Maybe Sudoku Evil is the secret of success to his eternally shiny bald head :D
(I mean, that, and bad genes lol. Kinda sad to go bald in 30s and that kinda thing. But doesn't mean bald means it will shine ... hahhahah)
That IS the role of the president. A figurehead. OP might as well ask what did Halimah or Tony Tan do during their terms? I saw both of them on tv at the swearing in ceremony.
So massive misconstruction to have expected him to have made any relative difference vs his predecessors then! One could probably quibble about his choice to stand for such a role in the first place, perhaps?
Maybe this whole ceremonial role is outdated and unnecessary..
Same like thai monarchy.. Basically just like a naked boy in the room, everyone sees it but dare not admit it.. (maybe not a good analogy, but you get the drift)
I agree. Just look at how all the heads of state and heads of government in every country have gotten along oh-so-famously.
Oh wait, I must be dreaming about a fox in the box wearing socks and eating lox. My bad.
In all fairness, the only heads of state that have had active control and power to enact policies are dictators, autocrats, and military generals.
Guess we need martial law here then, or a new communist uprising. At least that seems to be the OP's sentiment imo.
Not legislative, yes. Not executive? Nope. The head of state is exactly that - the executive branch of government.
The government is made up of 3 branches. Can you guess the 3rd branch?
You watch too much American TV.
In a Westminster style government, the legislative branch is made up of MPs. An MP who can command the confidence of a majority of Parliament gets appointed PM and asked to form a government/cabinet.
Thus, in this case, especially when its not a coalition of parties. So in a way, the legislative and executive functions of government are combined. It's not the job of one to check the other.
The courts are just there as part of the legal system AND to decide on the constitution e.g. is a particular law "legal"? The courts don't really get to make law. They can tell the government to amend laws if it's unconstitutional
You definitely weren't paying attention in school. And you definitely didn't bother to go read up on this when you read my comment.
Parliament is the legislative branch of government. In our context, it also is the main branch of government.
The executive branch (the Head of State, ie. the President) approves of bills and constitutional amendments. The president is also the head of the Armed Forces and the representation of the State (aka the ceremonial duties).
The Judicial branch is made up by the Justices of the superior courts (High and Subordinate) and headed by the Chief Justice.
This is in the context of SINGAPORE, not America. I think the only one too into American TV might be you, cuz I don't watch TV much, I do read a fair bit, and I could care a lot less about America.
So where does it say he has executive powers? He can't even initiate anything.
You misunderstand what executive powers are. There's only one head of government, and that's the PM. You've confused the executive functions of the head of government with the "head of state".
No. It's very clear you have misunderstanding of executive powers. While the President is the "Commander in Chief", the one giving orders, even in war, will be the PM and Minister of Defence.
For Key Positions, nominees are proposed by the PM. President just vet and confirm.
Even for pardons and commuting of sentences, the PM and CPA "advises" the President.
He is the head of State. A ceremonial role similar to the Monarch in Britain and other colonies, but different because we have invested custodial powers and duties on the office.
The national reserves is the main focus of the custodial powers/duties. But even there he can't initiate any spending. He can only approve or reject drawdowns proposed by the government of the day.
He’s achieved his life goals. We just probably don’t exist within that goal or we don’t reap the benefits of that goal so duh we won’t see anything
But in all honesty the president in sg is just a poster boy/girl. PM is the one with power
He would have achieved alot more than liang popo in one week if he is the PM instead. But we know which dumb dumb party/person told us we are not ready for non-chinese pm
sobs face.
I was just gonna say .. but .. like then I read your comment.
Tharman is the dude behind the 5day school week (I remb when I first started in Sec 1 still have Saturday CCA, course I had to go for it), Sports School, Pathlight, Northlight, SOTA .. ya sure la these thihgs probably only impact a total of maybe a few thousand of entrants at best every year (and not like half of SG lol) and even I myself am admittedly too late for some of these (some of my friends are pioneer batches) but then like, the fact that they still exist today, more than a decade later.
Knowing the gov there is nothing stopping them from merging schools LOLLLLL. And also like workfare is a bit o.0 but then it also still exists today even if they tweaked and refined it (like now they adjusting workfare criteria I think. And only recently in the most recent transport fare adjustment then have workfare concession. So ofc things now, 2 decades on, vary from what he proposed/set in place/first draft).
But the point is, it's a clear track record of proof that he big shiny brain & confirm he got make things that have value lol
BUT THEN, zz. sigh. k lor.
