MacDonalds and self-censorship

My,

what a racial flap a private entity's decisions has created.

Out of a decision to NOT offend a particular denomination, the whole can of worms over political correctness has been reopened.

What seems to be at issue that a lot of the anger has seemed to miss:

SELF CENSORSHIP

This is the private entity's societal crime. It has attempted to modify one culture's at the sake of not offending another denomination. (In this case, pithy the Chinese-Muslims, for what do they do in the year of the pig? Well, it's just HARAM - they do not eat nor touch it. But its a metaphorical pig; one that perhaps existed way before Islam became a significant religion within greater China or inner Mongolia!)

By doing this, McD's has decided to place one denomination's sensitivities over another. Hence the recent mind-war over minarets in Switzerland, or Burjas and all that in France.

So why self-censor by removing the pig from what is clearly in the eyes of Singapore society a pig? Does Hong Kong McD's offer the pig as a Doraemon character in their set of twelve? (YES).
If so, then, have they chosen to place chinese culture over muslim religion instead? perhaps because there are less muslims in HK?

Does the self-censorship speak to a deeper angst that runs as a undercurrent within SG society, and the greater world? Has the war on terror reduced the world to such weak efforts of mental will?

If we seek to be pluralistic, then secular society cannot seek to address any one denomination over another. To paraphrase a friend : "since I cannot please everyone completely, I shall offend everyone equally". What does this mean? Perhaps, every denomination should not have any kind of special 'rights' or privileges, unless the society that denomination exists in discriminates against the said denomination, (ergo 1960s and the American civil rights movement and resultant laws that still are needed today because, well, intolerance takes a long while to 'breed' out of any society.)

Afterall, many societies still treat women as near chattel. Much work universal suffrage has still to do.

And yes, since by the time I write this, Mr Wang has decided to stop the discussion in his comments page, I agree that Mr Wang has also missed the point. But its not about the religion or not, its the point about the self-censorship.

Accept that humans are naturally different in society and culture;
Lighten up on the urge to convert all to one view by means fair and foul.
Peace will then naturally arise, because hate will have left.


E.o.M.

A random poem about... informational asymmetry?

Randomly inspired by random thoughts.

Originally crafted along the lines of Martin Niemöller 'attributed quote'.

this poem got distracted.
(perhaps someday, I might review it. ahh.. hubris.)

anyway, posted the following as a response to YawningBread's short

-------------------------------------
First, they abused
the illiterate, then,
the uneducated, weak with
contractual informational asymmetry;
unable, to defend

Knowledge is power,
in this economic world built,
upon the efforts of all man,
what is fair?

Yet, those taught and literate,
stand idly by, not caring beyond,
their own little reality;

Are, in their own way,
abused by powers, incomprehensible,
to even those, that traverse,
the biggest corridors of power.

Or, are we all,
already, collected for?

---------------------------------
Abuse happens when good people do nothing, or are unwilling to lift a finger to help those who build our society. Too often, we observe abuse, but do nothing to alleviate nor reverse the damage, because, well, they're not like us, or, because, just where do we start undoing wrongs?

Is the law of economics just a monetary equivalent of the law of the jungle? Are we then, human, or beast?


E.o.M.

AWARE - the fight continues

Ramblings from a post to YoungRepublic mailing list:

========================
Well,

as far as the news reports are concerned, the constitution has no fixed rules on how to remove a sitting ExCo. Given the understanding most Singaporeans have and care towards the letter of the law, it is very possible the constitution of AWARE has been pretty simple and just 'borrowed' from the Registrar of Societies' simplified template.

This is a big wake-up call to other bodies to review their own constitutions and sort out their act.

As for the issues XXXX raised:

1. This is true democracy at work.
Sure, not all the stakeholders showed up at the original AGM. Most democratic societies do NOT have the rule of compulsory voting. You can either have a holiday on voting day or turn out and vote. (South Africa's recent high turnout is a rarity, then again, its a very young democracy and a counrty which now seeks equality because democracy actually ended apartheid. [Good for them!])

Most AGMs are processional. Nobody really cares except those who cared. The 'takeover' clearly shows 'democracy' in action, i.e., those who cared enough came forward and executed a 'hostile takeover'.

Now, the fight back, whither led by only 6 who attended, or 144 new members who only signed up after, or whatever, is another example of democracy in action. If you care enough, you rally the others who were ambivalent and 'fight back' against the takeover.

Will the EGM solve anything? As I have mentioned, the constitution is probably too weak in its lettering to evict a sitting ExCo. However, a sitting quorate could table a motion to cancel the previous election outcome and hold fresh elections. What is possible? Who knows. The lawyers who are signing up for the fight should know better what is possible.

2. Varying rights of membership
Now turn around and ask yourself? are you just echoing what MM1's philosophy of one many many votes? What is ordinary membership? Who can hold office? How long must they be have been members before they can hold office ? 21? can someone be president from day one or must they serve sitting positions in other committee positions (Direct to PM? Thaksin?)

Again these are issues that the organization has to resolve within itself. When is equality equal?
Comes back again to the quality of the organization's constitution. Has it been written with thought towards its depth of complexity? is it something that all members agree to?

Come again, how many people here have ever read the constitutions of the various student bodies they have belonged to? Compulsory or otherwise? Did those make sense? Uniformed groups?

We're kept unaware (oh the pun!) or uneducated on what it means to be a body of people. Deliberately. No thought is given from childhood about teaching children what their various childhood bodies are about. They just exist. No thought is given towards teaching the young where/why these bodies have come from, nor its history. They just exist. No education is deliberately carried out on just how one can attempt to redirect a body or organization at a diferent direction democratically. Just by fiat by the ruling entity. or the ??


