Slashdot Mirror


Singapore Paper Yanks Blogger Critique of Gov't

Hou writes "mr brown — aka Lee Kin Mun, Singapore's most famous blogger, has been writing a weekly column for a local Singaporean newspaper called 'Today.' Recently, one of his columns was more critical than the powers-that-rule liked, which was a satire on the increasing costs of living in Singapore. They issued a statement through the press secretary for the Ministry of Information, Communication and the Arts, and sternly chastised Mr. Brown for having expressed anti-government views. Not surprisingly, a few days later, Mr. Brown posted a notice saying that his column had been suspended by Today. " (More below.) "Here's a snip from the government representative's statement:
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government. (...) If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.
Link to post on mr brown's blog, and the report from Reporters Without Borders. More blog entries can be found from fellow outraged bloggers here."

46 comments

  1. Hmmm by neonprimetime · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Cost of watching World Cup is up. Price of electricity is up. Comfort's taxi fares are going up.

    Isn't that called inflation?

    1. Re:Hmmm by KingEomer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes it is. However, it is usually possible to keep inflation to a minimum via fiscal and economic policy. Notice the Canadian and American governments' raising of interest rates in the past few years. They are cooling off the economy to try and a keep a lid on inflation.

    2. Re:Hmmm by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      One can also 'reduce' inflation by fscking with they numbers. Kind of like leaving food/energy out of the most common US inflation numbers.

  2. This is news how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Singapore is a very nice country (I've lived there), but really, to call it a democracy is a farce. It's authoritarian rule. There's just enough "democratic hooks" that get everyone thinking it's a free country, when it really isn't. (If you remember Malaysia where the leader of the opposition party was arrested on some trumped up homosexuality charges that really weren't proven, just he ended up jailed anyhow because the ruling party felt threatened in the opposition's rise).

    It's just the government is a far more subtle about what they do, but yes, all media is censored (TV, movies, newspapers, Internet (you have to use their proxy servers - no fake TCP RST's here)). When you visit, take note. From the looks of it, it looks a lot like any western country - well run, good order, clean streets, fairly affluent. You just don't notice that the government has a lot of control in many areas. (It's a bit of the "let foreigners pour money into this country, but don't let them dare infect our 'culture'" - there's a lot of anti-foreigner bias in Singapore, though you'll have a very hard time getting someone to admit it). China's worse, yes, but they're not as subtle about it. If the ruling party of Singapore feels threatened by what you write, well, expect to disappear. This guy got off lucky by only having his column cancelled (so far).

    1. Re:This is news how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      i would disagree about the part on people disappearing. PAP (the governing party) has a tendency to sue people for defamation. Also, they get discredited in the local media (since local media is controlled by the PAP). Alternative views on singapore politics can be found from this blog: http://singabloodypore.blogspot.com/

    2. Re:This is news how? by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 3, Informative

      "From the looks of it, it looks a lot like any western country - well run, good order, clean streets,..."

      That's the first sign that something is amiss.

      "If the ruling party of Singapore feels threatened by what you write, well, expect to disappear."

      And, we have confirmation.

    3. Re:This is news how? by nursegirl · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I remember that when I was in Singapore a few years ago, the national media there was full of articles talking about how their students had shown high ratings in maths and sciences, but low ratings in things related to creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship . The advantage of a culture of control is that Singapore is clean, organized and a great place to head the Pacific region branches of multinationals. The problem is that innovation and growth will always come from elsewhere.

      Innovation, lack of strict governmental control, and freedom to think differently are intimately connected.

    4. Re:This is news how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's been a very long time since anyone was "disappeared" in Singapore, but otherwise, yes, that's pretty much how most folks describe the country. It's worth noting that there are those here in the US who wouldn't mind seeing a single-party state with tight control of the media replace the current regime.