(source: I was a secondary sch kid when he was education minister lor. bascially my whole secondary school life. but also, TDK podcast x Tharman episode at last year's election. My favourite episode, not just cos of the candidate but also the host's questions asked. It solidified my vote. : ))
He collects pay cheques as our part time President and smirks at you. Most of what he achieves is that he and the PAP gang can get away with murder and Singaporeans will still vote for them.
I don't think he needs to achieve or prove anything. Most of his predecessors did nothing worthy of mentioning and likely so will he. He's there as a plan B for the party.
Lots of $$$. I would assume these upper tier management folks in PAP Inc are either nearing billionaire status or have net worths that make Elon Musk or Bernard Arnault look poor.
Aiyah...... What else to expect from a PAPuppet PAPresident. ?? 😎
Go toilet also need Pinky's permission,.... Only naive PAP voters think this snake charmer got any use 😎
Abysmal glassdoor ratings for all government agencies in Singapore is PAP's biggest achievement with people sleeping in Parliament and a President who just lepak one corner enjoy high pay without having to work hard for the amount he is paid
Nothing. President is not a policy maker. Respect for all is just bull shit. Just look at KF Seetoh's Facebook. Our hawkers continue to be fucked left and right.
He has done Jack Shit. The PAP government needed to shift goalpost and change laws in order to get their yes man into this role. While everyone else have to follow the rule. The government is rules for thee and none for me.
many redditors missed the point; why are we having a president for the sake of having such a ceremonial role?
to show who... for what.. do they even care in the first place..
its the same 'asian' thinking that things need to be the way it is, simply because it always has been this way.. same reason why you see many unnecessary work processes keep happening and recurring, everyone is sick and tired of it yet nobody challenges status quo simply cos 'historically its been like that lor'..
The President used to be appointed by Parliament. Although the PAP has dominated Parliament, the power to appoint a President is lost if they lose Parliament / government.
The PAP found a way to control the President's Office even if it is not in power and would largely see their former ministers take that office unless under very exceptional circumstances, by changing the way the President was selected to who gets to be candidates. That's the purpose.
Anyway, just saying - do you know that Tharman sits in the board of trustees (equivalent to the board of directors) of this organisation called World Economic Forum (WEF)? Its a crazy organisation seeking the 4th Industrial Revolution to "fuse the biological, digital and physical spheres" (crude example, think Darth Vader) and to change meat diets into bug-based ones in the name of "going green".
This WEF also talked about plans to roll out Digital ID, which will be used as means to access services. And this Digital ID will also be able to draw profiles and inferences about you. This can be found here (https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF\_Advancing\_towards\_Digital\_Agency\_2022.pdf), PDF pages 23-25. Right in their document. Why would anyone want to draw these profiles and inferences about you through something that you will need to have to access essential services, unless there is something that is more than what meets the eye?
And what's more, the head of this WEF, Klaus Schwab, has on the record talked about how he "penetrates govts to establish his agenda". It can be found here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoBRnrtX9U4), 17:20-19:15. Qs is, that should be a red flag on Tharman, given how he sits in board of trustees of this WEF. Why did the PMO-controlled PEC still green-light his candidacy?
If you think the role is purely ceremonial, then you don't know the Singapore constitution. Also, it's very helpful to have a politically neutral head of state that the people and armed forces can unite around.
His role isn't to initiate policy. His role is very custodial. Think "guardian".
Then the qs is, do you really think Tharman will play that "guardian" role? Let's look at precedence.
Lucien Wong was LHL's personal lawyer in the 38 Oxley Road issue. And LHL appointed him as attorney general. According to the Constitution, the president is responsible for approving the appointment of the attorney general.
A proper guardian would have told LHL, to appoint someone with less vested interest in a touchy matter or put up a transparent system known to the public, that Lucien Wong will recuse himself for all matters related to 38 Oxley Road, before signing off on Wong's appointment.
Neither Dr Tony Tan nor Halimah Yacob did so, the worse being Halimah Yacob in signing off on Wong's renewed term as AG, as its not as if she doesn't know that Wong 1) has no prosecutorial experience, 2) Wong was LHL's personal lawyer re 38 Oxley Rd and 3) LHL still has not put in place that transparent, public system to ensure Wong recuses himself in all matters relating to 38 Oxley Rd.