The AWARE 'spat' is good. it is awakening the people towards the idea that cohesive action can have an outcome. The S377A appeal failed, even though it followed all the proper steps in the SG constitution to bring the issue up for consideration. Is that the amount of respect we have for our word of law?

Pithy I am male. Nothing I can do vote-wise to affect the outcome, since AWARE is so afraid of male dominance that males cannot be anything more than associate members with no voting rights. (too much feministic tendencies at its setup? or as they said, an organization for women by women only?)

Should be fun. And signal that the body is still growing towards a better understanding of what it means to be a body, and what rules there are in this body and how to change them. When will it reach the House on the banks of the river?

E.o.M.

==================
quoted (names removed)

if YR cannot even serve as a forum for a relatively civilized
discussion of something as big as this, it really doesn't bear
sustaining, quite frankly. lets fix that.

i am not familiar with aware's constitution but is it possible to
gather enough people to call an EGM and reverse this takeover? likely
the vote only succeeded because not all the stakeholders in aware
attend aware's AGMs - a matter confounded by the fact that voting
rights are not adjusted for length of familiarity with aware and other
such factors. This is not a corporation - the constiution should not
allow the theoretical "buying of common stock" by swamping aware with
new members, and thus facilitating a hostile takeover.

i dont see any end result to this other than my suggestion above.. the
last thing we want is the government stepping in to dictate social
issues (oh, the irony)

Thanks for posting this xxx.  I wasn't going to raise this on YR but I'm glad someone did.

And now they've completely and utterly lost the plot:
http://www.glass-castle.org/blog/2009/04/tale-of-two-events-how-they-have.html
xxxxx

Identityless

what is a loss of email? 11 years of email?

has that much time passed?

is this the end of identity?

will forgetting history cause one to repeat its mistakes?


Is wisdom the sum of one's experiences?



There are no letters in the attic anymore.

What else be next?

tabula rasa??



E.o.M.

Another one bit the dust (sadly)

JBJ is dead.

another prominent figure head in the political scene is dead.


He never sought riches. He was a true lawyer, who believed that there was more than just seeking more money in the temple.

But one man cannot fight an entire system.
So he fought and lost, but still fought, until his end.

Will this be how he is remembered? Someone who never gave up?

Hopefully history will be kinder to him than his oppressor.




E.o.M.

Transparency versus Trust

Realization comes here and there.


When interacting with another entity/organization/government/etc

• When there is absolute trust, there is an absolute lack of need for any sort of transparency;
  

• When there is absolute lack of trust, there is an absolute need for transparency.

simplified

trust/transparency inverse relationship
==============
0% trust = 100% transparency
100% trust = 0% transparency

Most entities in the world operate somewhere along this continuum.

And when governments lose the trust of their people, the more the people will clamour for greater transparency.

Now if the question is flipped - if the people currently trust the government, wouldn't a call for greater transparency lead to a loss of trust from the people?

Is it a mutual dependency relationship, or a singular dependency relationship? eg, when trust is lost, transparency is needed, but if more transparency is needed, trust is not lost?

paradox of life.

all i know is the ministers look overpaid for what they do; seemingly way way higher than what the recent Straits Times salary survey showed as the mean (only $12,000?).

if we paid everyone according to the 'assets' they take care of,
shouldn't those cleaners who ensure that the shiny buildings are kept clean and safe should therefore be pretty well paid too?

Ministerial pay in Singapore is truly the "golden handcuffs" approach to ensure compliance with someone's reality.


E.o.M.

English? Engrish? or 3ngr15h?

This banner has been hanging along the CTE expressway for more than a year.

The text is fuzzy, but one of them dates it to 2007.

The question is -

who rocks? RAWKZ?
and they are teaching ENGRISH????



'tis sad. Any attempt by an older generation to connect with younger generations must necessarily look foolish and stupid, if not idiotic.

But as a guardian of language and educational institution of the young, to spell it as such is....... unforgivable?

sad.


E.o.M.

when is enough enough?

In response to a comment by an ANON on yawningbread's article on the latest shot to CSJ and sibling.

Not that I believe that all of CSJ's fighting tactics are the best, but since in a war, there can be no winning tactic until after the war is over, I guess this is also my official support declaration for the 'rights that is fighting for.

Where this will bring me next, who knows. Life is getting sociologically unbearable here for those who value thought over mindless obeisance.

When will the ideological war errupt, if there are no reporters willing or able to report it?
oh wait. the Internet. The last great free thought hope.




===============
to Anon: 05 June, 2008 23:35


You believed that "our political system has grown complacent & out-of-touch after nearly 40 years in power."

However, our political system has never been real ever since coherent opposition parties were crushed into near non-existence by iron rule and other tools of government misapplied.

Neither has our political system ever attempted to mature in any sensible way - whether 2 party rule, or coalition rule, or whatever forms it could have taken.

Constitutional change requirements on parliamentary majorities are a joke when one party has virtual control of the constitution, and has the legal right to change it as and when the party sees fit.
(as an addendum to this thought - when can an attack on a political party's ideology ever be constituted as an attack on government, or is that a fallacious question?)

As for the rest of what is happening to Singapore that most Singaporeans seem to be simmering hotly about, I doubt there can be any positive change towards a state for Singaporeans first.

When foreign talent are more attractive to employers than locals (eg: NS obligations etc), we can see what happens to us - HOTEL Singapore, where the majority of the staff are NOT Singaporeans.

As to leaving, I have already decided that one day, my ticket will be validated. And that is the sadness, for I will leave not for the sake of a better life, for I forever will remain born a Singaporean, but for the sake of a freer life.


E.o.M.




===============