    5. Re:This is news how? by phritz · · Score: 2

      A friend of mine, currently studying in the United States, faced a similar situation for criticizing some funding program of Singapore's science agency. Philip Yeo, the head of Singapore's science agency, threatened sue my friend into submission and forced him to post a pre-written 'apology' on his blog. Not only that, but Mr. Yeo has continued to harass my friend even after the apology was posted, by sending him crazy, childish emails. This is how it appears to work in Singapore. Idiot arrogant bureaucrats such as Mr. Yeo have free reign as petty tyrants and the blessing of the government to crush anyone who criticizes them. It's sick, and it's most certainly not democracy.

  3. I heard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I heard that in Singapore they'll cut your tongue off for spitting in the street!

    1. Re:I heard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what if you were Playing skin flute?

  4. Well thank God by IAmTheDave · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well thank God I live in the United States!

    --
    Excuse my speling.
    Making The Bar Project
  5. And soon.... by Twixter · · Score: 2, Funny
    The government also issued the following statment:

    "It is also not the place of the newspapers or media to abuse their position to take support, or take aggressive and critical stanaces that will undermine confidance of local or community busineses, forgien governments, or celebrities. As such, we will be changing the name of Newspapers to the more appropriate name Blankpaper. You'll be able to by this blank paper at any store and write whatever you want on it as long as you don't show it to anyone else. The End."

    --

    -Todd

    Put down the sig, and step away from the computer.

  6. Democracy? by spykemail · · Score: 1

    You can't have a Democracy without free speech, because even if everyone votes against it there's always the possibility that they could change their minds - in which case, they would need it in order to get it back.

    I hope I didn't confuse too many people just now.

    1. Re:Democracy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well they dont have a democracy. There are no opposing candidates in a large number of constituencies (due to the opposition candidate being disqualified and the areas that vote for the opposition are blatently ignored by the ruling government when it comes to spending on infrastructure). The last 'ruler' Goh was progressive and tried to bring reforms to the country. The current 'ruler' seems to belive in a single party system.

    2. Re:Democracy? by spykemail · · Score: 1

      A single party system... isn't that an oligarchy?

  7. Speaking of offending the higher powers... by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

    News to me, but apparently, you can now get in deep legal poo in the U.S. for speaking "contemptuously of the president"

    --
    There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    1. Re:Speaking of offending the higher powers... by rob1980 · · Score: 1

      The rules change when you join the military - which, by the way, is entirely voluntary.

    2. Re:Speaking of offending the higher powers... by Erwos · · Score: 1

      I just want to point out that the guy in question was a military officer. He's a got a different set of rules to follow than civilians. Put the president of the context of "commanding officer", and it's fairly sensible to not allow contempuous talk - bad for discipline!

      Besides, let's face it: that's only a tack-on to his real offense, which was refusing to go to Iraq.

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    3. Re:Speaking of offending the higher powers... by andphi · · Score: 1
      There's a nuance here you may not grasp. Mr. Watada is an US Army officer; the President is in his Chain of Command (specifically, at the very top of it). Speaking ill of one's superiors in public is insubordination. AFAIK, members of the armed forces do not have the same 1st (and possibly 4th and 5th) amendments rights as the rest of us. What Mr. Watada did was criminal.

      Full disclosure: I'm an Army brat married to an Air Force brat. My father was an Air Force brat. Two of his brothers went Army; one went Air Force (we talk to him anyway). My wife's grandfather went ashore at Normandy on D-Day. My family has mass quantities of experience with the military, its laws, and its culture.

    4. Re:Speaking of offending the higher powers... by Guuge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, the military follows a different set of rules. So does Singapore. So does China. It's still a restriction of free speech in every case. That doesn't make it wrong necessarily, but we should call it what it is.

  8. The message is by Herkum01 · · Score: 1

    The media has greater access than a normal person so they must be a-political. If you dare criticize the government, it is political because that is the only type of problems that a government has. Noone in the government would put their self-interest before public needs!

    Take that Mr. Brown!

  9. Read the Paper's Response by DaftShadow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have to be honest, the paper's response was *spot* on. It was not, as the slashdot summary made it seem to be, a political retraction. It was a specific commentary describing what the blogger's article did wrong and why. Not only that, it addressed every point of sarcasm that the blogger presented in his article, and did such with reason.