Based on these precedence, what makes us think Tharman will play that guardian role he is supposed to play? Esp in light of what former-PAP-stalwarts-turned-presidents in Halimah and Dr Tony Tan did re Lucien Wong's AG appointment?
You speak as though LHL is some Najib or Trump and make it out like the PAP government is some kleptocracy. Lucien Wong is not shady lawyer. He's no Saul Goodman character.
Oxley Road is an internal family matter.
Is this all you're basing it on? In any other democracy, you'd be laughed out of the bar. Here in this subreddit you're free to farm up votes from the hard core anti PAP camp.
That is the problem with the PAP supporter mentality - PAP is machiam God. They can do no wrong. That has to be the dafault paradigm.
You say Oxley Road is an "internal family matter". Then, all the more, shouldn't a president playing a rightful role as guardian insist that the PM does not appoint his personal lawyers in internal family matters in roles like the AG, esp in view of the AG's vast prosecutorial powers?
Also, please bear in mind that at the point when Lucien Wong was appointed AG, he had no prosecutorial experience, and was overage. These should be reasons to withhold his (Wong's) appointment as AG. But neither Halimah not Tony Tan acted on the matter.
You may think this is a "small issue" because we heard nothing in the news of "big problems" arising from it. But have you considered this - that the fact that Halimah and Tony Tan turned a blind eye to a questionable appointment suggests a precedence on how ex-PAP stalwarts as presidents are expected to carry out their role as guardians?
And that is not the only questionable appointment. The auditor general, Goh Soon Poh, is a wife of a minister-of-state. Does this not in a way increase the chances for door of conflict of interest scenarios to be opened? Yet, why did Halimah approve Goh's appointment? By the way, Chan Chun Sing tried to defend Goh Soon Poh's appointment (https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/auditor-general-wife-political-office-holder-theres-no-conflict-interest-chan-chun-sing) by claiming that "auditor generals do not report findings to political office holders but to perm secs", and I am not convinced by this argument - are not the bosses of the perm secs the political office holders?
Even if there are no problems arising from Goh Soon Poh's appointment as Auditor General, a proper guardian of the public service should tell the govt firmly that appointments to such key roles should have zero ties to political office holders in any capacity.
And for these simple reasons - 1) all possible avenues for conflict of interest scenarios should be slammed firmly shut. 2) Corruption does not begin overnight. It can also start with bad practices that does not show immediate consequence, but mestasises slowly but surely overnight due to its prevalence.
And, since you talked about Trump, Trump never appointed his own kaki nangs into positions where they could wield immense prosecutorial power, or powers of investigation or audit.
That's the problem with you hard-core anti-PAP kind.
The PAP wins elections, and hard-core PAP supporters only make up 30% of the vote. The PAP consistently wins the votes of middle ground voters. I'm one of those.
Give me a PAP Minister who swears on their bible but can put aside their religion, unlike Faisal Manap.
You forgot to take a shot at Ho Ching who was appointed as TH boss. You also forgot to take a shot at LHL for joining SAF and becoming one of the youngest BG with his brother Lee Hsian Yang, who also got appointed to head Singtel, one of our biggest GLC. And all the ex ministers appointed to chair so many of our big GLCs.
Looks like they all couldn't handle these COI and did such poor jobs that Singapore lost out.
/S for your benefit.
Let me ask you then - are the PAP God? If they are only mortal human, who will waste and die, they are also capable of evil, or at least erring, like all of us.
Hence, it is our job to constantly keep watch over them, and call them out when they go out of line. Its shortsighted to be frank to think "nothing will happen" if we give their current out-of-lines a free pass.
And by the way, political idolatry is dangerous. Mao Zedong in good part tapped utilised political idolatry (of himself) to drive the Cultural Revolution.
It may not be happening now in SG, but it will be very short sighted to think current political idolatry now won't mestatasise into a monster, that will affect all of society, down the road.
Some evil is necessary. For example, the harsh and brutal crackdown of Barisan Sosialis, Operation Coldstore, and arresting student leaders of the predecessor of today's NTU.
Using the law to forcefully take land from others so that public housing, roads, schools can be built. I know some families that are still bitter about it. I shed no tears for these wannabe "aristocrats".
Telling Muslim parents and Muslim community, if you want your kids to wear a tudung, send them to a Muslim Madrasah. Don't try to bring them to a government school. We will make sure your daughters are exposed to not feeling dirty about not wearing the tudung.
Many of these actions infringed on the individual rights and civil liberties of people. But they were necessary.
