“Earn your right to vote, damn it – and be gracious that the winners are giving you a voice at all.”

Yeah.. if this is all possible…

“No. The true mockery that is happening here is the mockery that Singaporeans have made of the democratic process through their own behaviour. If Singaporeans want true change, they’ve got to fight for the changes – instead of blaming the incumbent for behaving like an incumbent.

The real joke is not the PAP’s behaviour. Singaporeans, the real joke is on you.”

Singaporeans cannot even do a one-man protest now? “behaving like an incumbent”.. more like a thug in the the story.

Again… same storyline like the PAP… blame it on the people.

Also if voters do not realise that NCMPs and NMPs are not allowed to vote, the seemign presence of opposition in parliament will only lull them to simply vote for the PAP.

Amusingly if this plan works out better than expected and NCMPship entrenches itself as a testing ground for opposition candidates, maybe someday PAP will have less than 56 seats in the Parliament :O

Thanks so much for the insights.

Very well-argued comments posted here. Perhaps this site is not so main-stream as TOC and Wayang Party and so less of the “Fxxk the PAP!” kind of remarks.
I am persuaded to read more.

The story above should be posted in more places. It pretty much sums up our situation in a manner the man-on-the-street can easily understand.
Please keep up the insightful comments.

There is a football field on this island.

There is periodic match on this island for which the winner gets to rule the island until the next match.

There is a committee that officiates and regulates this match and maintains the football field.

One day a team dressed in white won the match.

What they did next, to the shock of everyone, was to replace the committee that regulates the match.

It did this by first changing the laws of the island to allow it to kick the committee out legally. It then replaced it with its own team members.

Next the white team redraw the playing field their way.

One side has as bigger goal mouth than the other, a larger penalty box, and the half way line is more like three quarters way, nearer the larger goal mouth.

And the white team plays with 15 players. The other side has to play with 9 players as its side of the field was smaller, so says the amended rule book. And they don’t change halves at half time. Sometimes there is no half time.

In the next match it told the island people to send a team to play with them.

Of course no one wants to play.

And so the white team went out and grab some people, beat them up, and force them to play. (This however could not be verified, and you will get sued till you are bankrupt if you dare suggest such a thing happened.)

Of course the white team trashes the beat-p team, everytime, sometimes 20-0, sometimes 32-0, and the record was 66-6.

The islanders complained and complained. What else could they do?

Then the complainers got beaten up, by thugs in the night – it could not be ascertained if they were in white as it was dark – and the islanders whispered their complains instead.

The white team then said, “Look, I never break the law. The law says whoever wins this match gets to rule the island. And each time we won. You have the right to sent a team to challenge us. And you indeed sent a team each time. And each time you lost. So why do you complain? If you have to complain, complain about the quality of the team you sent to play against us. They are ones letting you down. Not us. We are also fair, legal, always sit on our moral high ground, and we dressed in white.”

Even in mollycoddled PAP it is already so hard to get someone with the stomach for politics, how much more harder then if you must be prepared to be bankrupted, to go to jail, and to be character-assassinated in the media and public eye, to be under constant unrelenting surveillance – every word you say, typed, whispered being heard – and all your dependencies to suffer.

In some sense Chee Soon Juan has crossed a threshold of no return, and he can take all the shit that can be thrown at him.

It is one thing for a political party to promote its opposition, but it is another matter altogether when the entire state and its civil apparatus are used to deter, suppress, and destroy ungraciously and heartlessly any potential genuine opposition. (The clowns don’t matter. Just hang one or two to demonstrate the powers that be. And let them be the opposition, and say to the people, Choose.)

Thus the true complain is the party have subverted the state – and that is corruption in itself – to create an oppressive, genuinely hostile, and politically unsound environment that may endanger the very existence of the state itself.

I will vote a donkey this time.

” Singaporeans are the ones who are making a mockery of the democratic process by not participating in it.”
Oh yeah, the monks and citizens participate in Junta uprising and overthrow but they fail, and therefore the junta not to blame, it is those monks and citizens that incompetent to blame

It is correct to say that it is obviously not the government’s job to create a credible opposition. However, is it therefore right for the government to obstruct/hinder/decimate/suppress the opposition with all of its massive might as it has traditionally been viewed as doing (through all sorts of means and tactics which may not be morally right, even if is entirely legal – after all they make all the rules through parliament in any way they want, don’t they)?

Opposition MPs enter parliament uncontested.

Whatever it is , it is stupid to keep blaming Singaporeans for being naive , trusting and greedy of carrot. Yes, they vote with their eyes wide open and now many live to regret that decision of voting for PAP and now have to be taunted for that. Such blame as akin to those minibomb investors who invest in their eyes wide open because they are trusting of what FI says and promises to the point of believing what agent told them. But then it is obvious the unregulated financial system is to blame, other how else can HK, and rest of countries are now on way to successfully sue those FI with help from government. Only Singapore gov with conflict with interest is unique in not doing anything but only using Mouth service. So what not think that it is the political system here that is the cause of major culprit then ?

“The point is – without the NCMP scheme, the losers would not have a voice at all in parliament. They would be totally excluded from the parliamentary process. Indeed, the fact that they were losers means they should not be entitled to any voice at all.”

You are just subscribing to mentality of “better than nothing”. Everyone knows that whatever the government’s decision to political system is final, just like any bills like Job Credit Scheme, GST etc. Debate or listening is just wayang. Surely you aware too ? Zheng Xi knows that whatever he and TOC writes are not going to change anything. But what they bring is the unawareness and traps of such scheme by exposing them. If you visit TOC, you realize how many innocent souls actually get to understand the pitfalls through the post and comments. So that is the point for Zheng Xi and TOC.

“For goodness sake, as much as you don’t like the PAP, they are the winners. I don’t want losers having the votes in parliament. The solution is not to blast the PAP for creating a “political theatre” – the solution is for the losers to buck up and become winners.”

What a joke. Let’s think positively for a while. Assuming that NCMP is exceptional candidate to you, does that even change anything ? He can be debated like Siew, make convincingly argument that make the MPs really look like fart-up kangaroos. Question is still “does that change anything even if they prove themselves to winner” ? Of course, you might say that if they are winners, they might as well contest as MP.
Case in point, if NMP Siew is impressive to you, does that change anything at all now ? He been giving his views and issues, but totally none of that are taken up by government and bills still passed through. Aren’t you aware of that ? If so, what make you even think that NCMP can even help pick a winner and create effectual change if Siew’s example is anything to go by ?