    I don't claim to say that this makes the Singapore government a different beast (how did we start talking about the govt anyhow?), but I do care to say that it changes the entire situation. This blogger does not deserve to be a Matyr. He ranted and raved about how bad he's got it, and passed blame. If he felt that one or any of these programs were a failure, there are far better approaches to answering that question. I can't rant and rave like a lunatic too, but it doesn't make me a journalist.

    - DaftShadow

    1. Re:Read the Paper's Response by kifo · · Score: 1

      Well to me, the blogger's article might come across as rather satirical but it does not appear at to be ill worded or lunatic. You can read the whole article here: http://www.todayonline.com/articles/127762.asp# http://www.todayonline.com/articles/127762.asp#

      By mr brown,

      THINGS are certainly looking up for Singapore again. Up, up, and away.

      Household incomes are up, I read. Sure, the bottom third of our country is actually seeing their incomes (or as one newspaper called it, "wages") shrink, but the rest of us purportedly are making more money.

      Okay, if you say so.

      As sure as Superman Returns, our cost of living is also on the up. Except we are not able to leap over high costs in a single bound.

      Cost of watching World Cup is up. Price of electricity is up. Comfort's taxi fares are going up. Oh, sorry, it was called "being revised". Even the prata man at my coffeeshop just raised the price of his prata by 10 cents. He was also revising his prata prices.

      So Singaporeans need to try to "up" their incomes, I am sure, in the light of our rising costs. Have you upped yours?

      We are very thankful for the timing of all this good news, of course. Just after the elections, for instance. By that I mean that getting the important event out of the way means we can now concentrate on trying to pay our bills.

      It would have been too taxing on the brain if those price increases were announced during the election period, thereby affecting our ability to choose wisely.

      The other reason I am glad with the timing of the cost of living increases and wages going down, is that we can now deploy our Progress Package to pay for some of these bills.

      Wait, what? You spent it all on that fancy pair of shoes on the day you saw your money in your account? Too bad for you then. As I break into my Progress Package reserves to see if it is enough to pay the bills, I feel an overwhelming sense of progress. I feel like I am really staying together with my fellow Singaporeans and moving forward.

      There is even talk of future roads like underground expressways being outsourced to private sector companies to build, so that they, in turn, levy a toll on those of us who use these roads.

      I understand the cost of building these roads is high, and the Government is relooking the financing of these big road projects.

      Silly me, I thought my road tax and COE was enough to pay for public roads.

      Maybe we can start financing all kinds of expensive projects this way in future. We could build upgraded lifts for older HDB blocks, and charge tolls on a per use basis.

      You walk into your new lift on the first floor, and the scanner reads the contactless cashcard chip embedded in your forehead. This chip would be part of the recently-announced Intelligent Nation 2015 plan, you know, that initiative to make us a smart nation?

      So you, the smart contactless-cashcard-chip-enhanced Singaporean would go into your lift, and when you get off at your floor, the lift would deduct the toll from your chip, and you would hear a beep.

      The higher you live, the more expensive the lift toll.

      Now you know why I started climbing stairs for exercise, as I mentioned in my last column. I plan to prepare for that day when I have to pay to use my lift. God help you if some kid presses all the lift buttons in the lift, as kids are wont to do. You will be beeping all the way to your flat.

      The same chip could be used to pay for supermarket items. You just carry your bags of rice and groceries past the cashierless cashier counter, and the total will be deducted from your contactless cashcard automatically.

      You will not even know you just got poorer. And if your contactless cashcard runs out of funds (making it a contactless CASHLESS cashcard), you just cannot use paid services.

      The door of the

  10. How Is this Funny??!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I know the poster and moderator who modded this "funny" are trying to be ironic jackasses, but the comment is absolutely dead on. Whatever faults or problems you have with the US, there can be no denying the freedom of speech we have and uphold.

    Millions have fought and died defending the most basic right of the US, you kiddies should stop being glib about it.

    1. Re:How Is this Funny??!! by IAmTheDave · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I know the poster and moderator who modded this "funny" are trying to be ironic jackasses, but the comment is absolutely dead on. Whatever faults or problems you have with the US, there can be no denying the freedom of speech we have and uphold.

