Odd thought of the night to strike me.
Have been spending last few nights actually doing work (*modestly* I was working on the fringes of a billion dollar deal. Really. And I'm saying that because of the pitiful, but definitely tangible satisfaction in being able say things like that even if your role in such a deal is to provide two pages of Powerpoint slides). That, and talking to people online, in fact, I realise that more and more of my PC time these days is spent interacting with humanity, whether through sporadic bursts of blogging or posting on bulletin boards or tagboards or forums, or through long, breeze-shooting conversations online with the few friends I have.
But why does it all tempt me? Why can't i just be content to stay offline, and finish watching my first season DVDs of Alias, and Ali G, play Deus Ex: Invisible War and Lords of Everquest, while waiting for Legacy of Kain: Defiance (PC version) and Thief 3, finish reading my Robin Hobb and Dumas novels, all of this interspersed with gratuitoius masturbation and the occasional swim? God knows these days time is a valuable commodity I fight for every second; even the non-work portion of it seems increasingly devoured by picayune errands and paterfamilial obligations.
All of the sensory and intellectual stimulation I need I can obtain on my own terms sans the friction of dealing with other people. So why do I still feel this insane need for human interaction? Why am I still whingng on this blog entry, if I *know* it arises from the usual stereotypical need for people to emotionally preen, whine and posture online, to open one's self up to being judged by those reading who think the fragments of text give them some clue as to what's really going on with the person writing it? How many times have I myself just as blithely laid down the simple aphorisms to people, "if you have a problem with people reading, don't blog it; just as if you have a problem with what people are writing, don't read it." I feel like one of those apotemnophilliacs (another the word to look up, people, it's a *good* one) I was watching in a documentary a while back; the sheer compulsivness of their behaviour is bizarrely juxtaposed against the bewilderment they feel in the wake of their own personal awareness as to how insane their own desires are.
Isn't genuine catharsis what a real diary which no one reads is for?
coda for the night: "Cigarettes. Pornography. Bitching to strangers. Hollow grave, wt."
L'origine de Bert
Sunday, December 14, 2003
Leaving singapore for Thailand tomorrow morning; returning on 5 January 2004. If you're interested visit
http://www.au.omf.org/ocf2003/
to know what i'm up to.
Putting up hopefully daily updates in the three weeks.
http://www.au.omf.org/ocf2003/
to know what i'm up to.
Putting up hopefully daily updates in the three weeks.
Post ID: 107141621419770099
Survey on people's Internet usage habits for someone's Masters dissertation.
The survey creator is, in particular, looking for respondents who are blog owners and would like it forwarded to people with their own websites.
Ongoing debate on a mailing list I'm on. Some names have been changed to protect the innocent (or not-so-innocent, as the case might be).
A: In case anyone here continues to insist that our national service is purely to keep Singaporeans in line, here is a counter-example of how a 100% propaganda exercise national service really looks like. Malaysia's so-called national service isn't. The whole harebrained scheme ( which must have been cooked up by Dr Mahathir) was to instill in Malaysians a sense of loyalty and love for the country.
What's the difference between their national service and ours, apart from the length? Yes, there is inevitably the "love of country" theme being trotted out every now and then....but a country doesn't need to spend 4 billion dollars a year just to do that. For Singapore guys, whatever their feelings about the gahmen or the system, as long as you happen to hold a pink I/C you have to do it one way or another, which is in contrast to the shameful random selectivity of Malaysia's national service. Najib then tries to chide Malaysians for complaining about NS, whereas "Singaporeans don't complain." Ahem.
No I don't like my job, and most other NSFs aren't particularly wild about theirs either. But if we aren't its greatest enthusiasts, i observe that people at least do the bare minimum to make sure the stuff works- and in fact, many people go beyond that, and i think most people around here would agree. But why, apart from the carrot of perhaps a meagre number of days off and the stick of extra duties and punishments?
In contrast to what is indeed, essentially a momentous waste of time across the causeway, it's a little different in Singapore because what each person does boils down to a matter of life and death. Take what the technicians do, for instance. If a gun can't fire when you need to use it, some rifleman will die. Ditto for the grenade launcher which explodes in your hand instead of away from you. Or the tracks breaking away from your vehicle many miles away from safety leaving you quite stuck. (The last situation is something I don't want to happen at all ). And so on and so forth. It's all quite serious. Who's going to repair the multi million dollar gadgetry were there no technicians? Or take away injured people without any medics? Or "fight the front" without any riflemen? And so on.
So there is a purpose to what NSFs do, really. Ultimately, we are the first line of defense should anything bad happen, so erm, maybe it is a good idea to be at least halfway competent! Does this in any way imply that we are ready to follow a hypothetical mad dictator's orders blindly to attack another country? I don't think so. We are here for the country's defence, not for some foreign policy whim. And for that reason, there should have been tougher scrutiny over the decision to send our soldiers to Iraq. A sound decision based on national security interests or another attempt to suck up to our great benefactor, the USA?
To anyone who insists that National Service in Singapore is not so much for defence purposes than propaganda, please give a good case for the following points. If you can show that Singapore is unlikely to ever face external security threats, or would probably be much better of as either a state of Malaysia, province of Indonesia or colony of the USA, I'd be quite happy to drop my support for National Service.
Don't be softies, Najib tells first NS conscripts
85,000 Malaysians have been chosen for the first national service draft, and minister tells them not to complain
KUALA LUMPUR - Malaysia has drafted 85,000 teenagers for a new mandatory national service scheme and has told reluctant recruits not to be 'softies'.
Young people will find out from today whether they have been chosen at random by a computer search that used quotas based on gender, ethnicity and location.
Advertisement
The draftees will have to take part in three months of basic military training as well as community service, and will take lessons in leadership and responsibility starting next February, Defence Minister Najib Razak said yesterday.
'There is no escape. The scheme will not only benefit the nation, but it will benefit participants personally,' he told a press conference.
Officials said the plan will help to stem religious extremism and instil patriotism in mostly Muslim Malaysia's young people.
But critics fear it will be used to indoctrinate participants with pro- government rhetoric and steer them away from the fundamentalist Parti Islam SeMalaysia.
Recruits - who were drawn from a pool of 480,000 people born in 1986 - will be placed in 42 camps nationwide, Datuk Seri Najib said.
He said teenagers would be able to call a hotline as of today to discover whether they had been selected.
Responding to doubts by some parents and teenagers over whether the scheme was necessary, he said officials had planned a 'productive' programme that would not be a waste of time.
It would be shorter and less physically demanding compared with national service training in many other countries. Datuk Seri Najib cited the example of neighbouring Singapore, where every able-bodied male must do at least two years of full-time military duty. Afterwards, they undergo annual training for 13 years.
'Singaporeans don't complain,' he said.
'Don't tell me Malaysians are such softies to be complaining.'
Most of those chosen have just graduated from high school and those who plan to further their studies will have the next several months free.
But many resent the national service scheme because it will prevent them from taking up temporary jobs or travelling on vacations.
The scheme is timed so as not to conflict with the tertiary academic year in Malaysia, which starts around June.
Recruits enrolled in foreign universities where studies begin earlier may be able to appeal.
One teenager, Tee Ann Jie, said the scheme should be voluntary. 'National service is not going to accomplish anything but cause frustration and intense displeasure,' he wrote in a letter published at the weekend by The Star newspaper.
'Forcing us to do something is not the way to endear our country to us.' -- AP
Me: Nobody suggests that Slavery here is *purely* to keep Singaporeans in line, but can anyone deny that that is a large part of it?
I don't see why A finds the randomness of Ma-laysia's selection system "shameful". We surely do not require so many Slave Soldiers to keep the PAP in power here, so why make more people suffer than they have to? Such is a gross waste. Of course, some argue that if only some were selected, they'd feel resentful towards those remaining free, but if this is sufficient logic to deprive everyone of their freedoms, then we might as well move to a communist state, since otherwise the proletariat would resent the bourgeois. Sure, you might say that the bourgeois got to their place by means of luck and skill, but the same is true for those who, by luck and skill, get downgraded or otherwise escape the clutches of the Powers That Be in Singapore.