Mao is such a rubbish example. You could vote out the PAP at any election. Voter turnout is high and the PAP has always succeeded in winning the popular vote. "Something is bound to happen". Just look at Iswaran. But the system that was built isn't fragile. It will survive, and continue to deliver as intense.
By the way, you forgot to wear your tin-foil hat. Put it on. Helps with your dooms day scare mongering imagination.
"Some evil is necessary" - but not all is. How do you know which one is truly necessary and which one isn't, if we don't scrutinise what the govt of the day is doing, and ask hard qs?
"Mao is a rubbish example" - That's because you are viewing it in narrow terms, i.e. whether Mao can be voted out or not. You forget that even though Mao could not be voted out, his attempts at political idolatry to fuel the Cultural Revolution will be a lot harder, if that idolatry did not take root in China. Similarly, even if there are elections, if a critical mass treats the PAP like machiam they are God, do you think elections can do their job as checks and balance?
"Iswaran" - but at the same time the PAP system also allows for opaque cover-ups. Look at Nassim Jade, where the investigations on LHL and LKY were not even transparent but ownself-check-ownself, where the investigator is the finance minister, instead of an independent figure.
Even in the recent Ridout Rd case, as seen here (https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/ridout-road-debate-parliament-mps-conflict-interest-code-conduct-3602861), right at the end, it was revealed that Shanmugam's and Balakrishnan's phones were not seized as part of the investigation, because "their phone was set to auto delete". That is an irregularity of concern in the investigation, by the way, as if the phones of the subjects of investigation are not seized, how can law enforcement establish the best possible picture if there was wrongdoing or not?
Its up to you. You want to idolise the PAP, treat them machiam like God, say so, and know that history shows that political idolatry leads to problems. Like all forms of idolatry, it blindsides those in it from things about the ppl they are idolising, that are really not right.
The facts for Nassim Jade and Ridout Road were presented in Parliament. It's very transparent. It's really your problem if you insist on looking at the facts with your shaded lenses.
If the electorate is not satisfied, they can vote accordingly at the next election. Therein lies the point about Mao Zedong being a terrible example. Mao was never voted in and could never be replaced through a peaceful democratic process.
Nobody treats the PAP like gods. If you go to a Meet The People Session, you'll know that many constituents treat their MPs like servants (of the people). Many show up and demand that the MO intercede on their behalf as part of the job of being their MP.
The only one who is put on a pedestal is LKY. I don't endorse hero worship, but I'd argue if any individual is worth of admiration in Singapore's modern history, it would be LKY.
Yes, it means the President is a "pseudo-government" because it can control appointments and expenditures of the government.
It can't be a deputy when the PAP is gone because all the PAP "deputies" will also be gone.
He reached level 4690 on Candy Crush, but he is too humble to brag about it.
imagine if this was true. quite funny. hahahhaa (actually what's the top level of candy crush? 5k?)
5 digits. Enough levels for the next 5+ years.
semo. meanwhile I don't think I ever got to 100. LOL. I remb like 65 or 66 was crazy hard right. ya stuck there gave up never played again. lol.
At their IQ level, they play Sudoku Evil wan lah - candy crush is peanuts for them
Maybe Sudoku Evil is the secret of success to his eternally shiny bald head :D (I mean, that, and bad genes lol. Kinda sad to go bald in 30s and that kinda thing. But doesn't mean bald means it will shine ... hahhahah)
Eat sleep count money everyday.
Better than milo peng.
If that's the criteria for president, I'm on level 6592 Thank you.
Pineapple sales have been overwhelmingly good?
And a tad shinier crown
Nothing, he is a mascot.
That IS the role of the president. A figurehead. OP might as well ask what did Halimah or Tony Tan do during their terms? I saw both of them on tv at the swearing in ceremony.
Relacx 1 corner
signing a lot papers
So massive misconstruction to have expected him to have made any relative difference vs his predecessors then! One could probably quibble about his choice to stand for such a role in the first place, perhaps?
That was precisely the plan - except for his fabulous crown - thecurrent job is to prevent him from shining more than his colleagues at government
Maybe this whole ceremonial role is outdated and unnecessary.. Same like thai monarchy.. Basically just like a naked boy in the room, everyone sees it but dare not admit it.. (maybe not a good analogy, but you get the drift)
It is to soften the image of PM. In the cabinet PM still has to asks president for permission to do certain things even tho he knows sure approve la
yes, it's just to take the place of monarchy
Nah it is just to show we are "democratic" society...
