Mr Brown podcast about the GRC comments from SM Goh is hilarous!
It is ironic that the initial aim of GRC-to ensure minority representation-has gotten a new twist- the seeking of elites, who are the minority of Singaporeans, to join the PAP.
Honestly, if you want to serve the country, fight an election based on your party’s and own calibre; it is least you can do! If you are not willing to fight an election and risk losing, then do not be an MP; you can become a civil servant or something else that is appointed.
I have proposed in numerous articles and posts that the government revamps the education system so as to foster a spirit of public service and geninue interests in politics.
My article last year:
Think Pills for Generation Lax: Young Singaporeans must shed their political disinterest
Sept 7 2005
I RECENTLY attended the Singapore International Foundation’s International Student Symposium, where I gained some insight into the political orientation of young Singaporeans.
While some were engaged on issues ranging from the role of the arts to the state of the political opposition here, the majority of the student audience either chatted among themselves or played with their mobile phones.
When asked if there would be more political pluralism in the next generation, a speaker replied that the next generation simply would not care enough to make a difference. This generated much laughter — probably of affirmation.
To encourage young Singaporeans to take a greater interest in our nation’s affairs, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his Government have taken steps to engage them since his first National Day Rally speech last year.
There is the National Youth Forum, last August’s Youth Consultation Exercise and the yearly Pre-University Seminars. But for these initiatives to have an impact, should they be expanded to embrace a larger, more diverse audience?
Youth today seem to have been depoliticised by the education system — which involves the learning of the official “inspirational form” of Singapore history; the discouragement of political discourse on campus; the absence of opportunities to study social science subjects such as sociology and politics at the O- and A-levels; and a set of prescribed “shared values” that emphasises consensual rather than competitive political participation.
Young Singaporeans either tend not to think critically or feel that being critical results in unwanted consequences or has no purposeful outcome.
If a generation of Singaporeans grows up with only basic notions of political participation, can Singapore expect good political leaders in the future? Or, for that matter, to be a global and cosmopolitan city, a vision set out by Mr Lee in his recent National Day Rally speech?
In order to ensure that our future leaders have empathy for Singaporeans, passion for Singapore, knowledge of political history and the ability to manage a complex economy and society, our education system must place a greater emphasis on critical thinking.
This can be achieved through a revaluation of the history curriculum to allow for discussion of the real political battles of pre- and post-1965 Singapore. History is not simply a linear story — it should involve a close examination of historical sources to discover how events and ideas came about.
For example, the political battles between the People’s Action Party (PAP) and the Barisan Socialis (BS) could be discussed in classrooms by examining oral accounts given by PAP and BS Members of Parliament. This could, in turn, lead to a fruitful discussion on the issues of welfare, communitarianism and Singapore’s struggle for nationhood.
Second, subjects that deal with the grey areas of policy-making and managing a rapidly evolving society should be studied. Doing so would help us understand the different ways in which individuals and groups make decisions, exercise power and respond to change.
Young Singaporeans, especially those pursuing post-secondary education, need the basic knowledge and tools to analyse the evolution of the political, societal, cultural and economic spheres in Singapore in a rapidly globalising world. Those interested in politics and sociology should have the opportunity to study these subjects at the O and A levels.
More importantly, issues ranging from the importance of good governance to the widening income gap and the potential for social divisions between Singaporeans and foreigners should be discussed in the classroom.
Teachers, peers, the media, politicians and speakers with non-traditional views could help students better understand the implications of the social and political issues of the day.
Mr Lee is justified in his praise for the compassion, resourcefulness, courage and strength shown by Singaporeans over the past 40 years.
However, if we do not address the importance of critical thinking, we risk creating a highly educated populace that is unthinking, complacent and lacking in passion for Singapore. Will the next generation then fail to see politics as a form of public service and a vocation?
