Rachel Zeng: I was always interested in finding out the reasons behind why adults around me voted for the PAP when I was young. I began asking questions when I was probably about 7 or 8 but I was never given a concrete or convincing answer. It was all very frustrating and I found what I perceived as “blind adulation” [which means] a denial to one’s ability to evaluate and find out more about the perspectives of others… I think this has to do with my mother’s constant reminder that I have to understand the good intentions of others even if I do not agree with them. Ironically, it worked against the grown-ups’ vote of PAP because I didn’t think that they were doing enough to find out more about “those who were not dressed in white” (that was what I thought the opposition parties were when I was young).
Because of my disagreement with blind support and political loyalty, I am not exactly a supporter of any parties in particular at the moment but I guess I have never been a PAP supporter either. Rather, I believe in having a more compassionate society. With that, I grew up with the belief that the establishment of basic human rights are necessary. This was what led me to look into what the other parties have to offer… because I don’t think PAP cares about human rights at all.
2 KJ: What do you think are the demographic group(s) the opposition needs to win to get to 50.1% of votes in an electorate?
RZ: Heartlanders and middle to lower income group in Singapore.. but of course, I am not exactly a political analyst.
3 KJ: What is your feeling of the political attitudes of young Singaporeans aged 15-22?
RZ: I get the sense that they are frustrated with their lives and unsure of their future, especially those coming from the lower to middle income group. This is perhaps the reason why some of those who I know are attracted to the other parties. I hope this is not going to be a phrase in their lives but at the same time, I hope that they will find out more about what all the parties are about and not just support something they think is “different” or will make them “stand out from among the crowd”.
I must say though, I have met some amazing youths who are well read about the various political ideologies ranging from anarchism to capitalism and are able to articulate their criticisms of our political system and parties quite well. I like that and I wish more people from my generation were (are) like them.
4 KJ: Can you tell us about your recent trip to Hong Kong including why you went there and what was achieved?
RZ: I attended a regional consultation meeting of ADPAN in HK recently. Information was exchanged, there was a lot of networking going on and we learnt from each other’s experiences. I think the most important thing I have gained was the fact that my fellow activists and I are not alone in facing problems and difficulties in this global movement to abolish the death penalty. I was there for 3 days and it felt like home… a home where people understood why I do what I am doing.
5 KJ: What do you think of Mr Shanmugan's comments that the mandatory death penalty is being reviewed due to "regular review of policies" and not due to activist efforts?
RZ: That’s alright, I don’t really care much about what he thinks. I mean, he is a public figure and a politician and I am sure he has his political career and public image to think about. I am more keen in advocating on the ground and to gain support for change from there.
6 KJ: What do you think is the % probability that mandatory death penalty will be removed in the next (say) 5 years?
RZ: I do not think that it will be entirely removed within the next 5 years but in the next 10 years perhaps an 80% probability. Am I being too optimistic here?
7 KJ: What are your comments on the recent Chinese driivers' bus strike?
RZ: Awesome! If they had not done that, would the papers find it necessary to publish a comparison of their salaries and benefits (or rather, lack of benefits) with local and Malaysian drivers?
No comments:
Post a Comment