Woah, quite a bit of gunpowder smell in here. Seems like we've
got the few big forumites of Sgforums in here debating topics
related to Elitism.
Question: Lets get to the basic, what is Elitism? Or who do we
classify as an elite. Sure there are sterotype, if you go from RI
to RJC, you are an elite. If you are a President Scholar, SAF
Scholar and so on, you are an elite. But what are the exact
criteria and definition of an elite?
The dictionary defines Elite: the most powerful, rich, or talented
people within a particular group
Elitism: the belief that a society or country should be ruled by a
small group of people who are superior to everyone else.
In Singapore's context, I would believe that elite refers to the
most talented people rather than the rich. For all of MM Lee's
might and power, if our current PM Lee had been born an idiot or
chose not to study hard, he would not be deemed an elite, no? We
also often associate elite to top notch schools such as RI, RJC,
HCJC. Despite all your critics against PAP, would you not agree
with me that generally one's progress within the education system
still depends on one's own talent and hardwork. If one's father is
a serial killer or earns about $800 per month, you will not be
rejected by RJC as long as your results are up to it. On the
otherhand, even if your dad or mum is the MP of such and such, if
you flunk your O level, you either take a trip oversea or go ITE
no?
So an elite in Singapore's term would be one that had displayed
their academic talents consistantly from a young age. Elitism in
Singapore's context would therefore be to form a government by
choosing those that had performed well in school since a young age,
irregardless of family background (generally, unless you share my
family background)
So.....what's wrong with a society that trains its best students to
become the next generation of leaders? I mean the alternative
sounds strange, would you rather deliberately not choose the best
students to be a state's next generation's leaders?
But I think most people's issue is not with choosing these students
as potential leaders, but rather the trend that these leaders do
not listen to opinions or at least perceived to be not listening to
others, namely the vast majority of the population. I said
perceived, because at times it is really hard to actually show that
you "listen" to the population. The population is often divided and
thus its opinion differs, take the casino as an example, there are
people who wants it and those who doesn't want it, poor or rich,
the views are diverse. Either decision, the government will appear
to be not listening as there are always a part of the population
holding opposite view.
Having said so, the transperancy of Singapore government and the
lack of independent checks such as Ombudsmen does give rise to
suspicious of "how many skelatons are there in the closest?"
However, a rise of suspicious cannot amount to a conviction and it
would be rather irrationale to equate lack of transperancy to bad
governance. China (our partial cultural ancestor), has had Emperors
who did very well despite the lack of transperancy. Western
thinkers such as Isben in his play "Enemy of the Public" also
suggest that the vast majority of a population may not always or
rather tend to not, come up with both morally and rationally
correct decisions.
The western liberal democracy is really the dominant political
theory only in very recent times and it is hardly a panacea. But
suffice it to say that Singapore is hardly the only state in the
world that has not had all the necessary checks. But even if these
checks are in place, there is no guarantee that the government will
be better than one without these checks. Checks are artificial and
as the Chinese saying goes, Dao Gao Yi Chi, Mo Gao Yi Zhang, people
will always find ways to get round the checks. The US for example,
is hardly a popular one, but Bush did win both elections, despite
the conspirarcy theories out there, the fact remains that a much
disliked person currently seats in the Whitehouse.
*its currently late here, and I shall stop here for now but will
continue it on another day. And people, with regards to the name
callings, try to ease on it.
