The by-election of Punggol East is to be held on 26th January 2013. Even before the date of the by-election was announced, there was already a flurry of voices from the opposition parties proclaiming their interest.
Hence, when Chee Soon Juan announced his Singapore Democratic Party’s (SDP) desire to join the by-election, my reaction was one of “Why not?” Not surprisingly, not many shared my sentiments as there was a barrage of criticism online against Chee Soon Juan for making it a multi-cornered fight.
I was amused. Why were all these opposition supporters so sure that SDP joining in the fray would dilute Workers’ Party’s (WP) votes? Don’t they have faith in WP? If WP can’t win People’s Action Party (PAP) in a multi-cornered fight, supporters need to seriously consider whether WP would ever be able to take over PAP as the government.
I believe that the reason behind the insecurity is due to the different types of opposition voters in Singapore. I have identified 3 main types of opposition voters below:
1) Anti-PAP Supporters
These are the type of people you can’t have a decent and reasonable conversation with. They complain about everything and believe that everything bad that is happening to them must be the government’s fault. They do not acknowledge anything good about the government. If you say anything remotely good about the government, they will swear and curse at you and deem you a dog of the PAP.
And if the government seems to be doing something right, it’s a conspiracy. If the opposition did something wrong, it’s a conspiracy of the government too. To them, the government is omnipresent, omniscient and omni-powerful because the government is behind everything bad.
The perfect candidate for people belonging in this category.
It doesn’t matter to them who is the opposition – a monkey can be placed against PAP and they would still vote for the monkey. Essentially, they don’t think critically and would vote for any opposition.
These are the people that are likely to be against a multi-cornered fight as they believe that the opposition votes will be diluted. They want the opposition to win at all costs.
2) Pro-Opposition Supporters
These are the people that believe that PAP has been given way too much power and that there should be more opposition in the government so that there will be checks and balances in place. They want more democracy.
They acknowledge that PAP isn’t all that bad but believe that the government can do better with more diverse voices in the Parliament. Some may acknowledge that the opposition isn’t as strong as PAP but they believe in giving them a chance. Some may believe that the party that would be voted in anyway will definitely be PAP and choose to vote for the opposition so that PAP would not get too strong a mandate.
These are the people that are likely to be neutral or supportive towards a multi-cornered fight as they believe that true democracy means that any party can choose to contest if they want to.
3) Genuine Supporters of an Opposition Party
They are probably the rarest of all the opposition supporters. They do not see opposition parties as monolithic but as individual different parties. They sincerely believe that the opposition party they support is the best for Singapore. They truly believe in the policies and the actions of the opposition party they are voting for.
These are the people that are likely to be against or neutral towards a multi-cornered fight. They might be against because they know that their chances of winning would be lowered and yet neutral because they believe that people would rationally vote for the best party which is the party they believe in.
If you are an opposition voter, which type do you belong to?
I think it’s obvious that I do not belong any of the three types above because I voted for PAP. I remember an anti-PAP acquaintance asking me what did PAP do to win my vote. I replied that the better question should be did the opposition party do anything to win my vote. He had no answer for me.
And that brings me to the biggest problem of the opposition parties – they rely on the first and second type of voters too much. This is especially noticeable when all they do is to criticize PAP. Bashing PAP does not make you the better party. There are no constructive ideas or solutions of what should be done instead. Seriously, if I need an MP to criticize PAP, I might as well vote in any grouchy coffee shop uncle. Anyone can criticize the government, but can anyone do better than the government?
What opposition parties should do instead of just praying that PAP makes a wrong move so that they can criticize them all the time is to build up their own brand and image to attract genuine supporters. There are many things they can do before the next election. They can come up with alternative and better policies and ideas and publish it on their blogs so that people would know the causes they are championing. They can do charity work to help the poor that they insist that PAP is ignoring. I have yet to see any opposition party donating money. All they do is to ask for more donations. (The hypocrisy!) Don’t just do something to be heard, seen and known, do something to be respected.
Of course, if the opposition is happy with just 40% of the votes, they can happily continue on their tirade. If any opposition party ever intend to become the government of Singapore, they would need to gain the third type of voters – genuine supporters. They would need to win the 60% over and not just pray that by some divine intervention PAP would make all the wrong moves and push the 60% over.
