Tuesday, April 12, 2005

Workers’ Party casino stand doesn’t sit well with Singapore bloggers 

The Workers’ Party (WP) releases its statement on its stand on the casino, but some Singapore bloggers are not impressed.

Wows at Singapore Ink thinks that the statement “is a commendable move” but complains that the WP’s statement lacks “any alternative suggestion as to how we might raise the revenue a casino might bring in, or how we might have an alternative to the casino as part of our new tourism blueprint”. He elaborates on his views further here.

Lzydata, also at Singapore Ink, agrees that the stand is “commendable”, but is somewhat disappointed that it largely echoes the views of religious organisations, the “family” lobby and sceptical Singaporeans, and does not adequately address the potential economic benefits.

Han is scathing in his comments about the WP. He thinks it is an opportunistic bunch of losers. He is “sick and tired of that old ‘family values’ bugbear used to justify every reactionary impulse to control”, whether it is used by the PAP or by the opposition. “If there’s one thing I cannot stand more than a oppressive government, its a stupid opposition.”

Reacting to a reader’s defence of the WP, Han adds fuel to the fire by criticising the WP of “distasteful paternalistic arrogance” — of proposing more interference and meddling in the affairs of people, of possessing socialist and communitarian tendencies.

If these reactions are any indication, it looks like the Worker’s Party has its work cut out for it if it hopes to win the support of Singaporeans.

Having said that, let’s not forget that last year, President George W Bush’s Republican Party got a lot of stick too in the United States before going on to win the election comfortably. And while some people may focus on the so-called “reality” or “truth” — “logic is the final arbiter of truth”, says Han — let’s not forget that elections and politics are ultimately about people.


Hi! Thanks for linking to my post & Wows's. While what you say about my opinion is not wrong, I would just like to add that my other main gripe with the WP's statement is the disingenuousness of it. (It has gained more significance to me because two WP-linked commenters don't even seem to get it.) Basically, many parts of the statement imply that we need more information from the government to come to a "balanced judgement," but the WP is only interested in information favourable to its case, on "social ills." This made me wonder about whether they have already closed their minds regarding the issue. If they have, & they are also trying to insinuate that the problem is really a less-than-forthcoming government, that's pretty opportunistic, to use Han's word.

Hey, thanks for the mention too. =)

Sometimes I wonder if people think I'm some crackpot... I do realise that my position at times does seem quite radical compared to the average Singaporean's.

Post a Comment

<< Home