmm..)

masagos1_0

‘INSENSITIVE AND INCOMPETENT’, ‘SPREAD ILL WILL’, “SHAME ON YOU!’.

Insensitive, yes, but I don’t think the staff deserves the rest of the berating. Spreading ‘ill will’ is a serious charge, the kind that will land you in court. Didn’t Minister Gan just tell us to develop a ‘learning culture‘ from such mistakes? Has the Minister considered the career repercussions of the affected staff from this public bashing? As a public figure I would have expected something more neutral, diplomatic and forgiving, like ‘Let us all learn from this lesson in our bid to become more inclusive’, or ‘The reply was a missed opportunity. Businesses could emphasise communication skills as part of their training programme’, or ‘The staff may wish to apply for course via SkillsFuture so that such incidents may be avoided’. Taking sides, shaming and fanning flames on the matter short of accusing people of Islamophobia helps no one.

This was Masagos’ response to the Paya Lebar assault earlier in the month.

Screen Shot 2016-04-09 at 9.48.27 AM

Yes, more ‘SHAME ON YOUs’, though in this case he did urge us not to ‘incite hatred and division’. In other words, don’t stir shit while the Police are investigating. The same applies to the Tampines 1 case, whatever the Police are doing to resolve the matter while at the same time managing ‘walking time bombs’ in Little India.

Meanwhile I’ll continue to patronise Tampines 1, Hari Raya bazaar or no bazaar, and hopefully it doesn’t turn into the Little Chinatown of Tampines after this incident. If there’s any mall that deserves to have the police knocking on their doors, it’s not one as supposedly ‘racist’ as Tampines Mall is, but those with the potential to randomly kill you. Jem, I’m talking to you.

Calvin Cheng on the killing of terrorists’ children

From ‘Calvin Cheng’s killing children remarks insensitive and inappropriate: MLC Chairman’, 28 Nov 15, article by Raymond Tham, CNA

Recent remarks made by former Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Calvin Cheng online were “insensitive” and “inappropriate” for a member of the Media Literacy Council (MLC), said the council’s chairman Tan Cheng Han in a statement on Friday (Nov 27).

“I have spoken to Mr Cheng and counselled him that as a member of the Council he will be held to and judged by a higher standard compared to a private citizen,” Professor Tan said.

On Nov 17, Mr Cheng posted a four-lined comment online, which seemingly advocated killing the children of terrorists “in case they grow up to take revenge”. Mr Cheng had been responding to a thread about liberalism and security started by Future-Moves group chief executive Devadas Krishnadas.

After receiving negative feedback, Mr Cheng took to his blog on Nov 24 to elaborate further on his initial comment. According to Mr Cheng, his initial comment was meant to be “provocative and outrageous” to spark deeper thought into a “complex moral issue”.

Mr Cheng also referenced two schools of thoughts regarding the topic: Moral absolutism versus utilitarianism. “Take self-defence. If a child is holding a rifle and is about to shoot at you, do you have the right to kill him?” Mr Cheng wrote.

In 2011, a Young PAP member named Jason Neo was accused of racism for captioning an image of bus of kindergarten kids with the phrase ‘young terrorist trainees‘ and posting it on Facebook. Now the MLC would condemn such discrimination as ‘hate speech’, but when a more renown public figure sparks controversy by suggesting how children of terrorists should be handled for the ‘greater good’, the incident is let off the hook on the grounds of ‘insensitivity’. Cheng, as expected of a man of his character, remains grudgingly apologetic/(unapolegetic?) about the whole affair.

Incidentally, both Jason and Calvin Cheng were from the Young PAP (YPAP), though the latter scooted out of that organisation in a hurry to become NMP once his ‘curiosity’ was sufficiently stoked. Back then, Cheng explained that he was ‘curious’ all the time, and that his YPAP stint wasn’t on a ‘whimsy’ or a fling even though he never collected his membership card, and one wonders if that’s the same reason given for being part of the MLC.

While inciting provocative moral issues like whether you should shoot a child in the face if it’s really a demon spawn from the Children of the Corn appears to be out of scope of the MLC’s mission and core values, they do frown upon commentators with a brazen lack of respect or those who engage in personal attacks.

One saga which casts doubt upon Cheng’s capacity to champion media literacy/etiquette was when he targetted playwright Alfian Bin Saat in a FB post, even threatening to invoke the ISA:

…In countries where Muslims are minorities, ISIS propaganda takes advantage of feelings of insecurities, fabricate lies that they are being oppressed and then thereafter persuade them to commit acts of violence against their alleged oppressors, all under a twisted version of Islam.

That is why in Singapore, we have to be careful as we have similar fault-lines that can be exploited.

