As I sit here rotting in the Law library, I think its about time that I write about this. I’ve been meaning to post this for some time, but as usual, I have been procrastinating. Herculean amounts of reading to do, brain frazzled, thoughts lack semblance of coherence or logic, refrain from posting.
The funny thing is that I should be dead by now. I thought the heart palpitations I suffered earlier today had been due to the combination of Red Bull, guarana bars and expressos, but then again, it could just be the lack of sleep. Oh well, still alive.
Someone asked me about this, and I started thinking maybe I should clarify some things before I start being stalked by mysterious Men-In-White or be seized for questioning whenever I’m back in Singapore. So this is a big shout-out to all my peeps at ISD who are reading this right now and keeping tabs on me in case I ever turn out to be a threat or something.
- I hate bureaucracy.
- Politicians are not allowed to be human.
- Politicians get no love.
- Once you get in, its hard to get out.
I think one thing is clear from my writings. I find that more often than not, government meddlig is the problem, and not the solution. Would it not be hilarious (and not to mention hypocritical) for someone who thinks this way to want to be part of the problem?
Lest I am mistaken for an anarchist, dear Big Brother, far from it! I just happen to be someone who believes I can contribute to society far better by staying OUT of politics. I have long decided that I shall surrender myself to the siren call of the market and the beautiful, dirty smell of money.
I believe that there are unrealistic expectations placed upon politicians, that severely circumscribe their behaviour, which we peasants would not put upon ourselves.
I mean, just look at Steve Chia. All he did was engage in a harmless spot of naturist photography, and people made a big deal out of it. As far as I’m concerned, as long as both parties are consenting and able to give consent (meaning adult), I don’t see why its any of our business what they do in private.
Similarly, I know full well my own personal weaknesses and foibles. Being a politician would mean that I would have to effectively neuter and sterilize the parts of my personality that make me who I am. Why the hell would I want to do that?
Hey, I know everybody wants to hate Bill Gates, because he’s the big bad mofo who controls your desktop. But you know what? You still use M$ Winblows XP anyway.
If you’re a politician, what do you have that people want? Nothing. If you’re a loyal Man-in-White Ministar, ‘opposition’ loonies will hate you and vilify you. If you’re a freedom-fighting Chee Guevara, people will laugh and ridicule you and call you ’siao’. I think the only people who actually willingly want to get involved in politicis are masochists.
Life is short, what’s the point of having people hate you man? Seriously, where’s the love? I’d rather make tons of money and lots of love. Make love not war brothers and sisters, politics makes baby Jesus sad. 
It’s like one of ‘em gangs, yo.
Think about it. All that time you could be spending with your family and loved ones, or building a business empire, or shagging all the hot chicks/dudes (pick your preference) that you want, instead, you’re spending it learning skills which you would probably never ever use in the real world.
Wayang, siam arrow, tai-ji-quan, carry balls, shadow kick, etc etc. True, one probably has to employ these skills in the private sector, but the truth is the one sure place in which ALL of these skills are compulsory is in the public sector.
The worst part is, these skills are not transferable to the market. Why do you think many of the people who used to work for Big Brother still do even after they ‘retire’? (come on, you know what I’m talking about) Because they can’t find employment outside of Big Brother’s world with the skills that they have.
Thanks, but no thanks. I’d rather have struggled and failed, and then try again in the battlegrounds of the marketplace, than to be comfortably bound by the ’security’ of indentured servitude.
I actually had more reasons when I first started thinking about this… but I guess my brain is failing me now. I’ll update when I remember the rest. Maybe a failing brain is a good reason too. You people wouldn’t want a loony suffering from an early onset of Alzheimer’s as your dictator, would you?
15 Comments
Hi,
Things could be simpler than what you think!
I only agree with you that the main sarcrifice is the time lost in spending with family members. This is the most important sarcrifice that could not possibly be compensated by higher salary but the satisfaction that you derived from what you do.
Politicians are just human beings and stop thinking like PAP that the people we have must be “perfect”; there is no such thing. This is the fundamental reason why we need democracy to install checks and balances in the political sysetm. The citizens must realize this fundamental principle and the rationale behind democracy.
Politicians get no love? Not true at all. At least when Mr. Low goes around Hougang, he is well greeted! Whether politicians get love or not, depends on what he does, not his position. Of course, there will always those who dislike you, so be it. Don’t you get friends and foes in real life too?
Actually, you could always get out any time you want. It is only your attachment to various things, like monetary return that cause you not to let go. As for transferable skills, there are many, if only you bother to think through.
Goh Meng Seng
GMS:
Hey, thanks for the comment.
I guess at the end of the day, there are always sacrifices and trade-offs to be faced when making any decision, and deciding whether one ones to get involved in politics or not really depends on individual preferences and circumstance.
For me, I just think that the costs outweigh the benefits, and that I can contribute to society in a different way, so politics is not for me.
