In reference to the blog post above, I believe the author tends to simplify things, and not going into analysing the phenomenon of the emotions of the rally crowd in details. Emotions appear only on the surface, people don’t get angry just because of the rally talks, rather they agree from the bottom of heart with the analysis of the speakers. That doesn’t mean that they all are obsessively emotional and not thinking seriously for what it really matters or means to them. In a democratic country, where the people can freely participate in politics or policy formulation, still they show emotions to what favour them and what does not. They believe that, if the ruling party doesn’t concern about their causes, or take care of their interests, some of them (who maybe are the disappointed long-term supporters) choose to negotiate or pressure the ruling party to compromise into giving grounds (very often if the party refuses to oblige, they must decide it based on some other conflicting interests); some of them who do not see hope in the changes forthcoming from that ruling party they could go to the other competing party who can promise and champion their cause. In the end, democratic free and fair election is the only game in town to resolve all these conflicts to a certain extent. People can exert their free will and judgment into some representatives can truly represent their voices, and thus influence the making of new policies to deal with certain critical issues or concerns of people.
In a semi-democratic country like Singapore, to change within the system, if it were truly could be done, and people still lay hopes on that, I guess more of the people would choose this easier path to achieve the goals, and therefore people would be expected to be less angry towards the ruling party (government before the election, now interim not incumbent ). The reasoning is simple, because of the heavy tilted advantages (read: unfair and not-free election to a large significant extent) towards the ruling party, the ruling party will be almost certain to restore the power after the election, people choose cooperation would be easier to get what they wanted. Their causes and concerns, I believe, are what matter to them the most, and they don’t care which party as long as the party supports and listening their voices.
I think this explains why the people are angry or emotional… they are simply disappointed or disillusioned or lose hope in the ruling party that they can truly represent their voices, and implement the change they would like to see. If those were just petty issues, or non-political issues, it would be silly for singaporeans to express their dissatisfaction against the big-bro government for the fear of serious repercussion. The opposition parties would not be easily ‘inciting’ the emotions, certainly cannot fool the smart and calculative Singaporeans, if the undercurrent dissatisfaction of how life and politics go in Singapore on the ground simply doesn’t exist. If the previous government has done well all the time and capable at fixing the problems/issues raised by oppositions, they certainly have less to worry and sure they are still popular. If the indication points out that the government has failed and no (or less) indication of changes on offer, not blaming the ruling party then blame who? In the end, who is in power to formulate and enforce the policies to take care of the citizens in all aspects?
Therefore voting for opposition parties, signify the ruling party (if they still go on and win the elections) that the grassroot grouses can be ignored at their own peril, and let the capable new voices to perform and represent them, to push for the changes they would like to see. Voting for opposition, could probably be an informed decision, and cannot be regarded as 'not voting wisely' or emotional votes (that is why Malaysian ruling coalition BN always in denial). Remember, the result of the general election should always reflect the situation on the ground at that particular period of recent time (eg. 4-5 years performance of the last term), disregard the glorious past and how much the ruling party has been contributing to this country since independence. A political party must keep up the pace, evolve and be forward looking at shaping the future of the nation and society.
Always with good check and balance, the democracy is healthy and thriving and eventually beneficial to the people. Somehow I believe Singaporean politicians can carry out their responsibility professionally. So, make an informed decision and vote wisely!
(p/s: sure, voting for the ruling party could also be a wise and informed decision, i don't deny that, as long as you can also reason that out...after all, democracy cannot be just having one voice-- that is fake!)
(p/s 2: sure, that is not my country, people may condemn me for not fully understanding about their nation before comment, therefore i make quite an principal theoretical statement responses to that blog, from the standpoint of what democracy, election, and government mean. I will not go through point to point rebuttal of that blog, but many of the author's arguments i found are flaw, just reflects that she doesn't fully understand or appreciate the values of democracy and what are the responsibilities or functions of government.)
(p/s 3: For the case of my country and state, so far (and most likely still be valid at the point of next election) I would definitely vote for current PR state government (ruling parties) and vote against BN federal government. That is simply not emotional... i have too many reasons to do and say so. You would see how my argument and testimony work for the incumbent Selangor State government. 8-) )
No comments:
Post a Comment