People like Alfian Sa’at for example need to be careful of their irresponsible rhetoric, which allege racial discrimination against our Malay-Muslim brethren.

…The Government should watch commentators like Alfian Sa’at closely and if red lines are crossed, the use of the ISA on these domestic agitators should not be ruled out.

And then there’s this rant against the evil forces and ‘traitorous’ individuals that threaten to do Singapore (or rather, him) in, namely Kirsten Han and the folks at TOC.

…These tactics must also be fully condemned, and especially Singaporeans like Kirsten Han and the editors of TOC who would gang up with Western forces to do Singapore in. Kirsten Han especially needs to be stopped as she regularly writes for anti-Singapore publications to run us down, and to suck up to the Western liberals.

According to Cheng, enemies of the state are everywhere, not just kids with machine guns. I’m not sure such ‘right-wing’ rhetoric is becoming of a council member of the MLC. Cheng is currently a director of media company Juice Pte Ltd,  though he seems to be branding himself as a leading expert in Muslim religious affairs and terrorism with a wishlist of who should be rounded up and detained without trial.

Since he’s a fan of moral conundrum, here’s one delicious dilemma for Cheng to ponder upon: If you had young LKY tied up on a railway track and a train full of innocent children hurtling towards him, would you blow up the train given the choice?

By the way, how long is one entitled to call yourself ‘Former NMP’? I’m curious.

Society will lose out without a natural aristocracy

From ‘PM tackles questions on S’pore system, freedom of speech at IPS conference’, 4 July 2015, article by Joy Fang, Today

…On the dominance of countries such as the US, Sweden and Israel in innovation, science and technology, Dr Zakaria said these communities are common in that there is a culture of a lack of respect for or challenging authority.

“You spent six hours yesterday in a court trying to do this, to instil a culture of respect. And isn’t it exactly the opposite of what you need for your economic future?” the US journalist asked.

In response, Mr Lee said: “You want people to stand up, not scrape and bow. But if you don’t have a certain natural aristocracy in the system, people who are respected because they have earned that and we level everything down to the lowest common denominator, then I think society will lose out … If you end up with anarchy, it doesn’t mean that you’ll be delivered with brilliance.”

A BBC article in 2004 addressed our PM Lee as a ‘philosopher-prince‘ when he ascended ‘to the throne’, so to speak, following in the footsteps of his late father, who is also no stranger to being compared to royalty. In 1961, David Marshall lamented that workers were in the grip of fear under the rule of ‘Emperor’ Lee Kuan Yew, a title used again by ex Malaysia-PM Mahathir to describe LKY’s interventions into Malaysian politics.

When the founding PM passed away, the outpouring of tributes and grief was without doubt a grand farewell ‘fit for a king’. Granted, our leaders don’t go around asking people to kiss their feet or wear crowns, robes or wield sceptres, but if there’s one thing similar between our ‘socialist democracy/meritocracy‘ and any form of ‘aristocracy’, it’s that any dissent towards the elite, the ‘creme de la creme’, will not be tolerated, even if the target of the insult is dead. It’s like Thailand’s lese majeste, just with a lot more beating around the bush before you finally punish the bugger.

Which inevitably leads to, ironically, a paternalistic ‘bowing and scraping’ culture because people are afraid to throw eggs at their supreme leaders. This despite some members of this ‘aristocracy’ sending conflicting messages and assuring us that nobody will sue you if you call him a ‘stupid fool’. Nonetheless, our PM has no qualms about queuing up with everyday people for chicken wings, like a lord coming down to the village for a taste of hearty rat broth.

Ex president Devan Nair, in a 1983 speech at a President’s scholarship award ceremony, had this to say about ‘natural aristocracy’:

..And as in sports, there is a NATURAL ARISTOCRACY of talent in all the departments, disciplines and professions of public life. To abolish the natural aristocracy of talent would be to acknowledge the right of butchers to take over surgical wards in hospitals, or to have your teeth pulled out by carpenters rather than by qualified dentists.

Meaning, as one Total Defence song goes, ‘there’s a part for everyone’, whether you’re a serf, a general, a scientist, or the guy chopping pork at a wet market, and the only way to move up the social ladder is to prove your worth through hard work, sometimes with a stroke of luck.

In PM Lee’s context, however, it’s about ‘respect’, showing who’s boss, that one shouldn’t ‘play games’ and mess around with DA AUTHORITY, otherwise we’d all fall into a state of hellish anarchy, a situation which I suppose includes people not queuing up in an orderly manner for chicken wings anymore. Back in the old days, any duke or baron who got his pride wounded would challenge the offender to a gentleman’s duel. Today, our natural ‘aristocrat of aristocrats’ uses not a sword, nor a pistol, against the likes of Roy Ngerng, but a Davinder Singh.