Not to mention that my own personal political beliefs don’t fit into ANY of the parties in Singapore. I don’t think much can be done when one’s own ideology is on the fringe like mine.
Hmm no…we really don’t want and need another lawyer politician.
Of course there is no perfect person, but one will have to be very discrete.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/brogden-recovers-in-psychiatric-facility/2005/08/31/1125302611563.html
I think the general population do expect their politicians to be relatively ‘clean’, be it in Australia or Singapore, or anywhere else in the world.
Hi,
Don’t be too sure yet. Who knows you might be invited to the famous tea session in the future!
Power and popularity is addictive heehee, once you tasted it you might not wanna let it go lol…
andy:
I doubt it lah… I think one needs to fit a certain profile before they invite you for tea, and I highly doubt I fit that profile at all.
Besides, I’m not willing to sacrifice the freedom I have as a private citizen.
Vivian was pretty critical of PAP before he joined it. PAP got a very good record of co-opting their critics! Lawyers are one of their favourite targets lol. So who knows what will happen in the future?
I point out that lawyers are also PAP’s biggest TARGETS.
Tang Liang Hong, JBJ, Francis Seow, just to name a few.
Dear Han,
I think no matter what your political belief is about, the aim must be beneficial to the people.
I think for lawyers, they are more inclined to be in politics basically because of their profession. For those who chose to join opposition politics, they have stronger sense of justice. It is the same for me, I fight for social moral justice and my personal belief is that we should squeeze more from the government, and should not allow them to have the mandate to squeeze us.
Of course, as Han has said, it is each individual’s valuation of cost and benefit. Some may just find it waste of time, not worthwhile, but some may find it worth every bit of efforts and the personal satisfcation level is higher. It is the spiritual level of satisfaction that is more attractive to me personally.
If you are talking solely on monetary return, then most people would join PAP instead.
Goh Meng Seng
GMS:
When I say cost and benefit, I don’t just mean it in terms of money of course. I also include time sacrificed away from doing things that one likes, or loved ones, or sacrifices made in terms of privacy or personal freedoms. All these are costs too.
I disagree with this though. I’m sure there are lots of people who join PAP and never see a single-cent gained. Why? Because they lack the ability to achieve high office (i.e. Minister level).
That being the case, being in public office is really no different from working for a big company, as you need the ability and results (usually) to get into a position where you are paid highly.
To me, this means that the requirement to “get money” in public office is no less stringent than the requirements in the private sector, AND furthermore also includes much sacrifice in many other personal areas as well.
Then the conclusion is not one of which political party is more monetarily beneficial. The conclusion is that one must be able to bear the costs of participating in electoral politics, regardless of which party, before deciding to do it.
Well, it’s up to you. To each his own.
Politics is an arena of interests and not an arena of morals.
A politician should realize that it’s impossible to overhaul the system and be realistic. Good politicians are usually those who are able to make small changes to the system and making policies that can benefit the public.
As I have once said to you over email, one has to govern by necessity, never by ideology.
BL:
Yes, what you say is so true. There is an economics blog which I frequent, its title is ‘Marginal Revolution‘. This title perfectly captures how the world works.
Revolutions occur with small, incremental changes at the margin, not through grand gestures. To that I add, these small incremental improvements are best made by individual, decentralised decision-making. People should know best what is good or bad for themselves, no?
Hi, i’m a drop-by visitor and just wanted to add a comment. I think the role of politicians is to provide a public service to their countrymen. The points you mentioned above are the sacrifices they make to ensure a country’s peace and posperity. It’s not an easy job for sure but it’s a noble choice if a person chooses to take it up. Unfortunately few politicans like that exists - if any at all. In reality, we get overpaid and narcissistic governments who are in it for the power and prestige, which leads to cynical and disgruntled citizens. It’s a pity really.
Hi,
>> For me, I just think that the costs outweigh the benefits, and that I can contribute to society in a different way, so politics is not for me.
I kind of think that being in a position of power to represent people is never an easy task. In Singapore, I often feel that people have unrealistic expectations of their representatives, be it PAP or Workers’ Party. PAP hence compensates with high salaries but being in Workers’ Party or other opposition parties become a thankless job (not voted in again and again yet expected to carry the sky and earth) and therefore the number of alternative candidates are shrinking and more walkovers occur.
Regards
>andy Says:
September 1st, 2005 at 03:12 pm
Vivian was pretty critical of PAP before he joined it. PAP got a very good record of co-opting their critics! Lawyers are one of their favourite targets lol. So who knows what will happen in the future?
>
The problem is seeing the limited picture from the public stands, and a bigger picture as an insider.
Despite my occassional criticism of the government, the fact remains that there is a large number of very intelligent and capable people running the show now.
The data processed in the formulation of policies are rarely ever fully shared with the public. There is this ‘need to know basis’ mentality in our government that is deeply ingrained.