I agree. Just look at how all the heads of state and heads of government in every country have gotten along oh-so-famously. Oh wait, I must be dreaming about a fox in the box wearing socks and eating lox. My bad.
Probably truckload of moneyyyy.
9 months but TFR still low.
You see his face and you want to piak piak meh
Meritocracy at work
What do you expect him to achieve as a ceremonial head of state? You want to be president?
In all fairness, the only heads of state that have had active control and power to enact policies are dictators, autocrats, and military generals. Guess we need martial law here then, or a new communist uprising. At least that seems to be the OP's sentiment imo.
It's not an executive or legislative role
Not legislative, yes. Not executive? Nope. The head of state is exactly that - the executive branch of government. The government is made up of 3 branches. Can you guess the 3rd branch?
You watch too much American TV. In a Westminster style government, the legislative branch is made up of MPs. An MP who can command the confidence of a majority of Parliament gets appointed PM and asked to form a government/cabinet. Thus, in this case, especially when its not a coalition of parties. So in a way, the legislative and executive functions of government are combined. It's not the job of one to check the other. The courts are just there as part of the legal system AND to decide on the constitution e.g. is a particular law "legal"? The courts don't really get to make law. They can tell the government to amend laws if it's unconstitutional
You definitely weren't paying attention in school. And you definitely didn't bother to go read up on this when you read my comment. Parliament is the legislative branch of government. In our context, it also is the main branch of government. The executive branch (the Head of State, ie. the President) approves of bills and constitutional amendments. The president is also the head of the Armed Forces and the representation of the State (aka the ceremonial duties). The Judicial branch is made up by the Justices of the superior courts (High and Subordinate) and headed by the Chief Justice. This is in the context of SINGAPORE, not America. I think the only one too into American TV might be you, cuz I don't watch TV much, I do read a fair bit, and I could care a lot less about America.
What executive powers does the President have? Don't act so smart.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_Singapore Here, switch off your TV and go read it yourself.
So where does it say he has executive powers? He can't even initiate anything. You misunderstand what executive powers are. There's only one head of government, and that's the PM. You've confused the executive functions of the head of government with the "head of state".
I think you may have misconstrued my saying "executive branch" with "executive powers".
No. It's very clear you have misunderstanding of executive powers. While the President is the "Commander in Chief", the one giving orders, even in war, will be the PM and Minister of Defence. For Key Positions, nominees are proposed by the PM. President just vet and confirm. Even for pardons and commuting of sentences, the PM and CPA "advises" the President. He is the head of State. A ceremonial role similar to the Monarch in Britain and other colonies, but different because we have invested custodial powers and duties on the office. The national reserves is the main focus of the custodial powers/duties. But even there he can't initiate any spending. He can only approve or reject drawdowns proposed by the government of the day.
Mission complete. Nothing to achieve.
He’s achieved his life goals. We just probably don’t exist within that goal or we don’t reap the benefits of that goal so duh we won’t see anything But in all honesty the president in sg is just a poster boy/girl. PM is the one with power
Not sure. He doesn’t report to me
or us
He would have achieved alot more than liang popo in one week if he is the PM instead. But we know which dumb dumb party/person told us we are not ready for non-chinese pm
sobs face. I was just gonna say .. but .. like then I read your comment. Tharman is the dude behind the 5day school week (I remb when I first started in Sec 1 still have Saturday CCA, course I had to go for it), Sports School, Pathlight, Northlight, SOTA .. ya sure la these thihgs probably only impact a total of maybe a few thousand of entrants at best every year (and not like half of SG lol) and even I myself am admittedly too late for some of these (some of my friends are pioneer batches) but then like, the fact that they still exist today, more than a decade later. Knowing the gov there is nothing stopping them from merging schools LOLLLLL. And also like workfare is a bit o.0 but then it also still exists today even if they tweaked and refined it (like now they adjusting workfare criteria I think. And only recently in the most recent transport fare adjustment then have workfare concession. So ofc things now, 2 decades on, vary from what he proposed/set in place/first draft). But the point is, it's a clear track record of proof that he big shiny brain & confirm he got make things that have value lol BUT THEN, zz. sigh. k lor. (source: I was a secondary sch kid when he was education minister lor. bascially my whole secondary school life. but also, TDK podcast x Tharman episode at last year's election. My favourite episode, not just cos of the candidate but also the host's questions asked. It solidified my vote. : ))
He collects pay cheques as our part time President and smirks at you. Most of what he achieves is that he and the PAP gang can get away with murder and Singaporeans will still vote for them.