NSFs doing the bare minimum? Agreed, for most anyway, but I think the fear of getting charged and going to DB is great, and doing your bare minimum is not so hard anyway.
> To anyone who insists that National Service in Singapore is not so
> much for defence purposes than propaganda, please give a good case
> for the following points. If you can show that Singapore is unlikely
> to ever face external security threats, or would probably be much
> better of as either a state of Malaysia, province of Indonesia or
> colony of the USA, I'd be quite happy to drop my support for National
> Service.
You fall into the trap, then, of claiming, as the Powers That Be do, that *any* alternative to our current system would result in catastrophe. Thus cowed, the masses timidly accept the current system without contemplating anything more than cosmetic changes.
And about Ma-laysia's "NS": At least they are not emphasising the military aspect so much. Does anyone really think the SAF could fight a war effectively? What with incompetent NSFs filled with hatred against the system, Regulars whose job scope involves making NSFs suffer and who only want money and Reservists who cannot remember anything?
To quote Tee Ann Jie, 'Forcing us to do something is not the way to endear our country to us.'
Some myriad related thoughts:
I remember reading an article about how the American Right Wing has managed to mould public thought in America by its clever manipulation of language to its advantage. This puts me in mind of the SAF. Take the word "National Service" for example. It implies that it is a way of serving one's country, and has the connotation of duty. I refuse to accept the paradigm that the apparatchiks are trying to implant in me subliminally, which is why I call it "National Slavery". For, if not similar then related reasons, Chinx calls it "Neverending Slavery".
Take, then, what the SAF, with its collective wapred mind, considers "privileges". E-mart "breaks" are a "privilege". Canteen breaks are a "privilege". Booking out is a "privilege". By defining basic rights as "privileges" and using the term copiously, they get most slaves to accept implicitly that they are fortunate to be given these "privileges". I reckon that if they had their way, they would proclaim that it was a "privilege" that us slaves do not spend 2 1/2 years imprisoned at the bottom of a pit, wallowing in our filth and excrement, with naught but unleavened bread and brackish water to survive on, and "Property of the SAF" tattooed all over our bodies.
All this just goes to show once again that for all their glowing talk of "duty", "honour" and "sacrifice", and the gold medals Lee Kuan Yew gave the first batch of Slaves, it is all a sham to deceive pre-enlistees and the fortunate members of the public who have not had the chance to "serve" their country. Once you're in, the facade is dropped and you are treated like the inhuman scum that you are, not deserving of humane treatment, to be stripped of human dignity in the name of "discipline" and "regimentation", all because you have little or no rank (a concept that, in the end, is empty and worthless for a surefire way to get it is either through good A level results or signing on)
Meanwhile, in an insidious if ingenious ploy, the best and brightest, the natural leaders of any rebellion from among the ranks, are co-opted into the system as Officers and given a few more "privileges" than the rest to placate them. Some others are elevated to the posts of Specialists - junior commanders and given similar "privileges", albeit to a lesser degree. They are then turned on each other - BMT Sergeants against their Recruits, jailers in DB against the inmates and indeed, Local Third Sergeants against their Men. The fellow slaves who should stand united instead fall to the strategy of Divide and Conquer, and the slavemasters are satisfied.
More and more, I tend to agree with parts of He Who Must Not Be Named's theory - "i admit NS has become more about social engineering and mind control than it has about actual military defense." Why else do they enslave everyone when not everyone is needed? Why can't conscientious objectors choose to do non-military "service", as is the norm in other countries with conscription? And why else is the philosophy behind NS "make them suffer" rather than "make them defend Singapore"?
Caleb: Bravo Gabriel for your informed, cogent, and sane reply. I whole-heartedly agree with most of what you have to say, with the possible exception of your comments on the co-opting of 'brightest and best' to become officers and the granting of extra privileges as a divide and conquer tactic. That, I think, goes too far and begins to sound suspiciously like some pseudo-Marxist/anarchist bullshit.
The government doesn't need tactics to force through Natiional Slavery, it already has a monopoly of arms and an impressive repressive machinery. If you go AWOL etc etc, you go to DB. If you don't want, on principle, to assist in the imprisonment of someone who was merely exercising his right to freedom of labour and movement, you too will be banished to that place of outer darkness.
From what my friends in OCS tell me, most of them do it for the extra money; most of them don't enjoy it (well the intelligent ones anyway). And in any case they don't get such a good deal. Certainly not in OCS -- a friend of mine described OCS as a 'you get paid to get tortured' scheme. Once they are commissioned they do enjoy greater freedom, but this is largely because sycophantic and stupid (aren't these two qualities always linked?) WOs kowtow before their rank. Furthermore, in my unit at least they have to do more work than non-officers. The situation is even worse for sergeants. Many would love to get a better (i.e. less regimental/less neanderthal) posting.
And so, some try to get downgraded. I agree with Gabriel that those who force through a downgrade to ensure a more humane/human existence are merely exercising their will and their skill. As they say, when there is a will, there is a way.
As for DB gaolers, BMT sergreants and the like, actually they themselves endure quite unpleasant working conditions. However, as I am sure many of you have personally experienced, many of them also tend to act like mini Gestapo/SS officers. One's attitude towards such ppl should not be one of pity, or anger, or even hatred. One should merely accord them the contempt they so richly deserve. You see, such ppl display a classic case of what sociologists call 'empowerment through institutions'. In no other situation would they enjoy such power. Granted, this power is in fact extremely petty ('sing louder!' 'March properly!' 'Never greet!' et al ad nauseum). But that is not their concern. They merely take this as a chance to make themselves feel important. They are 'instructors' -- a kind of priesthood which imparts the well-guarded knowledge of how to kill other ppl in vicious and violent ways to the benighted recruits. They are 'responsible' for their recruits' 'welfare'. This illusion that their pathetic lives are actually of value and importance gives them an incredible kick. And hence, sadly, they delight in their Auschwitz-like manipulations.
The other breed, slighty sadder and slightly more worthy of pity, are those who think that by slaving away for their nation, they are doing their masculine duty and not shirking their responsibilities like pansies. For them, National Slavery is a phallic romp. This is not helped by the propaganda images of tanned, toned and gun-wielding combatants which now adorn buses, billboards, and other public places. In a way, I suppose it's a way for jocks to extend their jockhood past school.
As for A's I've-imbibed-so-much-propaganda-that-even-though-I-have-benefitted-from-an-RJ-ed\ ucation-I-still-buy-that-shit comments, allow me to add a few more derisive points:
1. Gabriel is absolutely right. While it is true that most countries require some sort of national defence to survive AND to exercise a reasonable amount of clout in int'l dealings (the second point is de-emphasised by the govt since it implies that NSFs are pawns to foreign policy considerations which in fact we are), this does not mean that conscripting every bloody person born with male genitalia for 2/2.5 years is the best way to go about meeting this requirement.
It is true that far too many ppl are conscripted (including, for those of you who don't know, post-op transexuals). It is also ridiculous and morally repugnant that no non-military alternative exists. That JWs are imprisoned for their objection to NS is testament to the fact that religious freedom in Singapore is a farce. Furthermore, conscientious objection is a perfectly sound moral stance which the state has a duty to accommodate. In fact, as I shall explain later, conscientious objection in Singapore's case is perhaps the ONLY morally acceptable stance. The argument that if such an alternative existed, everyone would opt for it is rubbish. This has not been the case in Sweden etc simply because many men think it is exciting/macho/whatever to be a soldier for a year.
Which brings me to my other point. 2/2.5 years is surely too long. This is not the 1960s where the world moved slowly and 2 or even 3 years was not such a long time. This is 2003 where 2.5 years can almost get you a degree. And believe me, Singapore and its increasingly lamentable economy SORELY need a better educated and better trained workforce. Plus, from what I observe, the SAF is not exactly the place to cultivate a good work ethic...
