Search the Community

I have to SALUTE this lady. This is not the first time she is voicing her concern towards those managing our country. 3 CHEERS TO YOU Ms CATHERINE LIM. http://sg.news.yahoo.com/pap-is-incapable-...herine-lim.html

One of Singapore's best-known authors Catherine Lim said on Friday that the People's Action Party (PAP) is incapable of reinventing itself. Her view was in response to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's speech at a PAP convention last November where he said that the party has to reinvent itself to "build a new PAP for a new era". The 70-year-old was speaking at socio-political blog The Online Citizen's (TOC) Awards Night where she was conferred the Lifetime Achievement Award by Singapore People's Party secretary-general Chiam See Tong. Lim, who is a frequent critic of the government, is best known for her social commentary story in 1994, titled The PAP and the People - A Great Affective Divide, which sparked controversy with the ruling party. Since then, she has published numerous novels and political commentaries. In her acceptance speech, Lim said that even if the party can achieve reinvention, what

I took it off Yahoo. A long read, but very well written. ======================== COMMENTARY By Catherine Lim For 17 years, since 1994, I had been writing commentaries on various issues in the Singapore political scene. Whether these were long-standing problems such as the emotional divide between the PAP leadership and the people, or specific issues such as the controversial increase in ministerial salaries, the articles invariably identified the underlying cause as the unrelenting authoritarianism of the PAP government, with all that this implies of stern, punitive measures used by the leaders, and of timid compliance shown by the led. Even as I made a plea for a political opening up, I could not shake off the pessimism that the PAP's obsession with control would at best allow only a very limited version or, worse, only a semblance of it. Now GE 2011 has changed all that. There were four distinct issues that I had brought up in my commentaries, in all of which I had been proved wrong by GE 2011. 1) A climate of fear. I had come to believe that the PAP's systematic use of fear as a strategy to silence critics was so successful that it had become a permanent feature of the Singapore political landscape. During election time, it would spawn all sorts of rumours about how a powerful and vindictive government could find out who you voted for, and punish you accordingly. But the climate of GE 2011 was far from fearful. I saw to my amazement, in the days leading up to the election, the emergence of a large group of young Singaporeans who were articulate, confident and bold, speaking their minds freely and fearlessly in the mainstream and social media, and showing open, unabashed support for the opposition. Their confidence seemed infectious, spreading quickly among the people. Never again can I write about a population muted by fear and its contemptible off-shoot, self censorship. 2) A politically na

GENERAL ELECTION Surprised by 'cooling off' idea MY REACTION to the recent announcement of the 'cooling off' period of 24 hours before Polling Day ('24 hours to cool off before Polling Day', Dec 1), was of great surprise, followed by a single thought: 'Why, the People's Action Party (PAP) must be feeling very insecure.' My analysis of the situation went something like this: The decision must have been driven by self-interest. It meant that the PAP is convinced the new ruling will give it an advantage at the polls, that is, more Singaporeans would vote for the PAP than if there were no ruling. Since 'cooling off' can only refer to emotions, there must be a PAP fear that the wildly enthusiastic display of emotions by the large crowds at opposition rallies in past general elections is likely to be exploited by the opposition in this coming one. It will build up to a climax towards the end, affecting the voting pattern, and hence, must be prevented. The emotional approach, though it has its uses, is completely alien - and contemptible - to the pragmatic, no-nonsense PAP leadership that has always prided itself on its rational approach, solidly backed by charts and figures showing its many achievements, and by constant reminders of the good life made possible by strong, efficient leadership. Despite its distrust of emotions, the PAP realises that in the coming General Election, emotions could actually become the rogue factor in the political equation. For, the electorate will include a large number of new, young voters who belong to the noisy, rumbustious world of the Internet, where emotions rather than cool reason prevail. The opposition is sure to make opportunistic use of this new force. Since the PAP could never adopt the 'If you can't beat them, join them' strategy of using the same emotional approach, the only way is to reduce its impact especially at the point where it is expected to be maximal, that is, just before Polling Day itself. Hence the 24-hour clampdown. I was surprised that a shrewd leadership like the PAP could come up with a ruling that first, is of doubtful value and could even backfire; second, exposes an anxiety that could provide political fodder for the opposition, and third, exposes an insecurity that must make even its supporters wonder about how strong, after more than four decades of leadership, the bond between the Government and the people really is. Catherine Lim (Ms)