Singapore Democrats

A commendable start to the series "Let's Talk". AA does himself credit with views that are mainly balanced, and within the limitations of a nine-minute video, provide some insightful points for us to reflect on.

My main takeaway from the video was in response to CTL's question (@7.06 min) about what opposition parties need to do to be a more effective force in S'pore politics.

AA replied that firstly, they need address bread and butter issues which people are usually concerned about.

Secondly, the opposition parties need to be sensitive to the fear level in general population. They should try to work at a level that ameliorates that fear by doing things that people can participate without risking too much. This gradually build people's confidence in being engaged.

SDP's current effort at Fajar wet-market illustrates both aspects very well.

Firstly, the Bt Panjang effort addresses a bread-and-butter issue -- the concern of stall-holders' livelihood and the possible escalation of prices in the wet-market. This contrasts well with the perception that which the government seem to have taken a hands-off, legalistic, and leave-it-to-the-market approach.

However, the second point AA made is equally pertinent. SDP has escalated the effort recently by planning to organise an outdoor talk which it already concedes will not be permitted by the police.

If the talk goes ahead as planned, the police is likely to treat it as a contravention of the POA and take action.

My view is that the attempt at an outdoor talk not deflects from the original cause, it now heightens the people's concern (and fear) to align themselves to SDP. Residents are in a fix whether to participate in talk with doubtful legality.

The strategy contradicts AA's advice that opposition parties should try to work at a level that ameliorates fear of the people. The talk, if not permitted by the authority, is something that people are unlikely to participate as it would be might just be "risking too much".

[b]I propose that SDP pay heed to AA, for the current Bt PJ effort, and future ones as well[/b]; and, I must not forget to congratulate SDP (and CTL) on the good video work.

Just realised lots of grammatic errors above; lame excuse is that it is quite hard to do grammar-check on a puny editing box... thousand apologies nevertheless, but you intelligent guys will make up for my failings, no?:

- AA replied that firstly, they need [b]to[/b] address bread and butter issues which people are usually concerned about.

- This gradually build[b]s[/b] people's confidence in being engaged.

- My view is that the attempt at an outdoor talk not [b]only[/b] deflects from the original cause, it now heightens the people's concern (and fear).....

....and a few more, I am sure. Sorry la, I promise to do better.

Men in the streets, in the coffeeshops, at MRT stations, in the malls, at the cinemas, you name it.....people are talking about this SDP Lets talk video !!!

Congratulation to SDP! You make our day!!!

We will continue to spread this news nationwide about this lets talk video at SDP website !!!

Men in the streets are also keen to hear political figures like Mr Tan Liang hong, Mr francis seow, not forgetting Mr Siad Zahari and many more !!!

People are just excited about this ground breaking video !!

Thank you SDP !!! You bring us , our children, their children hope !!

PAP monkeys must be kicked out before singapore is sold.
Heaven can see the good deed SDP has done at Bukit panjang.

Hello, Democrats TV, is that it ?
Well at least, SPD had something different to offer, compare to our usual Conservative Media CNA that promote only traditional asian values.
This is the 1st time I had seen a Gay Activist talking on LGBT issue.
You bet, Bryan T would irritated, ya from his writting we can tell he is a neo-conservative.
Myself being a "spin-off" from the conservative values. Towards Centrism values. I still prefer "Don't ask, don't speak"

Hello, The Contend Business is going through some tough surgery themselves & AA had nail it on. Look at CNA & SPH (printed media) the Today Paper & The Strait Times. CNA is using "The Contemporary Model" their source of income is from (Advertisement) that is how they are able to give out free daily newspapers.

Solution: move away from Hard News towards more Soft News to increase readership to attract more advertising company. SPH uses the "Old Model" of buying your papers. Studies & Research had shown in Europe & States these companies are going bust as more Advertisement companies are heading to (the cyberspace) Solution: Most Printed Media had diversity out into (Cable Channel Media) SPH yellow pages ?

Today most companies are moving towards (website media) contends. Now with the coming of (Amazon Kindle) we can download (printed media) from anywhere in the world. As for CNA (music contend) for example traditional radio station refused to play metal music. Today, we had the (internet radio) Megadeth had launch their own internet music radio. Internet radio provide fcous contend Religious, Sport, Country, Pop, Metal..why listen to Class 95??