So you see, National Slavery is badly in need of reform. But it remains the most sacred of cows in Singapore because stupid ppl do not realise Gabriel's point: that there is no strict dichotomy between NS as it exists now and catastrophe. A good place to start reform would be to shorten the length of slavery. Conscription in all other civilised countries exists either to ensure the military remains a 'ppl's army' i.e. to inject a civilian and civilising element into the armed forces, or to ensure that when total mobilisation is needed, the size of the competent force will be large enough. Hence, the point of military service is to teach the conscripts how to carry out their specific wartime roles. NOT to provide cheap labour to beef up the manpower base of the military. The length of service with this goal in mind should thus not exceed 18 months at most.
Furthermore, disruption to continue with further studies should be granted to all, not just a select group of PSC scholars. The benefit to students (not to mention the economy) will be immense (for reasons which are too complex to elab here but should be obvious really).
2. Singapore is under no military threat. You see, the govt's problem is that it thinks we are Israel. You know the story: surrounded by hostile Muslim countries blah blah blah. Well that doesn't cut it for me. Let me explain:
a. Singapore will never be engaged in a trade/economic war. The key reason for the (now defunct) economic attractiveness of S'pore and SEA as a whole is its relatively well-educated workforce, low labour costs, good infrastructure and political stability. This would vanish with the advent of a war. Infrastructure tends to get bombed, stability will vaporise. Plus, war is VERY expensive.
So, for all the propaganda (which I am sad to say many imbeciles in the SAF have deluded themselves into believing), no, Malaysia doesn't want to 'steal' our airport. It's just not worth it, baby.
b. Singapore will not be attacked for strategic reasons, unless the war is not localised and has spread to the whole region. This is for the same reasons as those cited above. No govt wakes up in the morning and decides to take over some other country to improve its strategic position. The effect would certainly be counter-productive. Besides, no superpower at the moment considers S'pore of particular strategic importance. The only country to qualify among our immediate neighbours is Indonesia, and we aren't a gateway or anything to it. The only time S'pore might be involved in a strategically motivated attack is if a regional/world war has erupted, since in that case, economic considerations would take a back seat. However, in such a case, Singapore is unlikely to survive anyway (see next point).
c. Should Singapore be caught up in a regional/world war or an ideologically motivated war, it would surely lose. The cases I have examined above (trade war, strategic war, etc) are cases of limited war. Now in a total war, as Clausewitz has pointed out, sheer numbers are the most important factor. Given S'pore's small population and strategic handicaps, it is extremely likely to lose. The only way a loss might be averted is if it possessed an absolute technological superiority. But that would mean investing a very large percentage of GDP. Which is not exactly the best thing for its economy.
For me, Singapore's existence has always been predicated on its economic survival. It exists to make money and only for that reason. Thus its greatest threat is not military but economic.
Plus, according to just war theory, embarking a war which one is extremely unlikely to win is immoral, considering that war usually results in massive loss of life. So.
4. So, as we have seen, any armed forces which Singapore should posses should only have a deterrent function. This deterrent function should serve to discourage invasion by making the cost of attack high (i.e. destruction of enemy property by aerial raids etc). This deterrent function would obviously not be well played by ground troups like infantrymen, etc. Such ground troops should be kept to a minimum.
Singapore should rely on a largely regular corps to fulfil its manpower needs, which should be kept to a minimum. It should invest in a credible airforce, with suitably frightening bombing capability. This should be enough to deter a casual attack.
Certainly, it should NOT conscript every little boy and turn him into an unthinking pawn.
So, A, pls save your nationalistic hoorahs for the NDP. They will appreciate it there.
C: no need to be so scathing, caleb; it's enough to show A the failure of his logic - ad hominem isn't required. i assume, of course, that you're right and he's not, because your response is extremely long. if my logic appears suspect then do excuse me, i can't really be bothered to properly evaluate the debate so far.
anyway, you're as rabid an antiestablishmentarian as A is a nationalist ('papist' wouldn't be correct) propaganda-puppy, so slamming A that way is rather unfair.
the justification for maintaining a system of conscription seems to me to be rooted in the 1960s in the time when the possibility of invasion was very real. by now we've become so entrenched in the artificial culture of conscription that we can't shake off the feeling that we need a civilian army to protect us from the barbarians at the gates. we're paying through the nose for teeth and claws to scare off our neighbours just as Israel does. no one high up in government is bold enough to speak up and say that the entire juggernaut of NS isn't in concord with the defence requirements of this nation - that it should be revamped, reshaped and streamlined radically. i sure wouldn't have the balls.
of course, i don't know about the true political/strategic situation we're facing at the moment, or will be in the coming decades. if there IS a significant risk of war hidden somewhere beneath the veneer of diplomatic relations, if some hidden, volatile tension simmers, then there'll be grounds for a big ol' civilian army. and we're a pretty kiasee bunch.
D: i'm not taking any sides. i just want to make a few points about the ideas and arguments that have been exchanged so far.
first. A argued that because the SAF is primarily formed to play a defensive role, there should have been more debate before sending soldiers to iraq. i would completely agree with him if the soldiers who went were made to go en masse as part of their unit duties. that, fortunately, is not the case. as far as i am aware, when soldiers are needed for dangerous overseas missions (like in iraq and before iraq there was east timor), the units from which the relevant soldiers will come from will appeal for volunteers from their ranks. selection is strictly voluntary and no one who does not want to go will, in any way, be pressured to go. this explains why people who go are all regulars. they stand to benefit from promotions and lump sum bonanzas upon return. because these people, knowing the risks they would be facing, made personal decisions to take up the challenge, i am completely supportive of the sending of soldiers to iraq. after all, the move benefits singapore's international standing (which could in turn rake in many economic payoffs). if people were forced to go or "volunteered" en masse, however, it would be a different story but that is not the case.
second. gabriel and caleb both seem to be for the idea of having a non-military option for people who, perhaps due to ideological reasons, refuse to serve in the military. in theory, i am very much in support of this idea. but it seems to me a practical impossibility. if such an option existed (say people were given the choice to teach, do community work or serve in the civil defence forces), i'm pretty sure more than half the people would suddenly claim to be pacifists because of the significantly less hardship they would go through in non-military service. i'm not saying that pacifism is bullshit. it isn't. there are people who are strongly pacifist-leaning in this world (caleb would probably be one of them), and they should be entitled to their views. but it is impossible for us to distinguish between the real ones and the ones who just want to have an easier time. if 10% of the population opts to do military service (the crazy 10%, that is), will we still have a credible military to speak about? if there is some way of finding out for sure who the real pacifists are, i am in favour of excusing them from military service. but there isn't.
third. about gabriel and caleb's point that we don't need so many people in the military and that the remaining people should not be made to waste their time. i cannot agree more that the SAF is overstaffed. many people are doing nothing. many jobs can be made more efficient and many posts and be compressed into fewer. but the solution is, i feel, definitely not found in balloting. democracy is not just about maximising the society's welfare (presumably, if you do a ballot and spare some people from ns, you're freeing up productive labour and maximising society's welfare). it's also about equality of opportunity. now, this is not a communist/marxist idea. the communists want equality but democrats dream of equality of opportunity. the equality of opportunity epitomised in the words "all men are created equal" and the famous sentence, "I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood." That's what democracy is about. that people will be given the same opportunities and a level playing field. it's not happening everywhere of course. but that's where we should be headed. and balloting is one big step backwards. i am more agreeable to the suggestion that we cut the length of ns equally for everyone.
finally. about caleb's point that we will lose a war anyway if a regional/world war breaks out. he's probably quite right. in a regional war, we will probably be overpowered eventually by numbers. the question, however, might well be how quickly we fall. if we fall in a week like we did against the japanese then the consequences will be catastrophic for the nation. but if we build up an armed forces strong enough to hold up long enough, our allies, or other world developments, might just be able to come to our rescue in time. britain barely hung on in the second world war and might have fallen eventually had the US not decided to step in. what we want potential aggressors to know (and fear) is that we have an armed forces strong enough to give a heck of a fight and to hold on until somebody somewhere decides to do something that saves us (perhaps our sending troops to iraq might be reciprocated then by uncle sam. we are, after all, the most important economy in south-east asia).
for those who know me by now, you probably know that i'm not a patriotic, pro-establishment yes-man. i have plenty of grievances and ns is certainly one of them (i'm for cutting the length, remember). but some points you guys made, i feel, need a little more perspective.