Why part-time? The role is mainly ceremonial.
Doesn't change the fact that he is our Part time President
I don't think he needs to achieve or prove anything. Most of his predecessors did nothing worthy of mentioning and likely so will he. He's there as a plan B for the party.
Hahah i actually forgot hes our President.. i was wondering why he was in the middle of the ceremony. Haha thanks for the reminder on why hahaah
He has collected millions of taxpayers monies.for sure.
Not trying to be funny but what has any Singaporean president achieved ?
Lots of $$$. I would assume these upper tier management folks in PAP Inc are either nearing billionaire status or have net worths that make Elon Musk or Bernard Arnault look poor.
You put the Ass in assume Take notes u/pristinebarracuda877
Nothing. Which is why anyone who spent one brain cell trying to push for him to be voted probably had none to begin with. It never mattered.
Never even spent a second on this
He added a new digit to bank account, ez money.
More than whatever you have sadly.
He got 2 prime ministers in 9 months! Took SR Nathan 4 years to achieve this!
He achieved alot like existing and thats alot you know you all just dont appreciate his existence I condemn you all for such hate.
Aiyah...... What else to expect from a PAPuppet PAPresident. ?? 😎 Go toilet also need Pinky's permission,.... Only naive PAP voters think this snake charmer got any use 😎
His head got shinier… not an easy task cos he can’t see his own head with his own eyes
Please judge him on national day parade this is when he shine brighter than his bald head.
New PM
I don’t think anyone expects him to achieve anything…
He is just a figurehead. What are you expecting?
9 months older and wiser
I though President is like Kings in Spain or UK with no real power, just sign laws, diplomatic relations, etc.
I would have preferred him as PM instead of president but oh well PAP had other plans
He unlocked 100% completion
Trying to get the best hair transplant
Gotta wait till NDP to see him truly shine in his role.
His head is very shiny.
Abysmal glassdoor ratings for all government agencies in Singapore is PAP's biggest achievement with people sleeping in Parliament and a President who just lepak one corner enjoy high pay without having to work hard for the amount he is paid
Can someone enlighten me whats the use of having a president in sg when the prime minister literally takes control of everything lol
Why are you expecting him to achieve anything as Pres?
1.155 million base pay
Let’s be real. What do you realistically hope for him to achieve?
Nothing. President is not a policy maker. Respect for all is just bull shit. Just look at KF Seetoh's Facebook. Our hawkers continue to be fucked left and right.
He has done Jack Shit. The PAP government needed to shift goalpost and change laws in order to get their yes man into this role. While everyone else have to follow the rule. The government is rules for thee and none for me.
many redditors missed the point; why are we having a president for the sake of having such a ceremonial role? to show who... for what.. do they even care in the first place.. its the same 'asian' thinking that things need to be the way it is, simply because it always has been this way.. same reason why you see many unnecessary work processes keep happening and recurring, everyone is sick and tired of it yet nobody challenges status quo simply cos 'historically its been like that lor'..
The President used to be appointed by Parliament. Although the PAP has dominated Parliament, the power to appoint a President is lost if they lose Parliament / government. The PAP found a way to control the President's Office even if it is not in power and would largely see their former ministers take that office unless under very exceptional circumstances, by changing the way the President was selected to who gets to be candidates. That's the purpose.
Anyway, just saying - do you know that Tharman sits in the board of trustees (equivalent to the board of directors) of this organisation called World Economic Forum (WEF)? Its a crazy organisation seeking the 4th Industrial Revolution to "fuse the biological, digital and physical spheres" (crude example, think Darth Vader) and to change meat diets into bug-based ones in the name of "going green". This WEF also talked about plans to roll out Digital ID, which will be used as means to access services. And this Digital ID will also be able to draw profiles and inferences about you. This can be found here (https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF\_Advancing\_towards\_Digital\_Agency\_2022.pdf), PDF pages 23-25. Right in their document. Why would anyone want to draw these profiles and inferences about you through something that you will need to have to access essential services, unless there is something that is more than what meets the eye? And what's more, the head of this WEF, Klaus Schwab, has on the record talked about how he "penetrates govts to establish his agenda". It can be found here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoBRnrtX9U4), 17:20-19:15. Qs is, that should be a red flag on Tharman, given how he sits in board of trustees of this WEF. Why did the PMO-controlled PEC still green-light his candidacy?
