I am 16 this year, still studying in school, and for some reason, finding myself to be unexpectedly more than simply aggitated by the growing number of youths who are blindly voting for the opposition parties.
I have two minds about this trend. I want to pay PAP back and have them win this election so that they can strengthen their hold over Singapore to show what they can do and sway future votes to them, but at the same time I want the opposition to win, and then do a horrendous job of governing the nation so that PAP will be voted back into power, unanimously, unopposedly.
Singaporeans need to know what PAP can and will do for them. I confess to be biased, because I have been benefitting under this PAP umbrella. I live a fulfilling life, I have a family, friends, loved ones. I have probably lived in cotton candy for the entire of my life. I have enjoyed benefits of PAP's policies, and there will be some policies that will never affect me, such as the mandatory National Service (NS) for all (fit) Singaporean men.
I confess to be in love with the PAP, partly due to brainwashing by the "newly" introduced Social Studies lessons in school, and partly due to my own discretion. I am, however, a little unnerved by the high-and-mighty attitude that they give off, especially good old Harry Lee Kuan Yew (LKY, as we affectionately call him). There was one comment he made which made it to the Saturday Straits Times which really annoyed me, PAP supporter or not.
I am surprised by just how obsessed I am with this party. I have never known myself to be so involved with such political issues. I have never known myself to be such a staunch supporter of the PAP. I just thought I was someone who would be objective about things like these. I...don't know what to say about this new revelation. However, now that I know this, I am not going to try to change it.
I have read extensively on this year's General Elections, and I am very fearful for Singapore's future. As far as I know, 50% of all voters this year will be first time voters, with a large number of them youths who are opposition fanatics. I have tried, believe me, to see what is so good in the opposition that garnered the empathy of people like me (or even people older, and supposedly wiser, than me). I didn't succeed, apparently. I would like to believe that this is because there isn't anything in them that would prosper Singapore, but their tongues.
I love Singapore. This, I have always known, and will never regret. I am shamelessly patriotic, this I will admit. Singapore loved me back and gave me the bed of roses (sans thorns) that I sleep on. Singapore is more than just another country to me. She is my home. Nothing will ever be like her. Everything that I love is with her. I am hopelessly, undeniably, in love with my homeland, and therefore I want the best for her (and by selfish extension, myself). I don't want to see Singapore fall into the hands of undeserving government, to be destroyed after having been built up by sweat, blood, and tears. I cannot just stand by and watch while her fate may just spiral down into no return. I am frustrated at my inability to vote. Why can't I vote? I resent myself for not being 21. I want to be able to shape her future. I detest myself for being helpless.
These are my reasons for supporting the PAP, none of them baseless, I assure you, but still bias, as you can see.
1) They have served us for so many years, and they have served us well. When Singapore was nothing more than a newly orphaned child, discarded and unwanted by Malaysia, PAP cried with her. But they did not stop there. They gathered the broken nation in their hands and nurtured it. In every sense, Singapore became theirs. They, as her parent, educated her. They clothed her. They groomed her. They prospered her. She became beautiful. She became loved. They, on the other hand, stood by, proud parents, watching their child, guiding her. If given the choice, will you discard your parents like Malaysia did Singapore?
Let us give them what they deserve. Let us give them a resounding applause. Bring them back again, and acknowledge them.
2) Their proposals are by far the most sound of the rest. I have a few here with me, taken from 28 April 2011's special GE report, and I will thus compare. I find it ridiculous, so stupidly ridiculous, that the youths of today who profess to be educated, can still vote for the opposition after they have read these absurd proposals. Or maybe they're too blinded they don't bother reading. I will be comparing some of PAP's proposals with that of their (supposedly) strongest opposition, Worker's Party (WP). I think most of the WP's proposals are rather workable, and can sometimes be better than the PAP's. When you compare the rest of the opposition to the WP...I have absolutely no idea what the rest of them are doing. The WP is a much better competition than them...
I have, obviously chosen to omit some categories to compare because of a few reasons, mainly that the WP is better than the PAP there, I have no idea what they're talking about, or that I simply have no idea how to judge them. As you can see, I'm not a very objective person.