      Actually, my statement was a bit of a back-handed compliment. Yes, the US does have more freedoms than do most countries - and it seems that Singapore is coming up quite the jerks on this one. But with the feds looking at the possibility of prosecuting the NY Times for treason for reporting leaked classified information, and the prosecution of ordinary citizens under the espionage act for even possessing information that is considered classified...

      Then add domestic spying, etc. - and you can see that we have a government of extreme secrecy that WILL go to measures to stop people from critisizing the current administration. How many times has the current Executive branch of this government used the State Secrets privledge to dismiss lawsuits against it that seek to check the power of the federal government against the Constitution?

      Don't be surprised at Singapore. In at least one forseeable scenario, you're looking at the future of the United States.

      --
      Excuse my speling.
      Making The Bar Project
    2. Re:How Is this Funny??!! by johansalk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The US is fast becoming a place similar to those farcical democracies in the Middle East where you have liberties in image but in practice your exercise of them is either limited or ineffectual. The republicans seem to have learnt quite well from their Middle Eastern allies how to present the image of democratic particpation to their citizens while the game results are laregly fixed behind closed doors, and Americans are proving even more gullible than Middle-Easterners, at least Middle-Easterners know a bullshit when they see it. So you want to exercise your democratic rights and clown about? Well, go ahead, we'll send you our shills to clown against you and EVEN clown along with you. Religious bullshit, divisive non-issues, glorification of the leader and the troops, bought politicians, suspect elections, O'Reilly vs Olbermann, and so on. Had enough of your clowning, had fun, well revv it up, enterain the folks some more, torn your vocal cords yet? We're still winning elections and getting our business done. Seen it all in the Middle East, now seeing it in the US.

    3. Re:How Is this Funny??!! by raduf · · Score: 1


          I'm way to sleepy to google for it (just woke up) but US is about one-third from the top when it comes to personal freedom & stuff. Nowhere near the top. You do make the most noise about it, though, i'll admit to that.

  11. Free speech in the Military by nuggz · · Score: 1

    The rules of conduct for a serving officer of a countries military are different than those of an ordinary citizen.

    According to the link you posted the US government seems to be behaving very reasonably. Despite vocal opposition to the war, and his refusal to go to Iraq he is still permitted to go home at night while they investigate.

  12. Singapore IS censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Censorship is a way of life in Singapore. This is hardly newsworthy. One of thousands of funny examples of Singapore's censorship was the movie Pulp fiction. The authorities didn't like the "chaotic ordering" of the movie -- with scences skipping from the past to the present, and so on. So they editted the movie, and put everything "in order"!

      Imagine my surprise on seeing the movie for the second time in the states!

      I lived in Singapore for several years, and remain of the view that it is a fascist government. Magazines like the Wall Street Journal are sometimes banned from Singapore for anti-government views, magazines are generally contraband, but the ones allowed in are censored with black marker -- no kidding.

      One of my first little victories in life was getting onto a BBS within Singapore (1992), and finding the Communist Manifesto. Imagine my elation in subverting the complete draconian censorship laws of the country, with such a great new tool.

  13. Model 21st century state? by Distinguished+Hero · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Many people actually believe that Singapore is the model 21st century state. There exists within Western Europe and Canada a very strong movement to shift those countries toward the Singapore model. Many Western European states, Canada and Australia already have state operated media monopolies, and many of the aforementioned states also have ruling parties which have a tendency to hold on to power for the majority of the time (e.g. Canada). Furthermore, in many states such as Belgium, the judiciary (appointed by the the ruling party, more often than not) has the ability to (and does) declare parties (e.g. the most popular party in the Dutch portion of Belgium -- Flanders) illegal. In addition, Free Speech is not considered absolute in any of these countries, with the majority of the population accepting that "limits" exist to "free speech," and the ruling parties having recently introduced legislation further cementing this stance (e.g. in the UK); these limits are indeed often enforced by the judiciary in many of these countries.