Evolve or die, Differentiate or die. Channel 5 had to compete with Starhub 80 foreigns channel. It is not business as usual for them. The good news for SPD is with Aamzon Kindle they can open up the political space. We can see CNA & SPH losing their market size and their shrinking influnce on S'porean politcs

Inspite of the blacking-out and the sledge-hammering, the party that has substance not only refuses to buckle but has grown from strength to innovative strenght. This is the result of our faith in the young and IT savvy. When the young complements to old, this is what we get. Many have come to serve their country without asking how much they should be paid. It makes a lot of difference.

More is in the works. Long suffering Singaporeans,please hold your breath.

Like BryanT's mine also needs has a correction. "When the young complements [b]the[/b] old, this is what we get.

Yeah, grammar mistakes are the bane of old folks like us (I'm assuming Jufrie is also old like me; otherwise, I apologise if the assumption is wrong).

Eyesight weak, fingers finicky, brain.... don't need to say.

BTW, my english not very [i]boleh[/i], but I thought it should be "... the young [b]complement[/b] the old ...."

Reason is that the "young" refers to "young people", which is plural.

Wah, very panic man; worried that this post also contains grammar mistakes.

Like BryanT's my post also needs a correction. "When the young complements [b]the [/b]old, this is what we get."
[i]Jangan marah ya.[/i]

Possible to use skype to interview Francis Seow, Tan Wah Piow, Tang Hong Liang, Gopal Nair, etc?

Hello, AA was spot on with the Bread and Butter issue. Every election SDP 0 PAP 1, the ruling party win again. Did you noticed which party had the biggest crowds? What went wrong?
Where are those (die hard Liberals?) The Gay activist, Pro-choice activist, Women Rights activist, Human Rights activist, Civil Rights activist and so forth. These core group of Liberals that really dislikes conservative SPH & CNA. The Ruling Party will never touch these activist due to their DNA make up of conservative roots & religious supporter.
The Bread & Butter issue are usually the "soft news" that S'porean pay alot of attention to. Why didn't SDP cover the PSLE issue, most S'porean parent are boiling in anger. We are talking about their precious children. Their choice of school, how many N-level student in percentage end up in higher education? In fact, our education system start "Streaming our kids" at 9 years old at primary 3 onwards. O-Level is the passport to the world without it your can't enter ploy, pre-u, jc, uinversity. Our education system had been fiddle too often.

Have just started on this hilarious book* on British history from which I would like to quote a section. It describes a local political phenomenon very well. The authors were describing the Battle of Stirling Bridge in which William Wallace, a Scottish knight, routed the invading English army led by King Edward I.

[i]“Heading back down the hill, it seemed incredible that Wallace's men 'swooped down' from this steep craggy hillside in full armour with battle-axes and swords to slaughter the invaders. Even without all those encumbrances, you'd surely want to tread very carefully down slopes like this.

Even with the correctly supportive footwear.

But Wallace's men had no fear of twisted ankles. These were people who, when faced with a steep slope, really went for it, probably yelling,"AAAAARRRRGGHHHH!!!"

And also,"CAAAANNNN'T STOOOPPPP!!!""[/i]

The analogy pertains to a (best left unnamed) political party, with its well-polished suit of ideological armour, armed with state-of-the-art media weapons, and fortified with well-rehearsed and thought-through defences against external assaults.

One must realise that the suit of chunky and ossified armoury can pose a liability at times. The mood may be one of fearlessness, similar to that of Wallace's men.

But in whichever era of warfare, a leadened entity will repeatedly find itself propelled along trajectories from which it can't gracefully jettison. [b]The headlong collision may create much hullabaloo, but the real impact are only dents, not routs.[/b]

*footnote: for those interested, the book is "Blighty" by Steve Lowe and Alan McArthur.

Congratulations to the SDP on hitting yet another milestone that will undoubtedly aid in the recovery of [b]all[/b] opposition parties in Singapore; it has to be openly and proudly acknowledged that the SDP is helming the Recovery Movement on behalf of every opposition party in Singapore whether they wish to acknowledge it or not.