- GST "PAP: No raise in GST for the next 5 years, GST to help fund Workfare, bursaries and subsidies; poor get more than what they pay for GST" "WP: ...I'm not sure what their plans are, but there's a picture of 3 rice bowls in that box in place of any text at all..."
- Is one to assume that the WP has no idea what they are to do with the GST? Well, that's very "far-sighted" of them. What do they intend to do if they become the government? Store the GST away in locked vaults? Add it to our national reserves? Swindle it away? They're not promising us anything. And so, on my part, I am not promising them any votes.
- As for the PAP, they have a goal, something to adhere to. Isn't it right to spread money equally amongst the rich and the poor? Well, more evenly spread, anyway. If anything, I'd say that this plan is still a little sketchy, but it means well, to narrow the income gap, and I say it is better by far than the rice bowls in WP's box. What on earth do they mean anyway? A space filler?
- Transport "PAP: Invest $60 billion to double MRT network to shorten commuting times and reduce crowding while keeping fares affordable" "WP: Nationalise public transport - should be provided as a public good and not for profit. A National Transport Corporation will provide services on basis of cost and depreciation recovery. Public buses should be exempted from taxes like electronic road pricing (ERP). Buses can conver to clean fuel"
- Hmm, clean fuel, huh? They're actually already trying to do that for the public transport, not just buses. How much do you think it will cost to do so? That's a neat idea when the eco-friendliness is brought to the discussion table, but do you think that the Land Transport Authority (LTA) isn't already working on that? I believe they're already looking into clean fuel, and MRTs are more or less beginning to "reuse" the energy that they tend to lose due to friction during stopping. And public transport is already being promoted as the choice mode of transport. While it is a good idea to adjust prices to complement the rate of depreciation and whatnot, don't you think it will get a little messy? What about those who pay via coins? What, do they have to pay till the 1 cent? I would also like to add that, if the system isn't going to profit, it is entirely likely that it will crash and close one day. It needs to be able to support itself and upgrade itself. It can't always rely on the government to fund everything it needs, because funds might run out one day (especially since the WP seems to have no idea of what to do with the GST...).
- The PAP's proposal, I will admit, is still a sketchy idea. Broadening the MRT network will indeed shorten commuting times, but only for certain routes. And I honestly don't see how this will help keep fares affordable, unless, because of shortening of routes, the "pay by distance" charges are being reduced. This investment will hopefully pay off in the long run if and only if the system continues to run.
- Political System "PAP: Keep evolving and improving democracy. New election rules to encourage greater competition and give alternative coices larger representation in Parliament" " WP: Send ammendments to the Constitution to select committee of MPs from various parties. Cut voting age from 21 to 18. End GRC, Non-Constituency MP (NCMP) and Nominated MP (NMP) systems. Abolish elected presidency. Benchmark ministerial pay against political office of developed nations"
- Oh, I will definitely support that ammendment to select committee of MPs from various parties, especially if some other party but PAP is in power. I somehow don't trust other parties. It is a definite NO to the lowering of voting age. Singaporeans now are already too myopic to see what is good for them. I don't think we want to involve even younger voters in the voting process. The screw-up, I'm afraid, will be too large to handle. I am not fond of the GRC idea either. I don't want an overwhelming population drowning out my voice which screams for the PAP. I actually think that it's quite mean of PAP to introduce GRCs to manipulate the votes, but...if it helps them stay in power, keep it. I have no idea what NCMPs and NMPs are, so I shall refrain from commenting. Abolish elected presidency? Hang on a moment, the president is the people's FACE. Can't we choose who to elect as our president? I'm not too sure about benchmarking the pay, because if so, corruption...can happen. Singapore is known for it's lack of corruption, so I don't want to risk losing the trust of MNCs and other foreign investors.
- ...I have no idea what to say to the PAP. On one hand, I want them to stay in power, but to do that they must at least put on a facade of democracy, so they will have to introduce competition, but on the other hand, I don't even want to let them a chance to slip from power, because knowing Singaporeans, at the sight of opposition, they will clamour for it, and PAP...will be left in the dirt. They, who have served us well, will be discarded. The PAP is being "delightfully" vague about evolving and improving democracy. It will have to elaborate a tonne more than that to convince me, despite my pro-PAP-ness.