E: Hi there,
I'm not a 'propaganda puppy,' but I would like to contribute some views about why I believe NS is still necessary. A common perception is that the Singapore military exists to repel invaders in case of a war, and this is a pretty valid interpretation, since militaries are obviously used to fight in wars. And this argument extends that since the prospect of war is increasingly unlikely in an inter-connected world, the necessity for NS consequently decreases, and there's no need to maintain a strong army anymore.
However, I believe that a strong Singaporean army is still necessary even at such a time, for two reasons. First, while it may not seem immediately evident at first glance, I would suggest that a capable military provides the necessary preconditions for strong investor confidence in Singapore, particularly when we are nestled in an area surrounded by Muslim states, and particularly when we have frequent diplomatic squabbles with our neighbours. MNCs would be deterred from investing in a country that they perceive as being 'unstable,' or 'insecure,' especially if they are going to sink in millions or even billions of dollars into building factories/other infrastructure here. They'd rather go to Hong Kong or some other place that is free from such uncertainty. So in a sense, the lynchpin for our phenomenal economic success is our stability, and the lynchpin for that stability is the existence of a strong defence. Of course, this argument can be mocked by people when they say "oh are you therefore implying that if we don't have a strong army then all the investors will immediately pull out?" And to that I'd reply that it's always dangerous to pigeon-hole arguments into extremes. Rather, it's a kind of a spectrum, where the weaker our army is, the lesser confidence investors will have in our economy, the lesser jobs will be created, and so on.
And like what C said, if we were to make NS optional, while there would certainly be some people who would want to be 'macho' and continue in the army, the majority of people would just take the 'path of least resistance' and opt out of it, and since a perfectly legitimate alternative exists, and one's social status would not be diminished by choosing the non-military option, thereby increasing its appeal.
The second reason why I think a strong military is important is because it gives us a vastly increased diplomatic leverage. This is particularly important when a small country (ie Singapore) is involved in perennial negotiations and disputes with a big country (ie Malaysia). A strong military by the smaller country would tell the bigger country that you had better not bullshit around with us, you had better not boss us around, because we have the military might to back us up. Why do you think Malaysia balks at the idea of cutting off our water supply? It's not because they don't want to lose the three sens per gallon that they charge us for the water if they cut off our supply. It's because our civilian leaders (esp LKY) and military leaders have publicly declared in the past that if such a scenario occurs, Singapore will not hesitate to launch a pre-emptive attack on the southern part of peninsula Malaysia to secure our water supplies again, and I believe that Malaysia is taking our threat seriously.
So while the possibility of a full-fledged, regional war might not be as pervasive as it was three or four decades ago, I think a strong military exists for two other important reasons, namely as a lynchpin for economic growth in a volatile region and for increased diplomatic leverage. While the causal links are not immediately evident, and the successes in these spheres can easily be attributed to other mitigating reasons, I think the necessity of a strong military is inescapable. Of course, ideas such shortening the conscript duration can be examined, but to suggest that the necessity for a strong army is anachronistic nowadays would not be entirely accurate.
Caleb: Hello again
Yes i must admit the ad hominem vitriol was somewhat excessive, but i find 'if we had no conscription we would be putty in the hands of (name country of your choice)' arguments truly annoying. I am not suggesting that we do not need any defence capability, what I saying is that we are not best served by the current system of maintaining a large conscript army (with large infantry and armour regiments). To serve as a deterrent, our military only needs the capacity to inflict significant harm on the potential aggressor such that, when they do the cost-benefit analysis, it's not worth the money, loss of int'l credibility, etc etc that aggression would entail. You must remember that in today's world, a reputation for military adventurism would be absolutely disastrous to a country's FDI prospects. Even Singapore has been trying to spruce up its int'l image, what with the open arms for gay civil servants and all. And it was doing quite well (that is until Headmaster Lee ratted on about how he 'made a few phonecalls' to get preferential treatment in an NHS hospital and threatened to 'break heads' if the union boys at SIA got naughty). Sigh.
As for the M'sia and the water supply issue, let me offer a few thoughts:
1. The endless scuffles between S'pore and M'sia should merely be seen as the result of puerile attempts by the M'sian govt to shore up domestic support for UMNO. This is a favourite tactic of Mahathir, as Paul Krugman likes to point out in his NY Times Op-Ed. It is inconceivable that M'sia would actually cut the water supply *until the agreements run out*. This is because Msia and S'pore are too closely linked economically to for this to bring any benefit to M'sia. But, then again, even if it did cut the water supply after the agreements run out, there isn't much S'pore can do about it. Launching a 'pre-emptive strike' on M'sia would certainly not be a good idea, since it would then be illegal under int'l law.
2. S'pore fails to see that security is regional. Consider the EU. It is not inconceivable that France and Germany should ever go to war. Yet 60 years ago they devastated each other. Why this sea-change? Because their far-sighted leaders took pains to achieve 'ever closer union'. In contrast, ASEAN is a farce where leaders congratulate each other constantly and basically get nothing done. If S'pore had been more persistent from the start in integrating the region closer together, our security and economic situation would have been far better today than it is presently.
Well, just a few thoughts ya
Caleb: Oops I meant 'it is inconceivable that France and Germany...' not 'it is not inconceivable...' Sorry guys.
To address C's point about non-military alternatives, one would have to ask why the exodus he predicts from military NS has not occured in Sweden and other countries which have conscription. Furthermore, I would like to point out that non-military alternatives need not be cushy. My French teacher, who was one of the last batches of French citizens to serve NS before it was phased out in the early 1990s, opted for a civilian alternative and was duly sent to teach French at a Ugandan university. He once contracted malaria there and almost died. So, civilian service can actually be equally if not more risky/unpleasant.
Btw, since D mentioned the need for reform, why don't we discuss reforming the SAF? I mean for an organisation which has such a pervasive influence, it has very very little accountability. The Hu Enhuai thing was probably only saw the light of day in the media because the advent of the internet meant that such a atrocious lapse was already known by quite a large number of ppl. I believe there was a similar case in the ninties where a guy was killed (combat engineers) due to the negligence and stupidity of his superior officers. But, this case was not at all publicised. Why is this so? The govt likes to cite 'national security' as a blanket excuse, but I think that as citizens of an (ostensibly) democratic country, we have to right to know. Plus, there is almost no way for ordinary citizens or even MPs to have a say in how the SAF is run. In other countries which practice conscription, the military is expected to be fully accountable to the public. (This is with the exception of places like China and Russia, but well, let's not go there).
The survey creator is, in particular, looking for respondents who are blog owners and would like it forwarded to people with their own websites.
Ongoing debate on a mailing list I'm on. Some names have been changed to protect the innocent (or not-so-innocent, as the case might be).
A: In case anyone here continues to insist that our national service is purely to keep Singaporeans in line, here is a counter-example of how a 100% propaganda exercise national service really looks like. Malaysia's so-called national service isn't. The whole harebrained scheme ( which must have been cooked up by Dr Mahathir) was to instill in Malaysians a sense of loyalty and love for the country.
What's the difference between their national service and ours, apart from the length? Yes, there is inevitably the "love of country" theme being trotted out every now and then....but a country doesn't need to spend 4 billion dollars a year just to do that. For Singapore guys, whatever their feelings about the gahmen or the system, as long as you happen to hold a pink I/C you have to do it one way or another, which is in contrast to the shameful random selectivity of Malaysia's national service. Najib then tries to chide Malaysians for complaining about NS, whereas "Singaporeans don't complain." Ahem.