Score:

1. Full marks for innovation; and,

2. Full marks for political enterprise.

This innovativeness and enterprise that the SDP has always demonstrated will surely fuel the much needed reform on many fronts in Singapore. I really hope that someone - a truly unbiased political historian, if not the party itself - is documenting this, along with other tangible milestones in Singapore's political development.

Now, on to my comments on the content of the video itself.

I had previously written about the many 'story types" - news, op-ed, etc. - that typically constitute the range of stories found in most print media, of which this website is one.

This interview with Alex Au might be described as the broadcast media's version of a personality profile: we get a glimpse of Alex Au's political personality from the range of questions posed to him by the host.

On first viewing, the interview came across - to me at least - much like a talk show on the traditional, ultraconservative-to-fascist values broadcast media, except for the personality being interviewed as well as the untraditional questions posed to him. Nothing weong with that.

As far as Alex Au himself goes, his political personality and the issues that he is known to support do in fact coincide much with the SDP's. Thus Alex Au is in fact be a appropriate choice as an interviewee in this show.

However, this has led me to concerns about what the content of future shows might be.

[b]This is a series that is being produced entirely with the SDP's resources[/b]. Thus I would feel that [b]it must[/b] - rightly and unabashedly - [b]also serve a direct political purpose to the SDP[/b], and the causes it supports. To that end, I hope that future episodes would include:

1. personality profiles of [b]candidates[/b] that the SDP intends to field in the next election; and,

2. discussions on [b]issues that the SDP has been championing[/b], either with an interviewee - SDP member or otherwise - who supports the SDP's stand on those issues or even someone who detracts from it - we are [i]for[/i] free speech/expression after all.

Perhaps, the show as it is so far - all one episode of it - might actually serve the purpose of deflecting criticisms of being 'overtly self-serving' and/or 'political' by the SDP's many detractors (reminder: this series is produced [b]entirely[/b] with the SDP's own resources), even by those claiming to promote that elusive thing called 'opposition unity' from within the support bases of the other political parties, verifiable or otherwise.

If that were to be the case, I hope my suggestion would be considered for some time down the road. (I of course understand if the filming of future episodes that have yet to be released might have already taken place.)

Otherwise, congratulations to the SDP once again for breaking new ground against all the odds that have been stacked up against it.

Hello, I guess nobody want to ask the hard question...why we lost ? what went wrong ? did we miss out anything ?
Let get started b'cos I hate LOSER.
We had witness thousands of people at Worker Party Rally. Same things happen at SDP Rally, SPP Rally...none of them could close any deal. Why? X3
So many customers is in your shop but nobody bought anything! Quite amazing. Bad service? Poorly organized? Poor showmanship?...we had to figure it out.
1) "Uncle Charlie" symptoms- Standing on the muddy field all I heard are these heartlander Uncle Charlie complain X2, telling their unhappiness with the Ruling Party. The Speaker on the stage complain X2 with their unhappiness towards the Ruling Party. I guess after letting out some steam. They felt so good, they go home & "forget everything" sleep so well after release it all out of their chest 2) Poorly Organized - Whenever they switch to a Mandarin/Hokkien version the Malay & English educated become restless & leave for home. 3) Focus too much on Hard News heartlanders Uncle Charlie catch no balls. Solution: Capture that raw energy. Obama = all fired up, ready to go, yes we can! Clinton = enough, its time for change, Bush must go! Go for Duality Speaker 1 English simultaneously with a 1 Mandarin translator keep the flow of spirit. 2) Fired up your Liberals, all your grassroots core supporters. 3) Paint a bleak picture to the people its going to get alot worse. 4) What you will do for them, example Gay March, Reform the Education System, More Buses...etc 5) Hope is coming we are the answer 6) Why are you here? why you should vote for us? 7) Middle ground, Undecided voters why should we care ? this is not our war ? what can you do me ? Well, are you better off or worse off ? having less money but more work? you want change?? **My 2 cents views (its strange but I am actually giving Liberals a helping hand) Give a reason why they should vote you, sell something ? & keep a cool head. Be a PLAYER

I second this suggestion by maxchew:

Re: "Possible to use skype to interview Francis Seow, Tan Wah Piow, Tang Hong Liang, Gopal Nair, etc?"

