"The well-coordinated simultaneous attacks on TR and TOC: Who, Why and What". Perhaps 'twas the TOC & TR

“The well-coordinated simultaneous attacks on TR and TOC: Who, Why and What”

My first thought upon glancing a the aforementioned title of an article on the Temasek Review was, with a smile, “well, perhaps it was the TR and TOC who staged it to increase their oppositional stature in the eyes of the public?”

I’m not saying that it is the TR and TOC, but given the fact that the PAP has ruled the country for 50 years; given the fact that no one socialised within such a milieu can be above suspicion as being a subconscious progenitor of its perspectives; and given the fact that the oversights of the entire oppositional movement of today is very telling of the truth of the previous point, I cannot, on the basis of reason, jump on the bandwagon and view either TR or TOC as the messiah-come-lately lest the fight against evil becomes little more than a movement to perpetuate old evils in new and acceptable forms.

It is these factors that argue for my skepticism in the face of the ‘opposition’ and all their hallowed leaders. After all, if I was to apply a British standard here, these fellows would not be insusceptible to allegations of fascism and racism given their consistent oversights. It is quite the mind-boggler to awake to the fact that the stance taken by the opposition in singapore against, for instance, ‘foreigners’ is just about identical to that of the commonly reviled British National Party; and given the oversights of the ‘opposition’ when it comes to race relations and egalitarian multiculturalism, again, these are oversights that can be expected of the BNP or the National Front of old. Given these facts, I cannot put it past the ‘opposition’ to engage in such stunts to encourage the prominence-worshipping which their nemesis rely on.

However, what I do believe is that this these ‘attacks’ are not initiated by the ruling party or the PAP Jugend. That would be quite a silly move by them if they did. Given that the ruling party has very successfully taken singapore through a cultural overhaul to the point that I would say that their greatest achievement lies in producing an 'opposition' that is not to different from them in perspective, I wouldn't expect that they would make such a boo boo such as instigating such 'attacks' on the TOC or TR. As the PAP itself has relied on the worship of prominence and the Confucianised masses making sense of reality through the pronouncements of the hallowed ones, such attacks would certainly lead to the undecided and none-too-happy flocking to the TOC or TR for insights and directions. The nature of those visiting such locales is indicated by the fact that whilst their articles might have many ‘views’, say, a couple of thousand, the ‘comments’ struggle to reach the 10% mark. That indicates the head-nodding mindlessness of the readers. You really have to look at these seemingly innocuous symptoms to appreciate what general malaise society is afflicted with. Perhaps it were just some PAP supporters who took it upon themselves to commit the deed, and perhaps it was the TOC and TR, or someone amongst the opposition even who realised that this would indeed enhance the stature of the opposing prominent acropolis facing the party in power.

I would recommend an appreciable degree of skepticism amongst the true opposition out there - wherever you are. The opposition cannot be defined by their taking issue with this or that stance of the government of the day, but by their underlying perspectives. And to discern said underlying perspectives, consistent oversights and freudian slips that are so frequent that we could say it is their 'mother tongue', is the final argument for or against the reality of their oppositional status.

The best thing that we can do is to afford the views of the TOC and TR the objective consideration any opinion or perspective deserves, and not allow any effort by any party to reduce or elevate the status of the aforementioned by any means to compromise or amplify the above. Whether it is a PAP member of parliament having their views published by either; whether their being 'attacked' is supposed to indicate their insightful value relative to others; or whether they are mentioned by the ruling party should not detract us from an appreciation of reason in itself whether it lies within the digital auspices of the TOC, TR, or Mr/s what's-her name.

Oh, by the by, I hope the TR or TOC is not going to ask me to substantiate my views (as do the government in a milieu where transparency is an aspiration of chimerical proportions) as they bully-like demanded that a 'gamer' do when s/he had alleged similarly in the past. In the absence of transparency, members of the jury, the existence of the human subconscious that manipulates the conscious mind below the threshold of our own awareness, along with reason and logic, is substantiation enough for skepticism.



0 thoughts:

The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.

Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.

Blogger Template by Clairvo