No I don't like my job, and most other NSFs aren't particularly wild about theirs either. But if we aren't its greatest enthusiasts, i observe that people at least do the bare minimum to make sure the stuff works- and in fact, many people go beyond that, and i think most people around here would agree. But why, apart from the carrot of perhaps a meagre number of days off and the stick of extra duties and punishments?
In contrast to what is indeed, essentially a momentous waste of time across the causeway, it's a little different in Singapore because what each person does boils down to a matter of life and death. Take what the technicians do, for instance. If a gun can't fire when you need to use it, some rifleman will die. Ditto for the grenade launcher which explodes in your hand instead of away from you. Or the tracks breaking away from your vehicle many miles away from safety leaving you quite stuck. (The last situation is something I don't want to happen at all ). And so on and so forth. It's all quite serious. Who's going to repair the multi million dollar gadgetry were there no technicians? Or take away injured people without any medics? Or "fight the front" without any riflemen? And so on.
So there is a purpose to what NSFs do, really. Ultimately, we are the first line of defense should anything bad happen, so erm, maybe it is a good idea to be at least halfway competent! Does this in any way imply that we are ready to follow a hypothetical mad dictator's orders blindly to attack another country? I don't think so. We are here for the country's defence, not for some foreign policy whim. And for that reason, there should have been tougher scrutiny over the decision to send our soldiers to Iraq. A sound decision based on national security interests or another attempt to suck up to our great benefactor, the USA?
To anyone who insists that National Service in Singapore is not so much for defence purposes than propaganda, please give a good case for the following points. If you can show that Singapore is unlikely to ever face external security threats, or would probably be much better of as either a state of Malaysia, province of Indonesia or colony of the USA, I'd be quite happy to drop my support for National Service.
Don't be softies, Najib tells first NS conscripts
85,000 Malaysians have been chosen for the first national service draft, and minister tells them not to complain
KUALA LUMPUR - Malaysia has drafted 85,000 teenagers for a new mandatory national service scheme and has told reluctant recruits not to be 'softies'.
Young people will find out from today whether they have been chosen at random by a computer search that used quotas based on gender, ethnicity and location.
Advertisement
The draftees will have to take part in three months of basic military training as well as community service, and will take lessons in leadership and responsibility starting next February, Defence Minister Najib Razak said yesterday.
'There is no escape. The scheme will not only benefit the nation, but it will benefit participants personally,' he told a press conference.
Officials said the plan will help to stem religious extremism and instil patriotism in mostly Muslim Malaysia's young people.
But critics fear it will be used to indoctrinate participants with pro- government rhetoric and steer them away from the fundamentalist Parti Islam SeMalaysia.
Recruits - who were drawn from a pool of 480,000 people born in 1986 - will be placed in 42 camps nationwide, Datuk Seri Najib said.
He said teenagers would be able to call a hotline as of today to discover whether they had been selected.
Responding to doubts by some parents and teenagers over whether the scheme was necessary, he said officials had planned a 'productive' programme that would not be a waste of time.
It would be shorter and less physically demanding compared with national service training in many other countries. Datuk Seri Najib cited the example of neighbouring Singapore, where every able-bodied male must do at least two years of full-time military duty. Afterwards, they undergo annual training for 13 years.
'Singaporeans don't complain,' he said.
'Don't tell me Malaysians are such softies to be complaining.'
Most of those chosen have just graduated from high school and those who plan to further their studies will have the next several months free.
But many resent the national service scheme because it will prevent them from taking up temporary jobs or travelling on vacations.
The scheme is timed so as not to conflict with the tertiary academic year in Malaysia, which starts around June.
Recruits enrolled in foreign universities where studies begin earlier may be able to appeal.
One teenager, Tee Ann Jie, said the scheme should be voluntary. 'National service is not going to accomplish anything but cause frustration and intense displeasure,' he wrote in a letter published at the weekend by The Star newspaper.
'Forcing us to do something is not the way to endear our country to us.' -- AP
Me: Nobody suggests that Slavery here is *purely* to keep Singaporeans in line, but can anyone deny that that is a large part of it?
I don't see why A finds the randomness of Ma-laysia's selection system "shameful". We surely do not require so many Slave Soldiers to keep the PAP in power here, so why make more people suffer than they have to? Such is a gross waste. Of course, some argue that if only some were selected, they'd feel resentful towards those remaining free, but if this is sufficient logic to deprive everyone of their freedoms, then we might as well move to a communist state, since otherwise the proletariat would resent the bourgeois. Sure, you might say that the bourgeois got to their place by means of luck and skill, but the same is true for those who, by luck and skill, get downgraded or otherwise escape the clutches of the Powers That Be in Singapore.
NSFs doing the bare minimum? Agreed, for most anyway, but I think the fear of getting charged and going to DB is great, and doing your bare minimum is not so hard anyway.
> To anyone who insists that National Service in Singapore is not so
> much for defence purposes than propaganda, please give a good case
> for the following points. If you can show that Singapore is unlikely
> to ever face external security threats, or would probably be much
> better of as either a state of Malaysia, province of Indonesia or
> colony of the USA, I'd be quite happy to drop my support for National
> Service.
You fall into the trap, then, of claiming, as the Powers That Be do, that *any* alternative to our current system would result in catastrophe. Thus cowed, the masses timidly accept the current system without contemplating anything more than cosmetic changes.
And about Ma-laysia's "NS": At least they are not emphasising the military aspect so much. Does anyone really think the SAF could fight a war effectively? What with incompetent NSFs filled with hatred against the system, Regulars whose job scope involves making NSFs suffer and who only want money and Reservists who cannot remember anything?
To quote Tee Ann Jie, 'Forcing us to do something is not the way to endear our country to us.'
Some myriad related thoughts:
I remember reading an article about how the American Right Wing has managed to mould public thought in America by its clever manipulation of language to its advantage. This puts me in mind of the SAF. Take the word "National Service" for example. It implies that it is a way of serving one's country, and has the connotation of duty. I refuse to accept the paradigm that the apparatchiks are trying to implant in me subliminally, which is why I call it "National Slavery". For, if not similar then related reasons, Chinx calls it "Neverending Slavery".
Take, then, what the SAF, with its collective wapred mind, considers "privileges". E-mart "breaks" are a "privilege". Canteen breaks are a "privilege". Booking out is a "privilege". By defining basic rights as "privileges" and using the term copiously, they get most slaves to accept implicitly that they are fortunate to be given these "privileges". I reckon that if they had their way, they would proclaim that it was a "privilege" that us slaves do not spend 2 1/2 years imprisoned at the bottom of a pit, wallowing in our filth and excrement, with naught but unleavened bread and brackish water to survive on, and "Property of the SAF" tattooed all over our bodies.
All this just goes to show once again that for all their glowing talk of "duty", "honour" and "sacrifice", and the gold medals Lee Kuan Yew gave the first batch of Slaves, it is all a sham to deceive pre-enlistees and the fortunate members of the public who have not had the chance to "serve" their country. Once you're in, the facade is dropped and you are treated like the inhuman scum that you are, not deserving of humane treatment, to be stripped of human dignity in the name of "discipline" and "regimentation", all because you have little or no rank (a concept that, in the end, is empty and worthless for a surefire way to get it is either through good A level results or signing on)
Meanwhile, in an insidious if ingenious ploy, the best and brightest, the natural leaders of any rebellion from among the ranks, are co-opted into the system as Officers and given a few more "privileges" than the rest to placate them. Some others are elevated to the posts of Specialists - junior commanders and given similar "privileges", albeit to a lesser degree. They are then turned on each other - BMT Sergeants against their Recruits, jailers in DB against the inmates and indeed, Local Third Sergeants against their Men. The fellow slaves who should stand united instead fall to the strategy of Divide and Conquer, and the slavemasters are satisfied.
