Mudslinging, name-calling, manipulating of information, former boss revealing confidential HR discussions, last minute apology, no real debates on national issues etc.
These have caused some Singaporeans to get tired of GE2011.
What? So fast? Only after a few weeks?
Isn't this a decision to choose our Parliament bedfellows for the next 5 years? It's like a 5-year term marriage. Shouldn't the voters be spending more time and energy on getting to know them before committing?
Some voters have even openly stated on the internet that they have given up. They don't want to hear about the elections anymore. It's too noisy, too dirty, too much information, too tiring etc.
Politics Everywhere is the SameMudslinging, apologies, and everything dirty are part and parcel of politics. It would be great if the Singaporean brand of politics is different from the rest of the world, but hey... let's not kid ourselves.
Our political scene has been somewhat stunted after a vibrant period in the 60s. Though it is mildly spicy now, we should not for a moment think it is not dirty, and/or will not get dirtier.
Singapore is Different Where It MattersSadly, what's starkly different from the rest of the world is the lack of debate about national and social issues/policies.
The reason why there have been no real debates during the election is because the approved format does not allow for it. And you should all be aware of who/what sets the format of the elections. See here for more details on
the rules of the election game.
It's really merely a monologue at every rally, with the party talking loudly and one-sidedly to its audience. Then the mainstream media would pick up whichever points it likes (or has been instructed to), and publish that in the next day's news.
Then at the next evening's rally, some of these points may be picked up by the other party, but most are simply ignored.
This is the worst type of 'debate' ever. One with a go-between media filter and a 24-hour delay.
Dumbing Down of MessagesThat's just on the part of the performers and organisers.
But remember the audience also plays a part in this election. Regardless whether you like it, the messages conveyed at rally speeches, in the newspapers, through the evening news etc have to be diluted for the stomachs of the average Singaporeans. This means:
- Repetition of messages, and
- Only dealing with issues of obvious concern to the average Singaporeans.
For those seeking 'entertainment' from the elections, this is not a variety show.
For those who have been educated via and are used to the lecture system, just because the candidates stand behind a rostrum doesn't mean that the election rally speeches are a series of lectures, where you learn something new every session. Repetition is employed because it works best on the malleable underutilised human brain.
For those who seek 'door gifts', this is exactly the brand of politics we have been brought up with. I give you $$$ just before the election starts, I also give you goodies and/or lucky draw prizes during the election, I will also give you more goodies on your way out of the election period. It's like a meaningless Dinner & Dance. Doesn't matter whether the goodies (such as 2 mugs, 3 keychains, 4 cassette tapes, 5 thumbdrives etc) are useful to you, it only matters that you walk away with something so that you don't feel irrationally shortchanged for having participated.
As for content, there is really no point talking about issues such as national security, foreign relations, the labour tripartite, democratic processes, the ramifications of splitting of Singapore into distinct social classes etc during the election. Some have tried to do this, but it's clear that the audience has no fucking clue and doesn't want to hear about such issues.
The audience only wants to hear impassioned slamming of policies which are obvious to them, i.e. affect their everyday lives. E.g. the rising prices of a HDB flat, the rising cost of food, the rising cost of transport etc. People wanna hear and laugh at public scoldings of the incumbent, something they do not dare to carry out on their own.
And as such, those ministers, whose portfolios coincide with these obvious issues,
get more flak than others.
E.g. Mah Bow Tan (HDB) vs George Yeo (Foreign Relations).
There are such angry voices speaking out against MBT because of HDB flat prices, while few really know what George Yeo has or has not done well for his Foreign Relations portfolio and/or as an MP.
Re:
Unresolved Romanian ambassador hit and run incident in End 2009 & Jack Neo scandal in Mar 2010
here and
here. This guy openly supported his kaki who had repeatedly cheated on his wife by preying on young girls under his care. This PAP candidate has to be in the same male chauvinist basket with this other PAP candidate
Desmond Choo who uses analogies such as
"If your wife is unable to cook, there's no point. You must choose a wife who is able to do things for you".If MBT and GY had switched portfolios with each other, the angry voters would be targeting GY, regardless whether he 'appears to be a nice guy' by speaking gently, making a Gen Y video, or using social media.
Form over Function... Visible over Invisible... I digress...
Make A Prudent DecisionBack to the election game... So, the election rally speeches are really about rousing the crowd, drilling home the few key messages, and making sure that the average Singaporean learns (within a few weeks) to cross against the right box on Polling Day.
You should not be making your decision based on rally speeches and newspaper coverage alone. A once-in-5-year (for some, a lifetime) decision should be made after careful study and review of information gathered from as many sources as possible.
Trust yourself to be able to handle a lot more information than usual.