I would only vote for an opposition party when I do become a genuine supporter of the opposition party.
Why? Because I love Singapore and I want the best party for Singapore.
Pingback: Daily SG: 17 Jan 2013 | The Singapore Daily
Still stuck in ‘opposition’….
Meaning?
http://politicalwritings.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/politics-101-or-what-the-pap-didnt-teach-you-about-politics/
http://politicalwritings.wordpress.com/2011/02/20/there-is-no-role-for-opposition-in-singapore/
http://politicalwritings.wordpress.com/2011/03/16/the-1-political-problem-in-singapore/
Read through your articles. Pretty interesting take on the political scene in Singapore.
Agree with you on the fact that the opposition parties should stop being stuck in opposition and try to champion whatever causes they have. I also do not see opposition as one, instead I see every party for what they they do. I also do hope that voters would vote for the party only because they believe in the party’s cause and not for some other frivolous reason.
Thanks. Start by thinking this thought:
There’s no such thing as an “opposition” voter.
I happen to think that people that vote for opposition just for the sake of voting for them seem to be something uniquely Singapore. And yes opposition voters do exist in Singapore, why deny their existence?
I do see what you are trying to say by saying that there is no such thing as opposition parties but just parties. But why all these word play? Singaporeans uses the term opposition parties to describe parties that are not the major ruling party. And we can all perfectly communicate and understand the idea of opposition party, so why stop using it?
In fact using the term opposition to describe parties against the party in power is by definition correct too.
Do you call your son/daughter ‘loser’ every day when he wakes up? Would you?
For that’s what the term ‘opposition’ means. A party which lost the election and does not have enough seats to be in power.
Over time, the use of such a term creates a negative mindset. That ‘opposition’ parties have no right to aspire to power, only the ‘ruling’ party has. That ‘opposition’ parties exist for the sake of opposing. Etc etc.
In psychology we call these mind-blocks and self-fulfilling prophecies. As they say, call a child ‘stupid’ and he’ll prove you right.
Is that what you really really want?
I wouldn’t call anyone a loser. But if I lost, I wouldn’t mind the term loser because its the truth. There is winners and losers in every competition. There is no shame in being the loser. The important thing is that you fought hard for the competition. And that you will fight harder for the next competition.
Politics is harsh and cut-throat. If a party can’t deal with being called a loser (as you put it) then perhaps the party should get out of politics.
So yes, if a party creates a negative mindset just because it is called a opposition party over a period of time, I wouldn’t want the party to be in the parliament. I am looking for a leader that when he is called ‘stupid’, he will do everything to show that he is not stupid. That is what I really really want.
Look at the abuse PAP faces everyday – if opposition parties can’t deal with being called opposition – can they face the insults of being an incumbent party?
I could possibly also argue that in Singapore, it seems as though being termed as an opposition party gets you more love and thus less negative mindset. Because at least the party is brave enough to oppose the ‘big bad wolf’.
The problem is people think it’s all right to call themselves losers, ie they call themselves ‘opposition’ politicians and ‘opposition’ parties.
So they already start with a mindset that they are not in politics to fight for the right to govern Singapore or to form the next govt. They are only in politics to ‘oppose’ the PAP, that PAP is always and forever the ruling party, and their lot in life is just to be in ‘opposition’.
I do not think that is the right way to go.
The role of an opposition party is definitely to oppose the incumbent party, If they do not oppose the incumbent party, they should join the incumbent party as politicians,
Actually, none of the opposition parties have enough resources to take over the government yet. Most of the opposition parties have conceded that they can’t take over the government. The only party who claimed that they can take over the parliament was NSP which was a joke to me.
Have you every wondered why WP is the only opposition that got into the parliament? The reason is because most moderate Singaporean voters want PAP to be still the incumbent government. WP got in by saying that PAP would still be the incumbent but they can help to provide checks and balances.
Have a little faith in WP. WP is not saying that they are losers and they would only be opposition. Its a shrewd political move to win the hearts of Singaporeans who would have supported PAP to give them a chance.