More and more, I tend to agree with parts of He Who Must Not Be Named's theory - "i admit NS has become more about social engineering and mind control than it has about actual military defense." Why else do they enslave everyone when not everyone is needed? Why can't conscientious objectors choose to do non-military "service", as is the norm in other countries with conscription? And why else is the philosophy behind NS "make them suffer" rather than "make them defend Singapore"?
Caleb: Bravo Gabriel for your informed, cogent, and sane reply. I whole-heartedly agree with most of what you have to say, with the possible exception of your comments on the co-opting of 'brightest and best' to become officers and the granting of extra privileges as a divide and conquer tactic. That, I think, goes too far and begins to sound suspiciously like some pseudo-Marxist/anarchist bullshit.
The government doesn't need tactics to force through Natiional Slavery, it already has a monopoly of arms and an impressive repressive machinery. If you go AWOL etc etc, you go to DB. If you don't want, on principle, to assist in the imprisonment of someone who was merely exercising his right to freedom of labour and movement, you too will be banished to that place of outer darkness.
From what my friends in OCS tell me, most of them do it for the extra money; most of them don't enjoy it (well the intelligent ones anyway). And in any case they don't get such a good deal. Certainly not in OCS -- a friend of mine described OCS as a 'you get paid to get tortured' scheme. Once they are commissioned they do enjoy greater freedom, but this is largely because sycophantic and stupid (aren't these two qualities always linked?) WOs kowtow before their rank. Furthermore, in my unit at least they have to do more work than non-officers. The situation is even worse for sergeants. Many would love to get a better (i.e. less regimental/less neanderthal) posting.
And so, some try to get downgraded. I agree with Gabriel that those who force through a downgrade to ensure a more humane/human existence are merely exercising their will and their skill. As they say, when there is a will, there is a way.
As for DB gaolers, BMT sergreants and the like, actually they themselves endure quite unpleasant working conditions. However, as I am sure many of you have personally experienced, many of them also tend to act like mini Gestapo/SS officers. One's attitude towards such ppl should not be one of pity, or anger, or even hatred. One should merely accord them the contempt they so richly deserve. You see, such ppl display a classic case of what sociologists call 'empowerment through institutions'. In no other situation would they enjoy such power. Granted, this power is in fact extremely petty ('sing louder!' 'March properly!' 'Never greet!' et al ad nauseum). But that is not their concern. They merely take this as a chance to make themselves feel important. They are 'instructors' -- a kind of priesthood which imparts the well-guarded knowledge of how to kill other ppl in vicious and violent ways to the benighted recruits. They are 'responsible' for their recruits' 'welfare'. This illusion that their pathetic lives are actually of value and importance gives them an incredible kick. And hence, sadly, they delight in their Auschwitz-like manipulations.
The other breed, slighty sadder and slightly more worthy of pity, are those who think that by slaving away for their nation, they are doing their masculine duty and not shirking their responsibilities like pansies. For them, National Slavery is a phallic romp. This is not helped by the propaganda images of tanned, toned and gun-wielding combatants which now adorn buses, billboards, and other public places. In a way, I suppose it's a way for jocks to extend their jockhood past school.
As for A's I've-imbibed-so-much-propaganda-that-even-though-I-have-benefitted-from-an-RJ-ed\ ucation-I-still-buy-that-shit comments, allow me to add a few more derisive points:
1. Gabriel is absolutely right. While it is true that most countries require some sort of national defence to survive AND to exercise a reasonable amount of clout in int'l dealings (the second point is de-emphasised by the govt since it implies that NSFs are pawns to foreign policy considerations which in fact we are), this does not mean that conscripting every bloody person born with male genitalia for 2/2.5 years is the best way to go about meeting this requirement.
It is true that far too many ppl are conscripted (including, for those of you who don't know, post-op transexuals). It is also ridiculous and morally repugnant that no non-military alternative exists. That JWs are imprisoned for their objection to NS is testament to the fact that religious freedom in Singapore is a farce. Furthermore, conscientious objection is a perfectly sound moral stance which the state has a duty to accommodate. In fact, as I shall explain later, conscientious objection in Singapore's case is perhaps the ONLY morally acceptable stance. The argument that if such an alternative existed, everyone would opt for it is rubbish. This has not been the case in Sweden etc simply because many men think it is exciting/macho/whatever to be a soldier for a year.
Which brings me to my other point. 2/2.5 years is surely too long. This is not the 1960s where the world moved slowly and 2 or even 3 years was not such a long time. This is 2003 where 2.5 years can almost get you a degree. And believe me, Singapore and its increasingly lamentable economy SORELY need a better educated and better trained workforce. Plus, from what I observe, the SAF is not exactly the place to cultivate a good work ethic...
So you see, National Slavery is badly in need of reform. But it remains the most sacred of cows in Singapore because stupid ppl do not realise Gabriel's point: that there is no strict dichotomy between NS as it exists now and catastrophe. A good place to start reform would be to shorten the length of slavery. Conscription in all other civilised countries exists either to ensure the military remains a 'ppl's army' i.e. to inject a civilian and civilising element into the armed forces, or to ensure that when total mobilisation is needed, the size of the competent force will be large enough. Hence, the point of military service is to teach the conscripts how to carry out their specific wartime roles. NOT to provide cheap labour to beef up the manpower base of the military. The length of service with this goal in mind should thus not exceed 18 months at most.
Furthermore, disruption to continue with further studies should be granted to all, not just a select group of PSC scholars. The benefit to students (not to mention the economy) will be immense (for reasons which are too complex to elab here but should be obvious really).
2. Singapore is under no military threat. You see, the govt's problem is that it thinks we are Israel. You know the story: surrounded by hostile Muslim countries blah blah blah. Well that doesn't cut it for me. Let me explain:
a. Singapore will never be engaged in a trade/economic war. The key reason for the (now defunct) economic attractiveness of S'pore and SEA as a whole is its relatively well-educated workforce, low labour costs, good infrastructure and political stability. This would vanish with the advent of a war. Infrastructure tends to get bombed, stability will vaporise. Plus, war is VERY expensive.
So, for all the propaganda (which I am sad to say many imbeciles in the SAF have deluded themselves into believing), no, Malaysia doesn't want to 'steal' our airport. It's just not worth it, baby.
b. Singapore will not be attacked for strategic reasons, unless the war is not localised and has spread to the whole region. This is for the same reasons as those cited above. No govt wakes up in the morning and decides to take over some other country to improve its strategic position. The effect would certainly be counter-productive. Besides, no superpower at the moment considers S'pore of particular strategic importance. The only country to qualify among our immediate neighbours is Indonesia, and we aren't a gateway or anything to it. The only time S'pore might be involved in a strategically motivated attack is if a regional/world war has erupted, since in that case, economic considerations would take a back seat. However, in such a case, Singapore is unlikely to survive anyway (see next point).
c. Should Singapore be caught up in a regional/world war or an ideologically motivated war, it would surely lose. The cases I have examined above (trade war, strategic war, etc) are cases of limited war. Now in a total war, as Clausewitz has pointed out, sheer numbers are the most important factor. Given S'pore's small population and strategic handicaps, it is extremely likely to lose. The only way a loss might be averted is if it possessed an absolute technological superiority. But that would mean investing a very large percentage of GDP. Which is not exactly the best thing for its economy.
For me, Singapore's existence has always been predicated on its economic survival. It exists to make money and only for that reason. Thus its greatest threat is not military but economic.
Plus, according to just war theory, embarking a war which one is extremely unlikely to win is immoral, considering that war usually results in massive loss of life. So.
4. So, as we have seen, any armed forces which Singapore should posses should only have a deterrent function. This deterrent function should serve to discourage invasion by making the cost of attack high (i.e. destruction of enemy property by aerial raids etc). This deterrent function would obviously not be well played by ground troups like infantrymen, etc. Such ground troops should be kept to a minimum.
