From: Harish Pillay <harish@brokat.com.sg>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 1997 19:21:14 +0800
To: nobody@neva.org (Neva Remailer)
Subject: Re: Singapore & Freedom
In-Reply-To: <199712081823.MAA10229@dfw-ix13.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199712091112.TAA09122@brokat.com.sg>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




> >So, yes, the govt does at times choke the entrepreneurship drive
> >of the local population, but there are industries where the
> >coexistence of private initiative and govt-linked companies have
> >been possible and viable.
>  
> Please advise what industries and the companies involved.

SingTech Computers, CSA - the two largest computer companies.  CSA being
a completely private company, but listed on the stock exchange.

The hotel industry is pretty much 100% in private hands.  Shipbuilding is
both, airlines 100% govt-linked, public transport - a mixture etc.

> >Let's analyze the premise of an educational system. ....
> >It has been a fine balance between a fully liberal system and
> >one that generates worker units for the most part of the last
> >30-35 years. ...  It will take 5-10 years before an increasingly
> >liberal system is in place - an increasing thinking population
> >that is part of the global information flow that will
> >characterize the next centuries economies.
> 
> This last sentence appears to have been taken right out the PAP
> policy manual, and it is a good policy statement.  

Perhaps it behooves noting that not everything is evil in the PAP
policy manual.

> Educational
> systems are generally engineered by society to help prepare the
> students for life in that society.  In western societies the
> educational system is engineered by a number of different groups
> in that society in what is thought to be in the best interest of
> the society.  Who is doing the planning in Singapore and for what
> ends?  I believe you will find Elder Statesman Lee has a major
> involvement at this time.  If you look you will find an
> accelerated push to generate a more technical population. 
> Children in Singapore start school at 5 years of age, after 5
> years of schooling, what is the daily homework load for a 10 year
> old student??  

Does it matter?  In any case, first grade (we call it Primary 1) is
at age 6 not 5.

> Three to 5 hours per day?  If this figure is not
> correct please advise the correct figure.  What percentage of
> parents feel compelled to hire tutors to enhance their child's
> education or just so they get good grades?  Is 60% too low??

What has all the preceding got to do with censorship?

> What type of bonuses do school principals receive, is it based on
> the overall grade-point average of the students in their school? 

None whatsoever.  Public school principals are not rewarded on that
yardstick.  Perhaps you wanna suggest that to the Ministry of Education?

> Why the big push?  Who is the primary beneficiary of this push? 
> Is this being done for the benefit of the worker units or the
> collective good of the controllers of the political group in
> power?
> 
> Harry and his buddies have done a fantastic job with Singapore
> Inc. over the last 40 years.  Harry had a great vision and
> splendid execution of that vision.  Problem now is that he is
> rather long in the tooth and his people have changed.  Instead of
> loosening up and allowing more democratic freedoms Harry and the
> boys are finding excuses to state that Singaporeans must work
> harder and expect less in the way of freedoms.  Harry has stated
> many times that one of the biggest problems with western style
> democracies is that the voters can defeat a perfectly good
> government and install a bunch of goofs who spoil everything. 
> True enough, we sometimes vote goofs into power, but at least we
> have the choice.  Harry and the PAP have destroyed every bit of
> political opposition or made the opposition unpalatable to the
> voters.

Perfectly valid statements.

> 
> >Pray tell me how the SG govt has brought BB into reality? ...
> 
> Singapore is surrounded by the Muslim hordes who covet their
> wealth and it has no internal security apparatus?  In the 50s
> Singapore literally had a den of spies.  The regional den of
> spies is now Bangkok.  Why do ya figure they all moved their
> operations?? The Singaporeans politely asked them to leave?  Have
> you ever had any dealings with your nation's security apparatus? 
> If you did you would notice something strange.  You just got
> picked up for something that happened last week but these people
> know about your whole life.  They know how many hours you spend
> at the office, when you are out of the country, who you socialize
> with, and any vices you may have.  Maybe they really don't do the
> Big Brother thing, they probably just have a crystal ball and got
> lucky with a few guesses and bluffed the rest.  If you believe
> this last statement I have a real deal for you on some excellent
> used cars.

So?  Tell me which other country's citizen would not be similarly
shown a "This Is Your Life" book?  Come on.  Nothing unique here.

> When the Singapore government announced their intent to connect
> every household to the Internet they asked every citizen to
> become an informant and watch their neighbors (neighbours) for
> subversive activity and report any such activity to the
> authorities.  

I take it that you have evidence of this?  I have yet to see anything like
that.

> Now, if you connect to those 100 restricted porn
> sites and saved copies of all you viewed on your computer and the
> authorities discovered that porn what would be your fate? Or are
> you immune to this threat?

The SBA (god bless them) has stated that what is on your machine is not
of their concern.  They are well aware of their limitations.  Let's
wait till they find their first parry and then we can see if they indeed
are as mild-mannered as they want us to believe.  In the meantime, we
are all vigilant and do not take our freedoms for granted.

> >Interesting that you hide behind an anomymous name...
> 
> I notice your government does not like anonymous dissent either.

So?  They are bozos.  My point in the preceding is that the post was by
someone who claimed to have lived in Singapore for 8 years and I can only
presume that he/she is no longer here.  In spite of that, s/he choose to
be anonymous.  I on the other hand, have to walk along the streets here
and live a life.  I would have to watch my back if I felt that what I say
would be used against me - especially if what I said is false.

> The standard procedure in Singapore in dealing with trouble
> makers is to dig up their records, school, National Service,
> employment, and whatever else they can get and then tear the poor
> souls apart.  Harry has participated in this tactic many times.

And he continues to do so.  Like I alluded to in an earlier reply, our
privacy laws (what laws?) are a joke.

> Just so it will not bother you, I admit I am a low-life.  Dropped
> out of school, fired from every job, do drugs, abuse alcohol,
> guns, no church, beat my kids, beat my wife, beat my dog, and I
> hang-out in second-rate strip-joints with bikers who deal drugs
> and loanshark.  Plus I collect welfare.....

Why you need to deprecate yourself is beyond me.  I enjoy a good debate
on issues and facts.  We can choose to disagree on some issues, agree 100%
on others.  It does not bother me that you claim to be a low-life.  I respect
you and would deal with you fairly nonetheless.

> I use anonymous mail for many reasons.  The reason here should be
> pretty obvious.

To each his own.

> SingMonger

Regards.
-- 
Harish Pillay                             	  h.pillay@ieee.org
Singapore      *** Ask me about Linux *** http://home.pacific.net.sg/~harish