    Incidentally, Singapore has undergone a very rapid demographic shift. The once majority population has, within less than three generation, been replaced primarily by Chinese immigrants who now make up 76.8% of Singapore's population. Aside from this, Singapore is considered one of the most diverse and multi-cultural places on Earth (supporting link). To enforce this utopian vision, and ensure harmony, freedom of speech has been restricted, in a manner similar to that of Western European states and Canada; from Wikipedia: "Laws restricting the freedom of speech are justified by claims that they are intended to prohibit speech that may breed ill will or cause disharmony within Singapore's multiracial, multi-religious society. For example, in September 2005, three bloggers were convicted of sedition for posting racist remarks targeting minorities.[5]." Once people accept that freedom of speech has "limits," perhaps the remaining portions of the Singaporean model flow naturally.

    --
    Uttering logically derived and empirically supported truths to the disciples of the orthodox establishment.
    1. Re:Model 21st century state? by Guuge · · Score: 2

      You're spot on about free speech not being considered an absolute. This is perhaps best exemplified by Bush's infamous curse, "there ought to be limits on freedom". The last several years have demonstrated the US government's general hostility to the free press and free speech. In fact, a constitutional amendment prohibiting certain kinds of free speech failed in the Senate by only one vote! I'd say that the USA is today more hostile to free speech than most of Western Europe and Canada, but maybe that's because I hold it to a higher standard.

    2. Re:Model 21st century state? by jpatokal · · Score: 1
      To enforce this utopian vision, and ensure harmony, freedom of speech has been restricted, in a manner similar to that of Western European states and Canada.

      Oh, bullpucky. The level of censorship in Singapore far exceeds that of any Western European state. Every newspaper, every radio station, every TV channel is controlled by the government. Now that mr brown has been cast out into the cold by the govn't, nobody else will ever publish his writings.

      Also, the much-repeated "multicultural in harmony" bit pretty much amounts to propaganda for keeping the Indians, Malays and Others down while ensuring Chinese hegemony.

      Cheers,
      -j.

    3. Re:Model 21st century state? by Marcus+Green · · Score: 1

      "Canada and Australia already have state operated media monopolies"
      Could you tell us more about these, when I was recently in Australia they seemed to have a large and varied range of media outlets, newspapers, magazines, commercial TV etc.
      I was unaware they are run by the state.

    4. Re:Model 21st century state? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everything is "controlled by the government" in the sense of being owned by the government, but yes, all broadcasting stations in Singapore are regulated and have to comply with content laws, which is a different thing. Student-run papers, and various other media have yet to be regulated.

      And there are several misconceptions about the Chinese majority - most were born under ancestors which before the era of the PRC, hence most are not "Chinese immigrants". It is not an active attempt to keep the other races down so much as the PAP wants to find a convenient attempt to regulate and control social tendencies. By reducing the amount of variation to four classifications it makes it easier to regulate.

      This is mitigates many people, such as Indians who don't speak Tamil, and speak Urdu, Punjabi, etc. instead, Malays who aren't Muslim, Caucasians who aren't expatriates, etc. and the dialect speakers.

      One thing I find is that if one Caucasian looks it seems automatically assumed that he or she is an expatriate or the like, both coming with resent of that person or special treatment. That is one effect. Never mind the large amount (not yet 1%, but significantly somewhere there) who were born here.

      I, who lived in the US for a few years then came back, encountered discrimination based on my accent, whether it was different treatment based on accent, or having schoolmates from ACSI (ironically you'd think that "top students" would be more mature, but then again we were sec 1) call me "slanger".

      Before 1980, only 27% of the population spoke Mandarin, but in 1990 over 60% could speak it, due to the Speak Mandarin Campaign (probably at 80%+ now, since some non-Chinese take it up too). Is this Chinese hegemony? Well, you see, most of the people who came here before World War II and independence came from Southern China and they spoke dialects, not Mandarin.

      Within the Han Chinese population, there are Hokkien, Cantonese, Hainanese....each with their own identities. Within the Indian population there are various ethnicities. Don't get me started on "Eurasian". The Malay population is probably the only more or less integral part of Singapore's demographics, and they were the original indigineous population before 1819 anyway.