Singapore should rely on a largely regular corps to fulfil its manpower needs, which should be kept to a minimum. It should invest in a credible airforce, with suitably frightening bombing capability. This should be enough to deter a casual attack.
Certainly, it should NOT conscript every little boy and turn him into an unthinking pawn.
So, A, pls save your nationalistic hoorahs for the NDP. They will appreciate it there.
C: no need to be so scathing, caleb; it's enough to show A the failure of his logic - ad hominem isn't required. i assume, of course, that you're right and he's not, because your response is extremely long. if my logic appears suspect then do excuse me, i can't really be bothered to properly evaluate the debate so far.
anyway, you're as rabid an antiestablishmentarian as A is a nationalist ('papist' wouldn't be correct) propaganda-puppy, so slamming A that way is rather unfair.
the justification for maintaining a system of conscription seems to me to be rooted in the 1960s in the time when the possibility of invasion was very real. by now we've become so entrenched in the artificial culture of conscription that we can't shake off the feeling that we need a civilian army to protect us from the barbarians at the gates. we're paying through the nose for teeth and claws to scare off our neighbours just as Israel does. no one high up in government is bold enough to speak up and say that the entire juggernaut of NS isn't in concord with the defence requirements of this nation - that it should be revamped, reshaped and streamlined radically. i sure wouldn't have the balls.
of course, i don't know about the true political/strategic situation we're facing at the moment, or will be in the coming decades. if there IS a significant risk of war hidden somewhere beneath the veneer of diplomatic relations, if some hidden, volatile tension simmers, then there'll be grounds for a big ol' civilian army. and we're a pretty kiasee bunch.
D: i'm not taking any sides. i just want to make a few points about the ideas and arguments that have been exchanged so far.
first. A argued that because the SAF is primarily formed to play a defensive role, there should have been more debate before sending soldiers to iraq. i would completely agree with him if the soldiers who went were made to go en masse as part of their unit duties. that, fortunately, is not the case. as far as i am aware, when soldiers are needed for dangerous overseas missions (like in iraq and before iraq there was east timor), the units from which the relevant soldiers will come from will appeal for volunteers from their ranks. selection is strictly voluntary and no one who does not want to go will, in any way, be pressured to go. this explains why people who go are all regulars. they stand to benefit from promotions and lump sum bonanzas upon return. because these people, knowing the risks they would be facing, made personal decisions to take up the challenge, i am completely supportive of the sending of soldiers to iraq. after all, the move benefits singapore's international standing (which could in turn rake in many economic payoffs). if people were forced to go or "volunteered" en masse, however, it would be a different story but that is not the case.
second. gabriel and caleb both seem to be for the idea of having a non-military option for people who, perhaps due to ideological reasons, refuse to serve in the military. in theory, i am very much in support of this idea. but it seems to me a practical impossibility. if such an option existed (say people were given the choice to teach, do community work or serve in the civil defence forces), i'm pretty sure more than half the people would suddenly claim to be pacifists because of the significantly less hardship they would go through in non-military service. i'm not saying that pacifism is bullshit. it isn't. there are people who are strongly pacifist-leaning in this world (caleb would probably be one of them), and they should be entitled to their views. but it is impossible for us to distinguish between the real ones and the ones who just want to have an easier time. if 10% of the population opts to do military service (the crazy 10%, that is), will we still have a credible military to speak about? if there is some way of finding out for sure who the real pacifists are, i am in favour of excusing them from military service. but there isn't.
third. about gabriel and caleb's point that we don't need so many people in the military and that the remaining people should not be made to waste their time. i cannot agree more that the SAF is overstaffed. many people are doing nothing. many jobs can be made more efficient and many posts and be compressed into fewer. but the solution is, i feel, definitely not found in balloting. democracy is not just about maximising the society's welfare (presumably, if you do a ballot and spare some people from ns, you're freeing up productive labour and maximising society's welfare). it's also about equality of opportunity. now, this is not a communist/marxist idea. the communists want equality but democrats dream of equality of opportunity. the equality of opportunity epitomised in the words "all men are created equal" and the famous sentence, "I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood." That's what democracy is about. that people will be given the same opportunities and a level playing field. it's not happening everywhere of course. but that's where we should be headed. and balloting is one big step backwards. i am more agreeable to the suggestion that we cut the length of ns equally for everyone.
finally. about caleb's point that we will lose a war anyway if a regional/world war breaks out. he's probably quite right. in a regional war, we will probably be overpowered eventually by numbers. the question, however, might well be how quickly we fall. if we fall in a week like we did against the japanese then the consequences will be catastrophic for the nation. but if we build up an armed forces strong enough to hold up long enough, our allies, or other world developments, might just be able to come to our rescue in time. britain barely hung on in the second world war and might have fallen eventually had the US not decided to step in. what we want potential aggressors to know (and fear) is that we have an armed forces strong enough to give a heck of a fight and to hold on until somebody somewhere decides to do something that saves us (perhaps our sending troops to iraq might be reciprocated then by uncle sam. we are, after all, the most important economy in south-east asia).
for those who know me by now, you probably know that i'm not a patriotic, pro-establishment yes-man. i have plenty of grievances and ns is certainly one of them (i'm for cutting the length, remember). but some points you guys made, i feel, need a little more perspective.
E: Hi there,
I'm not a 'propaganda puppy,' but I would like to contribute some views about why I believe NS is still necessary. A common perception is that the Singapore military exists to repel invaders in case of a war, and this is a pretty valid interpretation, since militaries are obviously used to fight in wars. And this argument extends that since the prospect of war is increasingly unlikely in an inter-connected world, the necessity for NS consequently decreases, and there's no need to maintain a strong army anymore.
However, I believe that a strong Singaporean army is still necessary even at such a time, for two reasons. First, while it may not seem immediately evident at first glance, I would suggest that a capable military provides the necessary preconditions for strong investor confidence in Singapore, particularly when we are nestled in an area surrounded by Muslim states, and particularly when we have frequent diplomatic squabbles with our neighbours. MNCs would be deterred from investing in a country that they perceive as being 'unstable,' or 'insecure,' especially if they are going to sink in millions or even billions of dollars into building factories/other infrastructure here. They'd rather go to Hong Kong or some other place that is free from such uncertainty. So in a sense, the lynchpin for our phenomenal economic success is our stability, and the lynchpin for that stability is the existence of a strong defence. Of course, this argument can be mocked by people when they say "oh are you therefore implying that if we don't have a strong army then all the investors will immediately pull out?" And to that I'd reply that it's always dangerous to pigeon-hole arguments into extremes. Rather, it's a kind of a spectrum, where the weaker our army is, the lesser confidence investors will have in our economy, the lesser jobs will be created, and so on.
And like what C said, if we were to make NS optional, while there would certainly be some people who would want to be 'macho' and continue in the army, the majority of people would just take the 'path of least resistance' and opt out of it, and since a perfectly legitimate alternative exists, and one's social status would not be diminished by choosing the non-military option, thereby increasing its appeal.
The second reason why I think a strong military is important is because it gives us a vastly increased diplomatic leverage. This is particularly important when a small country (ie Singapore) is involved in perennial negotiations and disputes with a big country (ie Malaysia). A strong military by the smaller country would tell the bigger country that you had better not bullshit around with us, you had better not boss us around, because we have the military might to back us up. Why do you think Malaysia balks at the idea of cutting off our water supply? It's not because they don't want to lose the three sens per gallon that they charge us for the water if they cut off our supply. It's because our civilian leaders (esp LKY) and military leaders have publicly declared in the past that if such a scenario occurs, Singapore will not hesitate to launch a pre-emptive attack on the southern part of peninsula Malaysia to secure our water supplies again, and I believe that Malaysia is taking our threat seriously.
