In defence of Ministerial Pay-HikesIf we do not pay Ministers adequately, we will get inadequate Ministers. If you pay peanuts, you will get monkeys for your Ministers. The people will suffer, not the monkeys. - 1993, Goh Chok Tong (transitionary PM between Lee Kuan Yew and his son, Lee Hsien Loong.)
As a country is moved from its potential collectively empathetic nature to a self-absorbed, self-interested, and materialistic one - that is stage 1 - it is rational to peg the salaries of ministers to that of the private sector. If not, the government, that hopes to instill in a people that amount of self-absorption that it takes to be apathetic enough for a self-aggrandizing government to enjoy political longevity, will be undone in spirit.
When the government becomes opportunistic and view the people as a means to a self-aggrandizing end, the people will thus be nurtured, over time, to think, ‘if the government thinks its alright to do that to us, why should we not be able to do that to each other?‘ - and especially since they need to do so in order to contend with the financial pressures that come with top-down exploitation - That is stage 2 of the empathetic underdevelopment of a people. Stage 3, cements it when the government themselves say, ‘well, if the people think its alright to do that to each other, why can’t we?’ In this, the people are silenced, except for a few irrational people who actually think that it is alright to do unto each other that which they do not accept from the government.
For the government to maintain an austerity policy when it comes to their own salaries is a direct contradiction of the spirit that they brought about amongst the people. So why should not the government increase their salaries over those of other states’ leaders? How many amongst the populace will spurn the opportunity to make millions a year at the expense of their neighbours? And why should not the government have the opportunity to do likewise given that they maintain the socio-cultural-economic environment for you to do as they do? Why should the devil not enjoy the selfsame benefits as do his kingdom of demons? And via the same approach as they take toward each other?
People think of the Han period in Chinese history as the ‘Golden Age’. I view it as an evil age where the top-nurtured nature of the Chinese people, since the Qin dynasty, had been underdeveloped to a particular level, and from that low point, they achieved the best that they could, whilst losing the personality to appreciate or want more
When we reach that phase in (un)civilisation, that is when we reach the ‘Golden Age’. People think of the Han period in Chinese history as the ‘Golden Age’. I view it as an evil age where the top-nurtured nature of the Chinese people, since the Qin dynasty, had been underdeveloped to a particular level, and from that low point, they achieved the best that they could, whilst losing the personality to appreciate or want more - as did the people of the Chou period that came before the Qin. It was a period when the path that Qin Shih Huang Ti set the Chinese people on (in 221 b.c.) was realised and the people became like the government and the government used that to justify their own continuing to be as they are. That is when Chinese history ended and has been replayed ever since. It was the conclusion of a totalitarian past and democracy was born - with democracy meaning that people had a right to do unto each other that whilst attempting to get around the consequences of it being done unto them by the government and the people.
In essence, the political longevity of an evil government is justified by the spirit of the people. When people complain about the salaries of ministers, they take issue not with the right of the government to earn more than them, but for the government not facilitating their right to do unto each other and hopefully earn as much to put up with cost of having such a government.
That is why I always react with a fearful ‘oh oh‘ whenever i hear of anyone talking about a ‘Golden Age that is upon us‘ as that tends to mean that the evils perpetrated by a government or socio-economic-cultural system of the past is coming to fruition by way of underdeveloping a peoples’ collective persona to the point that they can think that all that a human can naturally desire is going to be supplied in said ‘Golden Age’. A ‘Golden Age’, in essence, refers to a period where people pass from the aforementioned Stage 1 to Stage 3. In other words, a people become the government in persona, and the government uses that as a justification for continuing to be what they had always been. Till we have a ‘Golden system’, all ‘Golden ages’ are nothing but periods where the undeveloped personality of the masses have come to accept and incorporate the spirit that their foreparents might have taken issue with.
So, when we look at the case of Singapore, those whom are objective would be forced to wonder if the government is not justified by the inculcated spirit of the people. In essence, the political longevity of an evil government is justified by the spirit of the people. When people complain about the salaries of ministers, they take issue not with the right of the government to earn more than them, but for the government not facilitating their right to do unto each other and hopefully earn as much to put up with cost of having such a government.