I bet that WP’s next move during the next GE would be to say that just providing checks and balances is not enough to improve things for Singapore and that they need get more seats in the parliament to oppose certain policies of PAP and voice out the problems of Singaporeans.
I guess you believe in ‘opposition’.
Its not about my beliefs but what is defined in a Westminster system. But i do feel there is nothing wrong with using the term opposition.
The definition is clear, It just means parties who do not have enough seats in parliament to be in power. We refer to such parties as being ‘in opposition’.
However, people in advanced countries do not call themselves ‘opposition’ parties right from the start, and they do not refer to themselves as ‘opposition’ politicians.
While there is nothing wrong with losing per se, no one brands himself as a loser and consistently refers to himself as a loser. That creates a mindset that my lot in life is to be in opposition forever. That’s what I’m against.
You can bet David Cameron did not celebrate 10 years as Leader of the Opposition.
I can see your point. But i don’t think leaders should be so susceptible to such negative mindsets so I see no problem in using the word opposition.
Perhaps I might be too positive as instead of looking at the term opposition as losers I see the opposition as possible future incumbents.
Nobody starts out immediately as the incumbent. They had to be opposition first becoming incumbent.
You really believe in ‘opposition’…
I supposed so.
Its normal to have different opinions. Lets agree to disagree.
http://politicalwritings.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/13-wishes-for-singapore-politics-in-2013/#comments
Sorry I am unable to grant your wishes for Singaporeans.
Politics in Singapore is very different from the other Western countries and even Malaysia. In these countries, there are only 2 major parties and you vote for one or the other. Until we reach such a situation, it is only fair that any election should be between the PAP and one other party, after all, the ruling party in any country is deemed to have the advantage due to their ability to re-draw election boundaries, time the election, make rules and regulations to favor themselves etc.
It is naive to think that any opposition party in Singapore that contest an election starts on a level footing as the incumbent party. For this reason alone, even in a straight fight, the odds are against the opposition party.
Your view that If any opposition party ever intend to become the government of Singapore, they would need to gain the third type of voters – genuine supporters. They would need to win the 60% over and not just pray that by some divine intervention PAP would make all the wrong moves and push the 60% over may not necessary be true. A shareholder will vote out the board of directors if these people do not perform up to expectation and replace them by another board. The new board will need to prove their worth after they are appointed rather than before they are appointed. In this respect, if the voters feel that the PAP is not doing a good job, it is our right to vote the opposition candidate into parliament and give him a chance to prove his worth. Hence if PAP continues to have wrong policies or policies that only benefit a small segment of Singaporean, they deserve to be voted out and be replaced.
Most western countries do not have a two-party rule. I assume you are talking about the one country that actually has – USA, Actually in my opinion, the two-party rule is the most useless form of democracy ever.
The two-party rule lets you assume that there is democracy and that there is choices but really, there is only 2 choices which are likely to be extreme. That doesn’t sound much like a democracy. Furthermore, the 2 party rule usually leads to much arguments and delay when important policies need to be implemented. USA is facing a lot of problems due to such a parliament system. Such a system also create significant strife within the country which the 2 parties encourages,
Actually its possible in theory that the shareholder can vote out the board of directors if they do not perform up to expectation. However, this hardly happens in practice because usually the major shareholders are on the board of directors. Nonetheless, would the shareholders randomly choose a board of directors that have no experience or portfolio whatsoever to back their expertise in being the new board? This is what the opposition party is asking me to do when they ask me to vote for them. I can’t blame them for not having a track record but they are not even doing anything relevant to contribute to the policies of Singapore.
Like I suggested – why not have a charity fundraiser to help poor Singaporeans instead of just complaining about how PAP policies have neglected poor Singaporeans? Why all talk and no action? Surely there is something they can do besides complaining and moping everyday.
Of course, I am not denying anybody rights to vote PAP out if PAP is doing a bad job. Everyone has the rights to vote whoever they want to. I just want to see our opposition parties do more instead of just praying for a divine intervention that PAP will do something wrong.
Like I said, if they are comfortable with 40% of the votes, continue praying. If not, do something.
But excuse me if I wouldn’t vote for a party that only knows how to pray.