Has the “slow” approach, which is also practiced by other opposition, to ameliorate the fear succeeded in achieving more rights and voice for Singaporean? No.

The 2 elected opposition MP currently in parliament are simply not enough. If not for JBJ’s effort in the 80s, we might not even have 1 opposition in parliament.

In real terms William Wallace did not achieve anything of lasting substance. That cannot, however denigrate his importance to the moral of the Scottish people. He showed by example what was possible if the Scots resisted the English. The "It cannot be done!" mentality has to be punctured by a few to show the way.

Why not complete the salutary tale of Wallace aka 'BraveHeart', this time not forgetting the grimmer, more grisly aspects?

In 1297, Wallace thrashed the English army at the Battle of Stirling Bridge. One year later, at the Battle of Falkirk the English returned the compliment and cut Wallace's army to ribbons forcing him to flee for his life.

He was captured 7 years later near Glasgow and handed over to a somewhat pissed-off King Edward I of England:

[quote][i]Following the trial, on 23 August 1305, Wallace was taken from the hall, stripped naked and dragged through the city at the heels of a horse to the Elms at Smithfield. [b]He was hanged, drawn and quartered[/b] — strangled by hanging but released whilst he was still alive, emasculated, eviscerated and his bowels burnt before him, beheaded, then cut into four parts. His preserved head (dipped in tar) was placed on a pike atop London Bridge. His limbs were displayed, separately, in Newcastle upon Tyne, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Stirling, and Aberdeen.
[/i][/quote]
Whether or not you find any of the above 'hilarious' depends of course on whether you're named William (*[i]cough[/i]* Lim Chin Siong *[i]cough[/i]*) Wallace or Edward, I suppose.

BTW, Edward I was also said to be temperamental bastard and this, along with his height, made him an intimidating man and he often instilled fear in his contemporaries. He was also known to be inordinately fond of invisible armour which only loyal acolytes were capable of seeing.

When the king died in 1307, he left behind a number of financial and political problems to his son Edward II. Funny, that.

The reign of his son was disastrous, marked by incompetence, political squabbling, and financial debacles. Although large in stature and powerfully built, he was more interested in light entertainment and simple pleasures than in the duties of governing.

Widely alleged to have been homosexual, Edward nevertheless fathered at least five children. He was unable to deny even the most grandiose favours to his male favourites...

Oh dear, more golden years ahead then.

For me, the best bit was Alex's Freudian oops! at 5:40 when he says what sounded like, [[b]i]"The political landscape is always in a state of f*cks..."[/i][/b], then hastily (and commendably smoothly) recovers to say, [b][i]"flux..."[/i][/b]! Never was a truer word said. That soundbite alone is priceless and pure gold.

Of course this being the first episode it's early days yet and I'm sure the presentation will be rapidly fine-tuned but a few rough edges were evident here and there.

CTL is a photogenic enough guy but sorely challenged in the professional journalist interview-skills department. A bit surprising as he is I understand, a lawyer by training.

He should've binned the cheesy and amateurish clipboard in favour of memorising and asking his questions in a more natural, conversational manner instead of reading them out like a bad PowerPoint presenter. The contrast with AA's somewhat more relaxed off-the-cuff replies was rather glaring, regrettably.

But what was more irritating was the absence of continuity, the lack of a fluent follow-up to the reply. What we had instead was a series of jagged little self-contained questions none of which appeared to acknowledge the existence of its predecessor. The result was a jerky, stilted, dissatisfying Q&A session - like you'd get when applying to become a PAP MP, I imagine.

Nonetheless, the concept of an 'SDP Hard Talk' is excellent and I look forward to the next episode starring Catherine Lim.

Suggestions:

[1] Vary the 'studio' setting.
[2] Use a less stiff setting for some interviewees.
[3] Lose the affected flower vase - ugh!
[4] Try out other interviewers and don't forget the ladies. You might find some unexpected talent in your ranks.
[5] Use U-Tube's subtitling/caption function for other languages
[6] Smile a little more?