- Education "PAP: Deploy wuality teachers in all schools, provide outstanding facilities for all schools, open more pathways for children of diverse abilities, give more support to children with learning difficulties, widen range of university, polytechnic and ITE programmes, have more and higher-quality childcare centres and kindergartens" "WP: Ideal learning begins with an inspired teacher in a small class size of 20 pupils, consider a primary-secondary integrated scheme instead of stressful PSLE, best that children cultivate love for learning rather than being groomed for high-stakes exams, increase tuition grants for local undergraduates instead of giving the same for all nationalities"
- The WP seems keen on reducing studying stress. I heard from my tuition teacher that during one of their rallies, they cited one case of PSLE stress-induced suicide as a reason for abolishing the PSLE. Hmm, one? Has anyone ever diagnosed the kid with depression? Did anyone know if he or she was suffering from something that caused the stress to build up? Or is it just ordinary stress that killed him or her? Which one? We need more information. Also, with the inherent "kiasu-ness" of Singaporean parents, don't you think it's rather impossible that they'll support this "no PSLE" kind of education? Interestingly enough, it is because of the stringent and stressful education system that we have here in Singapore which allows Singaporeans studying in overseas colleges to keep up with the stress in their new school. There have been a couple of dropouts in those Ivy League colleges because the students are unable to keep up with the stress. I believe close to none of them have been Singaporeans, and I also believe that Singaporeans studying in those colleges find themselves thankful to have experienced the stress in Singapore. I find it rather funny that the WP wants to reduce class size. That would mean something close to a doubling of teaching staff. How many Singaporeans here wish to be teachers, raise your hands. None? Well, now that's a dilemma. Many Singaporeans have dreams and aspirations NOT related to teaching. It's not so easy to double teaching force. Well, then another solution will be to bring in teachers, you say. Let's see, oh, Singapore isn't already crowded enough with foreign talents. You want to bring more in? Well, we might be able to squeeze in one or two more without inciting the anger of our people...so, how will the WP deal with this? I believe that the PAP is already working on cultivating interest in children, and that they've already abolished examinations in Primary 1 and focussing on interest-based learning instead. But please don't abolish all examinations...
- I believe that quality teaching instead of quantity teaching is a more viable option in Singapore. While WP focuses on small teacher to student ratios, PAP probably acknowledges that it will be difficult to have this accomplished so quickly, and has turned to quality teaching. Singaporeans are rather notoriously well-known to be rather good at quality control, so this shouldn't be an issue. Quality teaching may also overcome the issue of having too many students to a class, which hence negates the need for too many teachers (and possibly by extension, more "much disliked" foreigners teaching our children). It is nice to note that PAP is looking to cater to more diverse needs of the children, which WP is not, and will try to help students of different needs. I sincerely hope that they get an art college here, though...a reputed art college...I'm not sure if they already have one, actually, but never mind. Comparing this "suited to various needs" approach to the "less stress, more fun" approach by the WP, I can safely say that the PAP's seems to be more practical. Reducing stress in the education system might also cause students to slack (I have been experiencing this phenomenon, actually, due to the fact that I am not required to sit for GCE "O" Levels), which is most definitely not a good sign.
3) The opposition don't show me that they have enough experience. By rallying the people using incorrect methods (see above in my comment about WP's education), I believe that they are appealing to the wrong desires of Singaporeans. We are looking to better Singapore, not to build a fantasy bubble around ourselves and live in self-created utopia. They make you feel good, and don't you dare deny you don't that you can now oppose authority without being accosted for trying to launch a coup d'etat on the government. I wonder, is this what drugs feels like? I haven't personally been to any rally, so I can't say a thing, but I'm sure, PAP is fighting in their own way, we are just too blind to see it.
Be practical. Vote for long-term security, not spur-of-the-moment satisfaction.
Because of all these things, I support PAP.