      Hegemony on the part of race? I don't think so. Mitigation of many minorities - yes - because they get classified into four broad labels. Many grandparents speak dialects, but my current generation speaks them rarely, and only one fifth spoke them at home in 1990 (possibly even less them), compared to 40% 16 years ago. These dialects are of many kinds - the Chinese population is not homogenous. Mandarin hegemony? Putonghua hegemony? Now, you've hit on the nail. Ironic, isn't it? People learn Mandarin under the context of "knowing their roots", but in the drive to eliminate dialects from the Chinese population, they've isolated entire generations. My mother tells me that the older generations still like to speak dialects, despite government campaigns, because it is warmer and more personal - and much more multilingual (ie. many dialects for many peoples) - and they should. I only fear for my generation.

      john riemann soong

    5. Re:Model 21st century state? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I think you have the demographics wrong. 76.8% are not made up of Chinese immigrants. Most people in Singapore were born here. Their ancestors were immigrants, who fraternised with each other and created their own creole culture under the shadow of the British Empire. This 76.8% is also primarily based on resident population - not the huge amounts of Filipino maids, the Bangladeshi window cleaners, PRC construction workers etc. etc. who are also not included in the income demographics

      Of the 800,000 or so, only a minority are actually coming from the People's Republic of China. That doesn't mean I fear that we're moving away from multiculturalism into a little PRC with their "56 nationalities" (which is in fact, not multicultural at all) under the guise of "unified harmony" though.

      Some other demographics: the population was 2.8 million in 1988, but is now between 4.5 million. Yes, there is a falling birthrate, but and there's xenophobia about impending cultural change from all these "foreign talents", but only a minority even come from the PRC. The post war population must have been around 1.6 million (by my trending estimate). 2.1 million were eligible for voter registration (out of 4.5 million) in the last election, but only 1.2 million voted - the rest of the constituencies had walkovers because they weren't contested. In the elections of 1959, 586,000 people were eligible and 527,000 voted (this information from several Wikipedia articles). This is to note the demographic trend. Discounting the 800,000 foreign workers, which leaves us with 3.7 million residents, this means that 1.6 million people are below the age of 21. Clearly, these are not immigrants.

      Most of us used to speak dialects, even the non-Chinese, and almost everyone spoke Malay - it was the language of the street. We learned each other's language. You can tell a native Singaporean by two things: either English-speaking or Malay-speaking (if not both) - because those born before independence usually know Malay, and those born after they implemented "English as first language" policy and goes through the school system usually know English. If they can't speak either there's a high chance that they're a recent immigrant.

      Of course, not even I know Malay or dialects, (or even much Mandarin/Putonghua, thanks to residing in the US for a few years during my childhood) aside from Singlish, though I make up for it with a second foreign language. Many of us used to study Malay - but not my generation.

      We in fact fear we're being taken over by immigrants from the People's Republic of China, though they are a minority. More and more one sees people who can only speak Mandarin, and poor uncouth language best, not dialects, not Malay, not English. We're of course afraid we'll turn into something like them (although diffusion into the school system is ideal) and experience a culture shift in which they do not understand the Malay, the dialects, the culture where everyone knows each other's languages.

      The most worrying thing is that there is a "speak Mandarin campaign" which seeks to eliminate the dialects and encourage speaking of Mandarin alongside the "Speak Good English movement", to "unify the Chinese community".

      But the Chinese community is the majority and doesn't need unification. If anything a more diverse population is better to prevent mitigation of the minorities. Currently it seems that Lee Hsien Loong's ideal of "bilingualism" is that of superior English and the ability to communicate in Mandarin for business and cultural ties, to kiss up to the People's Republic of China. Not the old days (of course, I am a secondary school student who doesn't know these old days first hand, I just hear about them from taxi drivers and my parents) where everyone spoke each other's language.

      john riemann soong

  14. Don't be a tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what if he ranted and raved.

    That's the whole point of free speech, the basis of it is that you have the right to offend others, and specifically, the right to criticize the government and it's leaders.

    When you defend it, it looks like you're astroturfing. But hey *at least the trains run on time*, eh?

