General Elections 06

Its election time in Singapore...and the local media here seem to be stoking the flames of election fever through their widespread - and some would argue, biased - coverage.

Some random observations:

1. As seen from CNA's coverage during Nomination Day, predictability is the name of the game. No surprises to see wide-eyed journalists rushing to obtain sound-bytes from only-all-too-obliging PAP members. That's TV news for you - spot on, Neil Postman. One of the worst questions ever-posed to the PM: "Do you feel confident about the PAP's chances?"

2. Interesting to note that almost none of the opposition members were asked about their plans...

Now for more serious food for thought:

It's going to be good to see how the battle lines are shaping out to be like. Clearly, the Workers' Party (despite what the 3Ms have said) are looking like a whole lot more prepared and serious in its work. For its sake though, I do hope that it does not try and engage the PAP's on its strengths (i.e. its ability to mobilize resources to meet material needs), but rather to engage the men-in-white at a different level (questioning the materialistic rhetoric, for instance).

In my opinion, the move to field 5 young candidates at AMK GRC is a masterstroke (they're unlikely to beat the PAP machinery helmed by PM Lee) as it will be an indicator of how the younger folks think and vote. I would venture to suggest in fact, that, the WP's candidates are more likely to be favored among the young (esp. those who are skeptical of the promises of progress and disillusioned with the general state of political affairs). The question though: can the opposition provide a realistic alternative - is something that remains to be seen.

All said, I think GE06 is very much shaping to be a pivotal moment in domestic politics. More than just a clash of political parties, it is - in fact - an indicator of how the future of Singapore as a nation-state would develop and how ideas - propagated and circulated throughout the years - do have consequences.

Straw poll of young voters in a rainstorm

A letter written to The Straits Times by a member of a public, essentially saying that 4 out of 6 people in a straw poll would vote the PAP due to its ability to deliver the material needs to Singaporeans.
http://www.asiaone.com/st/st_20060417_385874.html

Couple of thoughts:

Firstly, this must be the worst straw poll/interview ever conducted that is newsworthy. According to the writer, a group of senior citizens, stuck in a rainstorm at P. Ubin proceeded to ask 6 young people who would they vote and why. While I shall not doubt the authenticity of the event, any thinking person would tell you that interviewing 6 people on their take on political issues - and esp. on who will they vote - is akin to almost saying nothing. Interesting why ST even chosed to carry the report...

More interestingly is the statement, "But for the time being, as far as the young are concerned, life is all about making a living and achieving the five Cs, and not about freedom, democracy or the need for an opposition". I'm not sure how many people would agree with that (to me, it says more about the author than the youngsters he spoke to), but if that is indeed the case - then our situation is indeed quite deplorable.

I would agree with MM Lee's take on the relevance of politics on bread-and-butter issues. Politics certainly includes these issues, but our elder statesperson is wrong to say that is all there is. When is life ever all about "men living on bread alone"?

Unfortunately, the opposition parties here - by their rhetoric - are simply playing into the same ball-game without actually challenging the assumptions that govern the PAP's rule. As Ellul pointed out (albeit in a slightly different context), both Communists and Liberals are actually arguing on the same side of the fence (in their advocacy of progress). My question: Based on whose standards?

As far as I see it, the modernist progress view that the older generation of Singaporeans are well-versed in is due for a shockwave. As the cost of sustaining material success becomes increasingly more difficult to pay ane people become more difficult to please, one's allegiance (to a political system) will be called into question.
This is not to say that the young will necessarily revolt against the system, but rather, social trends will increasingly affirm that the comfortable-life does not equate with the good-life. The "disenchantment with modernity" is likely to go on...

The 60s Counter Culture Movement and the 21st Century Church

Am embarking on a 10-week course (Apr 9 - June 25) in my home church where I will be exploring the 60s countercultural movement and its impact on Western culture and its impact on Christianity.

Much of the material will come from Os Guinness's classic The Dust of Death - and I am still in the process of reading as much as possible to glean further knowledge.

Part of the reason I proposed the course was to try and get Christians to understand the current cultural and social context in which the church is placed within. This, as I explained, was due to a growing disenchantment with modernity especially in its false myths of science, human reason and progress (within a secularized framework). In art, the depiction of a fragmented and despairing human was portrayed superbly in the works of artists like Edvard Munch and Francis Bacon (the 20th century English painter).

Later works of art, for instance, Jackson Pollock's Convergence (just one of many of his random-splashes), Andy Warhol Campbell's Soup cans and even Samuel Beckett's Breathe all highlighted the existential anguish and meaninglessness that the post-modernity movement have come to associate themselves with.

The 60s countercultural movement then, was an attempt to breakfree from the naive optimism upon which Western culture (with its Darwinism beliefs) was built upon. This revolt was not unexpected, however, the solutions that were proposed (Eastern mysticism, psychedelics and violence) were not any better. For the Christian church, the question would be: what then are our alternatives? How then should the Gospel of Jesus Christ be positioned (I am not arguing for a social gospel) in order to challenge and transform a broken humanity? Do we see the mighty power of our God and the thundering truth of the revealed Logos? Only when we do so are we then worthy of our Christian calling.