I live in Aljunied, where the fiercest battle between PAP and WP is probably going to take place, and in all likelihood, if Singaporeans still continue to get attracted to WP, PAP is going to lose, and I am going to feel like the world has ended. I don't feel safe with the WP. I don't feel safe with any party. The only party I can safely say will bring Singapore security is the PAP, because they have a track record.
Some may argue that I'm not giving the opposition a chance, and I say, yes, I am not. I play safe. Unless PAP suddenly takes a turn for the worse, I am a PAP fanatic through and through. Because of this, my two minds about the election outcome are at war with each other.
My first mind, the one that wants it to be PAP forever without them ever stepping down, really desires that PAP wins this elections again. However, logically speaking, even if they do win this one, I am very fearful that they may not win the next one.
My other mind says this, that Singaporeans need to go through a period of suffering under another party's rule to see how good PAP has been for us. On one hand, I am really hoping that the opposition that goes into power doesn't screw it up too badly, because whatever you say, Singapore is still Singapore, my homeland, my love. I cannot bear to watch her lose the status which she has spent so many years painstakingly building. I can't stand to see PAP's hard work go to ruins like that. On the other hand, I hope they screw it up so bad that the people no longer consider them, and bring PAP back. Singaporeans need a rude awakening, else they won't see the light. We are just...so incredibly, annoying thick-headed like that. Mm, durians.
Honestly speaking, I have no idea what to think about my second mind. I really wish PAP to come into power for a while to come due to fear of letting Singapore crumble to ruin again under the governance of another party, but I just can't help but fear for Singapore's future if this actually comes true. I am worried. I am afraid. I want safety. I want PAP. But Singaporeans need to see for themselves. They need to go through. But I am afraid that after they do, when PAP goes back into power, Singapore will lose her affluence should some irreversible damage occur to her economy, her society, her reputation. I don't want to take that risk.
I am torn. To ensure PAP's "reign" would mean to give Singaporeans a rude awakening, which would mean that Singapore may end up in the depths of no return. To ensure Singapore's prosperity, the people will have to vote PAP in, but then they would never get to experience "terror" under another party's reign, and there will always remain the fear of losing Singapore to the opposition. Of course, I seem to be avoiding the possibility that the opposition might do a good job, but in all honesty, I don't believe that they will. Their ideas are lofty, way too lofty.
I want Singapore. I want PAP. Somehow, along the way, I have already equated PAP to Singapore's prosperity, and I won't be undoing that anytime soon, so it seems.
I acknowledge that PAP may be a little too controlling, a little too proud, but hey, which parent isn't unbearably overbearing? If they aren't, they aren't parents. They don't want the nasty influences to be upon their children. They desire the best, and you can say that the best education is, sometimes, very strict. I would rather they control everything, than have people running around in the streets in a free for all, with riots every day and bodies strewn over the streets. Well, I'll try to believe in Singaporeans, that they won't run wild, but who's to say?
Vote PAP.
I certainly will, once I reach 21, unless PAP suddenly declines in efficiency till another party actually becomes better than them. However, who is to say that I still won't be hopelessly in love with PAP that I will want to give them another chance despite what they have failed to do? I still support PAP after the Mas Selamat incident. I still support PAP. I probably will for the rest of my life.
I vote for stability.
I've heard that other parties wish to abolish the death sentence. Go ahead. I'd like to see what kind of a mess the crime scene in Singapore ends up like after that happens.
I've heard that other parties wish to abolish the GST. Go ahead. I'd like to see what kind of services the government can provide with so little funding.
I've heard that other parties wish to shorten NS training time. Go ahead. I'd like to see how Singapore can cope with war in this new age with this shrinking population.
I've heard that other parties wish to withdraw millions from our national reserve. Go ahead. I'd like to see how we can cope in times of economic crisis.
Go ahead. IF YOU DARE. If you keep your children's safety and future in mind, I believe you will vote for PAP.
Once again, with all my heart, I wish for this:
Vote PAP.
Disclaimer here: I am a die-hard PAP fanatic, so you may not want to take every word that I say to be some sort of absolute truth. I twist facts. I'm afraid I can't separate my love for PAP from being objective, so this I apologise. Well, let's just say that I'm practising for some persuasive speech essay.
Haha, I sound like a propaganda-ist...
