| Subject: A little theory |
Author:
Dare
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 17:46:07 10/16/01 Tue
Author Host/IP: azure-ext.nus.edu.sg/137.132.3.5
In reply to:
jc
's message, "Re: Ah crap, I'm on their hitlist" on 12:18:56 10/16/01 Tue
Someone missed the joke.
anyway, here's a second hand theory, but worth mentioning.
>"hmph, i dun want to play with him anymore, he always
>wins...."
Erm, That kind of defeats the purpose of democratic voting, doesn't it? It's like being first place in a competition with only one participant. What's the point, then?
>SOmeday, the underdogs may win.. who knows... but like
>Prof Chua once said (NOT a direct quote), can u really
>imagine a world where the "underdogs" rule?
Look, in Singapore, the Underdogs (read= opposition parties)are usually worse than the PAP!!
>Personally i can't. Besides, i do think the PAP is
>doing a good job! Coz i can't seem to think of better
>alternatives. :P but that's just me.
well, I can just say that you're well-conformed to the government's expectations. good for you.
But this is NOT an issue of whether the PAP is doing a good job or not. It's about the idealogy behind voting in a democratic environment. Voting means making a choice. Which means you need 2 or more VALID alternatives. As you yourself say, you can't even think of a better alternative. The problem is that here the PAP IS the Government, not part of it.
Elections are like "Ok, you can vote for THESE GUYS, or that puny bunch of losers there. If you vote for the losers, we know who you are. Hmm, let's upgrade some flats." It's pathetic.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 