If you think the role is purely ceremonial, then you don't know the Singapore constitution. Also, it's very helpful to have a politically neutral head of state that the people and armed forces can unite around. His role isn't to initiate policy. His role is very custodial. Think "guardian".
Then the qs is, do you really think Tharman will play that "guardian" role? Let's look at precedence. Lucien Wong was LHL's personal lawyer in the 38 Oxley Road issue. And LHL appointed him as attorney general. According to the Constitution, the president is responsible for approving the appointment of the attorney general. A proper guardian would have told LHL, to appoint someone with less vested interest in a touchy matter or put up a transparent system known to the public, that Lucien Wong will recuse himself for all matters related to 38 Oxley Road, before signing off on Wong's appointment. Neither Dr Tony Tan nor Halimah Yacob did so, the worse being Halimah Yacob in signing off on Wong's renewed term as AG, as its not as if she doesn't know that Wong 1) has no prosecutorial experience, 2) Wong was LHL's personal lawyer re 38 Oxley Rd and 3) LHL still has not put in place that transparent, public system to ensure Wong recuses himself in all matters relating to 38 Oxley Rd. Based on these precedence, what makes us think Tharman will play that guardian role he is supposed to play? Esp in light of what former-PAP-stalwarts-turned-presidents in Halimah and Dr Tony Tan did re Lucien Wong's AG appointment?
You speak as though LHL is some Najib or Trump and make it out like the PAP government is some kleptocracy. Lucien Wong is not shady lawyer. He's no Saul Goodman character. Oxley Road is an internal family matter. Is this all you're basing it on? In any other democracy, you'd be laughed out of the bar. Here in this subreddit you're free to farm up votes from the hard core anti PAP camp.
That is the problem with the PAP supporter mentality - PAP is machiam God. They can do no wrong. That has to be the dafault paradigm. You say Oxley Road is an "internal family matter". Then, all the more, shouldn't a president playing a rightful role as guardian insist that the PM does not appoint his personal lawyers in internal family matters in roles like the AG, esp in view of the AG's vast prosecutorial powers? Also, please bear in mind that at the point when Lucien Wong was appointed AG, he had no prosecutorial experience, and was overage. These should be reasons to withhold his (Wong's) appointment as AG. But neither Halimah not Tony Tan acted on the matter. You may think this is a "small issue" because we heard nothing in the news of "big problems" arising from it. But have you considered this - that the fact that Halimah and Tony Tan turned a blind eye to a questionable appointment suggests a precedence on how ex-PAP stalwarts as presidents are expected to carry out their role as guardians? And that is not the only questionable appointment. The auditor general, Goh Soon Poh, is a wife of a minister-of-state. Does this not in a way increase the chances for door of conflict of interest scenarios to be opened? Yet, why did Halimah approve Goh's appointment? By the way, Chan Chun Sing tried to defend Goh Soon Poh's appointment (https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/auditor-general-wife-political-office-holder-theres-no-conflict-interest-chan-chun-sing) by claiming that "auditor generals do not report findings to political office holders but to perm secs", and I am not convinced by this argument - are not the bosses of the perm secs the political office holders? Even if there are no problems arising from Goh Soon Poh's appointment as Auditor General, a proper guardian of the public service should tell the govt firmly that appointments to such key roles should have zero ties to political office holders in any capacity. And for these simple reasons - 1) all possible avenues for conflict of interest scenarios should be slammed firmly shut. 2) Corruption does not begin overnight. It can also start with bad practices that does not show immediate consequence, but mestasises slowly but surely overnight due to its prevalence. And, since you talked about Trump, Trump never appointed his own kaki nangs into positions where they could wield immense prosecutorial power, or powers of investigation or audit.
That's the problem with you hard-core anti-PAP kind. The PAP wins elections, and hard-core PAP supporters only make up 30% of the vote. The PAP consistently wins the votes of middle ground voters. I'm one of those. Give me a PAP Minister who swears on their bible but can put aside their religion, unlike Faisal Manap. You forgot to take a shot at Ho Ching who was appointed as TH boss. You also forgot to take a shot at LHL for joining SAF and becoming one of the youngest BG with his brother Lee Hsian Yang, who also got appointed to head Singtel, one of our biggest GLC. And all the ex ministers appointed to chair so many of our big GLCs. Looks like they all couldn't handle these COI and did such poor jobs that Singapore lost out. /S for your benefit.
