Logic Check: The Insanity of Accusations Against Heng Swee Keat
I have to admit that one of the benefits of internet is that it has become stage for often ridiculous mental gymnastics of blind adherents of certain ideologies, who then have to reconcile them with factual reality. Amazing twists, turns, jumps and contortions of this circus could put to shame the, now sadly defunct, Cirque du Soleil.
Let me explain what I mean using the latest show of their mind-boggling irrationality.
In the wake of controversy over some racially insensitive comments of Workers' Party candidate Raeesah Khan, her fans decided - in virulent retaliation - to gang up on i.a. the future prime minister designate Heng Swee Keat, over his last year's remarks about how some older Singaporeans may not be ready for a Prime Minister representing one of Singapore's minorities.
DPM Heng said, in response to a question about why Tharman Shanmugaratnam isn't the candidate for PM, that while some - especially younger - segments of Singaporean society would have no issues with a minority PM, it is not the case with all Singaporeans. Citing his experience walking the ground and speaking with people, he admitted that older ones may not be so open to the idea yet.
And this, is somehow now held against him by the crowd who keeps moaning how bad Singapore is?
Let's get this straight, people who day and night harp on about how Singaporean society is full of racial prejudice are upset that HSK said: "well, yes, some people still are prejudiced"?
Can anybody explain to me what are they now upset about exactly? The same people who keep saying there is a lot of prejudice against Indians or Malays in Singapore are now saying - "Singapore is ready for an Indian PM, it's PAP that's not ready".
OK, so are you now saying that Singaporean society is not racially prejudiced and that it would be perfectly fine with a minority PM? Isn't that the exact opposite of what you've been saying all the time?
Given what they keep incessantly whining about I would have expected them to rather be upset that minister Heng singled out the elderly. Surely anybody who is ranting that Singapore is a racist country would stand up and say: "that's not true! it's not only the elderly, it's most people!". But no, they now say "people are not prejudiced, PAP is!".
So is it really about racism or perhaps about divisive politics that seeks to place blame for everything on one party, no matter what it is?
It's basically the case of PAP says A, so we have to say B, PAP says B, we have to say A. Whatever the government says is evil and racist and we have to be against it no matter what.
It's a sad example of importation of the worst kind of divisive politics that is currently ravaging the West like wildfire, leaving widespread destruction in the name of "progress" - which is really just a rebellion of the "no problem" generation that I wrote about on Facebook a few weeks ago (since my page was taken down after attacks of the cancel crowd, I will be reuploading my old posts to this blog shortly).
Patronizing Racism of the Left
The obvious insanity of these people goes even further and is exemplified by their openly professed respect and admiration for minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam. It would normally be commendable - but in this case isn't, because the same people who keep saying that PAP should field Tharman for PM are deaf to everything he says:
"The cabinet works as a team, we're all equal here"
"I'm a policy guy"
"I'm not interested in the position"
"I'm happy where I am"
Now, some may suggest that he is saying this because he has to, because he's the party member and he doesn't want to rock the boat or mount a challenge for premiership. The problem is that those people don't even listen to Tharman when he speaks about policy, when he says that Singaporean productivity has gone up by over 30 percent in the past decade (and that the wages have followed), when he talks about reserves, when he explains that minimum wage would be worse than progressive wage model that Singapore employs. "Oh, and by the way, I'm representing PAP, so would you please vote for us?"
Whenever it happens the people who keep bashing the ruling party are basically saying "we love you Tharman, you're a great guy, and you would be a great PM but since you're not, we're going to ignore everything you say and instead vote for the people who say something completely opposite".
Is it possible to be even more condescending? The same people who decry racism clearly view Tharman not as a smart, accomplished minister in a highly successful government, who could lead the country to new heights, but merely as an Indian who would simply look good as PM. They say they like, love and respect him - but then they totally ignore everything he says.
It's the patronising racism of the left - also imported from the West (mainly America) where competences increasingly don't matter - what matters is "diversity". Mind you - not diversity of ideas but diversity of skin colors, regardless of what the person stands for.
Appearances, not competences.
And, of course, virulent denigration and cancellation of all opponents, even if it makes you a bloody hypocrite. Because nobody can't stop "progress" - they just haven't figured out what this progress is supposed to lead to other than the destruction of the status quo.
Here's a comic strip summarizing where this mentality leads: