This letter appeared in the Saturday Straits Times Forum Page on 18 February. What we see is an interesting phenomenon whereby the aforementioned implied dominant political party in Singapore *need we mention names?* is going all out to recruit more members into its organisation.
In a situation whereby grassroots platforms are sinisterly converted into "recruitment and training grounds" for "potential" politicians, drawn along partisan lines, we need to perhaps pose the question of its legality. Besides that, can we read a trace of undue pressure or unnecessary harrassement?
It is a well-known fact that the PAP government has a symbiotic relationship with NTUC. Seemingly, grassroots are not spared from its web of infiltration.
==
I REFER to the letter "Choosing grassroot advisers:Forget politics" (ST, Feb 14) and the article "Aye to apolitical GROs" (ST, Feb 10).
In Singapore, joining a grassroots organisation (GRO) seems to be a sure way for one to be involved in politics, despite the belief that GROS are supposed to be independent on politics.
I volunteered in a GRO with the intention of serving the community, especially the lower strata of society, and getting engaged in activities which I have an interest in.
After serving in the GRO for a few years up till now, I have been approached a number of times by other grassroots members requesting me to be a member of the political party.
I do not see the need to be involved politically because my main purpose is to achieve the aims I mentioned above.
Getting involved in the political party does not seem to advance these aims in any way.
Moreover, getting affliated to the political party was not something I anticipated when I first joined the GRO.
Even if I want to be part of a political party eventually, I am still not ready to do so.
I hope the ambiguous line between GROs and political parties can be better defined.
Volunteers in GROs should not be put in a difficult position to decide whether to join a political party just because they want to serve the community.
With a politically-charged system where prospective grassroots leaders are "screened" on their backgrounds, those who are viewed as "undesirable" (for example, ex-offenders) but are sincere about contributing their share for the community are deprived of the opportunities to prove their worth.
Instead, there may be people who join the GROs to work for their own vested interests through politics without any real intention of contributing to society.
I hope the grassroots organisations can be autonomous and apolitical gradually so that volunteers can concentrate on serving the community.
Yee Kai Ling (Miss)
In a situation whereby grassroots platforms are sinisterly converted into "recruitment and training grounds" for "potential" politicians, drawn along partisan lines, we need to perhaps pose the question of its legality. Besides that, can we read a trace of undue pressure or unnecessary harrassement?
It is a well-known fact that the PAP government has a symbiotic relationship with NTUC. Seemingly, grassroots are not spared from its web of infiltration.
==
I REFER to the letter "Choosing grassroot advisers:Forget politics" (ST, Feb 14) and the article "Aye to apolitical GROs" (ST, Feb 10).
In Singapore, joining a grassroots organisation (GRO) seems to be a sure way for one to be involved in politics, despite the belief that GROS are supposed to be independent on politics.
I volunteered in a GRO with the intention of serving the community, especially the lower strata of society, and getting engaged in activities which I have an interest in.
After serving in the GRO for a few years up till now, I have been approached a number of times by other grassroots members requesting me to be a member of the political party.
I do not see the need to be involved politically because my main purpose is to achieve the aims I mentioned above.
Getting involved in the political party does not seem to advance these aims in any way.
Moreover, getting affliated to the political party was not something I anticipated when I first joined the GRO.
Even if I want to be part of a political party eventually, I am still not ready to do so.
I hope the ambiguous line between GROs and political parties can be better defined.
Volunteers in GROs should not be put in a difficult position to decide whether to join a political party just because they want to serve the community.
With a politically-charged system where prospective grassroots leaders are "screened" on their backgrounds, those who are viewed as "undesirable" (for example, ex-offenders) but are sincere about contributing their share for the community are deprived of the opportunities to prove their worth.
Instead, there may be people who join the GROs to work for their own vested interests through politics without any real intention of contributing to society.
I hope the grassroots organisations can be autonomous and apolitical gradually so that volunteers can concentrate on serving the community.
Yee Kai Ling (Miss)
5 comments:
Hello anonymous poster(s) from the Death to the Singaporean PM post, I'd like you to say if Yee Kai Ling (Miss) is demeaning the state with her trashy writing.
no akikonomu... i don't think they would find this one demeaning. i guess it's all about the tone. a fact can be made to sound unreasonable simply by the tone that it is put forth. that, unfortunately, masks the validity of the observations and hence makes it harder to use that observation for improvement.
about the Death to Singapoean PM post... well... yes. those comments made by Bruneo are all facts. though somewhat exagerated perhaps. and his reactions to them are perhaps too extreme. but we should take a good hard look at them and see how we can strive to improve on those aspects that he raised that we agree can be improved upon. but at the same time, we have to accept that things take time to change and that there are constraints.
as for Miss Yee's letter... i really think it depends on which constituency. i'm involved in some grassroots work. many people, including the MP's wife, have asked me to join the party. and my answer to them is that i don't want to join, but i still want to serve the people. and they leave it at that. once in a while, they still ask me. but i'm very clear that i just want to serve the people. and regardless of how irritiating i might find these occassional 'invitations' to join the party, i shall still contiue to be involved in grassroots work cos i find what i am doing there extremely meaningful and educational. so really... i think that what's important about being in grassroots work, or any voluntary stuff that one does, is that one is very clear about why one is involved.
get over it people!...this transparency scheme is mostly bs, to get people to believe there actually is tranparency...duh!
use your words on better things..like CHANGE!
rench, it's very polite of you to reject these invitations using your reasons.
I doubt they'll try again if you just say something about you believe in the right to political independence of grassroots organisations =D
oh... they still do try once in a while... but they do respect my decision not to join the party and they, in no way, treat me any less because i'm not in the party.
anonymous:
yes... i've been using my words to bring about change. i am known to give my honest and frank feedback and on at least one occasion, i have changed something in the system for, what i think is, better.
Post a Comment