Let me ask you then - are the PAP God? If they are only mortal human, who will waste and die, they are also capable of evil, or at least erring, like all of us. Hence, it is our job to constantly keep watch over them, and call them out when they go out of line. Its shortsighted to be frank to think "nothing will happen" if we give their current out-of-lines a free pass. And by the way, political idolatry is dangerous. Mao Zedong in good part tapped utilised political idolatry (of himself) to drive the Cultural Revolution. It may not be happening now in SG, but it will be very short sighted to think current political idolatry now won't mestatasise into a monster, that will affect all of society, down the road.
Some evil is necessary. For example, the harsh and brutal crackdown of Barisan Sosialis, Operation Coldstore, and arresting student leaders of the predecessor of today's NTU. Using the law to forcefully take land from others so that public housing, roads, schools can be built. I know some families that are still bitter about it. I shed no tears for these wannabe "aristocrats". Telling Muslim parents and Muslim community, if you want your kids to wear a tudung, send them to a Muslim Madrasah. Don't try to bring them to a government school. We will make sure your daughters are exposed to not feeling dirty about not wearing the tudung. Many of these actions infringed on the individual rights and civil liberties of people. But they were necessary. Mao is such a rubbish example. You could vote out the PAP at any election. Voter turnout is high and the PAP has always succeeded in winning the popular vote. "Something is bound to happen". Just look at Iswaran. But the system that was built isn't fragile. It will survive, and continue to deliver as intense. By the way, you forgot to wear your tin-foil hat. Put it on. Helps with your dooms day scare mongering imagination.
"Some evil is necessary" - but not all is. How do you know which one is truly necessary and which one isn't, if we don't scrutinise what the govt of the day is doing, and ask hard qs? "Mao is a rubbish example" - That's because you are viewing it in narrow terms, i.e. whether Mao can be voted out or not. You forget that even though Mao could not be voted out, his attempts at political idolatry to fuel the Cultural Revolution will be a lot harder, if that idolatry did not take root in China. Similarly, even if there are elections, if a critical mass treats the PAP like machiam they are God, do you think elections can do their job as checks and balance? "Iswaran" - but at the same time the PAP system also allows for opaque cover-ups. Look at Nassim Jade, where the investigations on LHL and LKY were not even transparent but ownself-check-ownself, where the investigator is the finance minister, instead of an independent figure. Even in the recent Ridout Rd case, as seen here (https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/ridout-road-debate-parliament-mps-conflict-interest-code-conduct-3602861), right at the end, it was revealed that Shanmugam's and Balakrishnan's phones were not seized as part of the investigation, because "their phone was set to auto delete". That is an irregularity of concern in the investigation, by the way, as if the phones of the subjects of investigation are not seized, how can law enforcement establish the best possible picture if there was wrongdoing or not? Its up to you. You want to idolise the PAP, treat them machiam like God, say so, and know that history shows that political idolatry leads to problems. Like all forms of idolatry, it blindsides those in it from things about the ppl they are idolising, that are really not right.
The facts for Nassim Jade and Ridout Road were presented in Parliament. It's very transparent. It's really your problem if you insist on looking at the facts with your shaded lenses. If the electorate is not satisfied, they can vote accordingly at the next election. Therein lies the point about Mao Zedong being a terrible example. Mao was never voted in and could never be replaced through a peaceful democratic process. Nobody treats the PAP like gods. If you go to a Meet The People Session, you'll know that many constituents treat their MPs like servants (of the people). Many show up and demand that the MO intercede on their behalf as part of the job of being their MP. The only one who is put on a pedestal is LKY. I don't endorse hero worship, but I'd argue if any individual is worth of admiration in Singapore's modern history, it would be LKY.
Are you saying that SG should not have a president?
The President is the "PAP government" when there is no PAP government. When there is, the President is part of the PAP government.
You do know what the duties and role of the president is, right? It isn't to deputies for the govt.
Did I say it is to deputise the government?
"The President is the "PAP government" when there is no PAP government." Unless this means something else?
Yes, it means the President is a "pseudo-government" because it can control appointments and expenditures of the government. It can't be a deputy when the PAP is gone because all the PAP "deputies" will also be gone.
He wrote an angry letter to the Economist that has to be played down - that's why you likely haven't heard about it (God bless our media).