  15. Parallels in Australia by femto · · Score: 1

    It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government. (...) If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.

    It is scary how closely the Singaporean government's words mirror those of the Australian government when it was justifying withdrawing funding for charities that it deemed to be politically active. In out brave new globalised world it seems that totalitarianism is going global as well.

  16. I'm Must Be Missing the "Spot On" Part by patio11 · · Score: 1
    mr brown is entitled to his views. But opinions which are widely circulated in a regular column in a serious newspaper should meet higher standards. Instead of a diatribe mr brown should offer constructive criticism and alternatives. And he should come out from behind his pseudonym to defend his views openly.

    Gee, I wonder why the man would insist on anonymity...

    It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government.

    On the other hand, that could be a fairly good reason to want to stay anonymous.

    If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.

    This sounds to me an awful lot like "You'll stay healthy as long as you say what we want you to say", given that Singapore is a one-party state and "partisan players" are literally criminals by definition. (I'm not being that unfair here: you'd be charged with violating the Internal Security Act. A Socialist who had the terminity to run against the government got hit with 23 years for that, eventually getting out in 1989 (source: http://friskodude.blogspot.com/2004/08/singapore-p olitical-dissidents.html ) More recently, the limping and ineffectual Opposition Party is busy seeing its key members get sued to death for "defamation" for calling the government, uh, less than a paragon of transparently democratic virtue.).

    By the way, for the 430,000 Slashdotters who will say "Yeah, but Dubya is worse": whens the last time someone knocked on your door for illegal partisanship?

    1. Re:I'm Must Be Missing the "Spot On" Part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      By the way, for the 430,000 Slashdotters who will say "Yeah, but Dubya is worse"


      You got it backwards.

      I've never seen anyone on slashdot try to excuse a nasty regime by comparison with Bush. I have many times seen people on slashdot try to excuse Bush by comparison with a nasty regime. Notice that all of the comments about how bad Bush is are directed at exposing Bush, not excusing other governments.

  17. Excellent analysis of falling incomes in Singapore by jpatokal · · Score: 1
    Here's a geek-friendly detailed mathematical analysis of the raw numbers that prompted the column and the ensuing bitchslap:

    Income inequality widens markedly

    Note that 10% of Singaporean households now have no income (at all) and the next decile has seen its average earnings drop 20% in the past 5 years, while the rich get richer.

    Cheers,
    -j.

  18. Re:Excellent analysis of falling incomes in Singap by raduf · · Score: 1

    I've read a year ago same article about Great Britain. Makes sense if you think a bit... the more money you have the more opportunities you have to earn more. Be it education, investments or just living near the place of work, upper and middle classes have the advantage. Moral of the story? Try to be above the demarcation line, not below.
    Oh, and in that article it said the "poor" stayed the same. No sign of getting poorer, just most of the "new money" went to the richer.

  19. not true -- singapore is a *fine* city by ejtttje · · Score: 1

    You're confusing Asia with the Middle East...
    As the tourist T-shirts go, Singapore is a "fine" city -- they'll just give you a fine for something like that. They reserve the more corporal punishments for truly criminal acts where there's no doubt you should know better but did it anyway. You might spit if you get some sand in your mouth, but you don't "accidentally" graffiti someone's car. (and repeated offenses in the case of the dumbass who finally got himself caned a few years back)

  20. Re:Excellent analysis of falling incomes in Singap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heh, I've survived in Singapore with my household sometimes earning no income at all, too - although my single parent worked for two years. The hawker food was always cheap enough (now in the US again) that I remember, but yes, there is a rising cost.

    Besides the explanation of the elderly living alone, also this excludes 20% of the total population which aren't residents.

    john riemann soong

  21. Re:Excellent analysis of falling incomes in Singap by jpatokal · · Score: 1
    Oh, and in that article it said the "poor" stayed the same. No sign of getting poorer, just most of the "new money" went to the richer.

    Hmm? Look at the data -- the percentage of people with no income has increased, and the average income of the poorest families has decreased in absolute terms, which means they did even worse in inflation-adjusted real terms.

    Cheers,
    -j.