So while the possibility of a full-fledged, regional war might not be as pervasive as it was three or four decades ago, I think a strong military exists for two other important reasons, namely as a lynchpin for economic growth in a volatile region and for increased diplomatic leverage. While the causal links are not immediately evident, and the successes in these spheres can easily be attributed to other mitigating reasons, I think the necessity of a strong military is inescapable. Of course, ideas such shortening the conscript duration can be examined, but to suggest that the necessity for a strong army is anachronistic nowadays would not be entirely accurate.
Caleb: Hello again
Yes i must admit the ad hominem vitriol was somewhat excessive, but i find 'if we had no conscription we would be putty in the hands of (name country of your choice)' arguments truly annoying. I am not suggesting that we do not need any defence capability, what I saying is that we are not best served by the current system of maintaining a large conscript army (with large infantry and armour regiments). To serve as a deterrent, our military only needs the capacity to inflict significant harm on the potential aggressor such that, when they do the cost-benefit analysis, it's not worth the money, loss of int'l credibility, etc etc that aggression would entail. You must remember that in today's world, a reputation for military adventurism would be absolutely disastrous to a country's FDI prospects. Even Singapore has been trying to spruce up its int'l image, what with the open arms for gay civil servants and all. And it was doing quite well (that is until Headmaster Lee ratted on about how he 'made a few phonecalls' to get preferential treatment in an NHS hospital and threatened to 'break heads' if the union boys at SIA got naughty). Sigh.
As for the M'sia and the water supply issue, let me offer a few thoughts:
1. The endless scuffles between S'pore and M'sia should merely be seen as the result of puerile attempts by the M'sian govt to shore up domestic support for UMNO. This is a favourite tactic of Mahathir, as Paul Krugman likes to point out in his NY Times Op-Ed. It is inconceivable that M'sia would actually cut the water supply *until the agreements run out*. This is because Msia and S'pore are too closely linked economically to for this to bring any benefit to M'sia. But, then again, even if it did cut the water supply after the agreements run out, there isn't much S'pore can do about it. Launching a 'pre-emptive strike' on M'sia would certainly not be a good idea, since it would then be illegal under int'l law.
2. S'pore fails to see that security is regional. Consider the EU. It is not inconceivable that France and Germany should ever go to war. Yet 60 years ago they devastated each other. Why this sea-change? Because their far-sighted leaders took pains to achieve 'ever closer union'. In contrast, ASEAN is a farce where leaders congratulate each other constantly and basically get nothing done. If S'pore had been more persistent from the start in integrating the region closer together, our security and economic situation would have been far better today than it is presently.
Well, just a few thoughts ya
Caleb: Oops I meant 'it is inconceivable that France and Germany...' not 'it is not inconceivable...' Sorry guys.
To address C's point about non-military alternatives, one would have to ask why the exodus he predicts from military NS has not occured in Sweden and other countries which have conscription. Furthermore, I would like to point out that non-military alternatives need not be cushy. My French teacher, who was one of the last batches of French citizens to serve NS before it was phased out in the early 1990s, opted for a civilian alternative and was duly sent to teach French at a Ugandan university. He once contracted malaria there and almost died. So, civilian service can actually be equally if not more risky/unpleasant.
Btw, since D mentioned the need for reform, why don't we discuss reforming the SAF? I mean for an organisation which has such a pervasive influence, it has very very little accountability. The Hu Enhuai thing was probably only saw the light of day in the media because the advent of the internet meant that such a atrocious lapse was already known by quite a large number of ppl. I believe there was a similar case in the ninties where a guy was killed (combat engineers) due to the negligence and stupidity of his superior officers. But, this case was not at all publicised. Why is this so? The govt likes to cite 'national security' as a blanket excuse, but I think that as citizens of an (ostensibly) democratic country, we have to right to know. Plus, there is almost no way for ordinary citizens or even MPs to have a say in how the SAF is run. In other countries which practice conscription, the military is expected to be fully accountable to the public. (This is with the exception of places like China and Russia, but well, let's not go there).
Post ID: 107140645977034615
Thursday, December 11, 2003
Gabriel's Homepage's third incarnation is in the process of being put up. Stay tuned for details. In the meantime, the pictures are going up at PhotoBucket.
In the meantime, you can pray that He Who Must Not Be Named or Andrew post more often.
Has The Opium Myth Gone Up In Smoke?
Was pleasantly surprised that the ST published this strike for sense in the misguided war against drugs, which induces almost religious feelings in many. So much for all the propaganda about opium. Too bad he didn't talk about pot, but I understand it is similarly harmless.
In the meantime, you can pray that He Who Must Not Be Named or Andrew post more often.
Has The Opium Myth Gone Up In Smoke?
Was pleasantly surprised that the ST published this strike for sense in the misguided war against drugs, which induces almost religious feelings in many. So much for all the propaganda about opium. Too bad he didn't talk about pot, but I understand it is similarly harmless.
Post ID: 107113893706008482
The Evolutionary Tales - "With apologies to Chaucer and Darwin". The Evolutionary Tales deals engagingly with the overwhelming evidence for evolution and the pseudoscientific nature of "creation science."
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ - "a reference for answering the "there aren't any transitional fossils" statement"
Transition between apes and humans - Can you decide conclusively which ones are apes and which humans?
Forum with list of SAF training "incidents" - Some sound quite gruesome. Eg:
"Heard from fellow engineers, 93-95.
Exercise cut, bulldozers cover anti-tank trenches. THEN roll call, 1 man missing. Excavators used to dig, uncovered body parts of missing man, chopped up by excavators. The man was napping in the trench.
Mother spat at CO.
CO escaped punishment, even got sponsorship to study overseas."
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ - "a reference for answering the "there aren't any transitional fossils" statement"
Transition between apes and humans - Can you decide conclusively which ones are apes and which humans?
Forum with list of SAF training "incidents" - Some sound quite gruesome. Eg:
"Heard from fellow engineers, 93-95.
Exercise cut, bulldozers cover anti-tank trenches. THEN roll call, 1 man missing. Excavators used to dig, uncovered body parts of missing man, chopped up by excavators. The man was napping in the trench.
Mother spat at CO.
CO escaped punishment, even got sponsorship to study overseas."
Post ID: 107112415287515408
Wednesday, December 10, 2003
CNN.com - Tests: Activists fed pork to sheep - Dec. 4, 2003 - I'm quite disturbed, though frankly not a little amused, by this. What will they think of next?
Britney Spears Lookalike
JesusDressUp.com
Women With Big Boobs Are Smarter This comes from the "Weekly World News News" stream - the same people who brought us "Crocodile Headed Man sighted in Florida"
Bossier School Board upholds Advil expulsion - A student is expelled from high school because she had Advil, an over-the-counter pain reliever, in her purse.
He Who Must Not Be Named urges me to maintain my studied silence regarding the "Best Singaporean blog thing", but I feel compelled to say a few words.
I never imagined anyone would nominate me for this kind of contest, but someone did, so there you have it. I have taken a look at some of my fellow nominees, finding some familiar sites in the process, and the quality of some, truth be told, appall me. Nonetheless, what was meant to be a friendly competition aiming to (among other things) showcase some of the best Asian blogs seems to have degenerated into petty squabbling and sliming. I don't believe in not saying something just because it will "hurt" someone, because when it comes to the crunch, anyone can be offended by anything, but there are limits, and there's a line between being light-heartedly mean for the purpose of getting a few laughs and being vicious (NB: Many people do not make the distinction, but what matters is that the person making the remark has).
Of course, remaining objective and laughing at yourself is hard when you are the one being criticised. Which is one reason why I've gotten into so much trouble over the years, but that is another story.
I will not comment on the other entrants, until perhaps the contest is over. You can always read other's spot-on critiques elsewhere (including below), for I will not tread on this heated battlefield for a change. Besides, I've half-made a resolution to be nice to people on even days, and brutally honest on odd ones :)
Britney Spears Lookalike
JesusDressUp.com
Women With Big Boobs Are Smarter This comes from the "Weekly World News News" stream - the same people who brought us "Crocodile Headed Man sighted in Florida"
Bossier School Board upholds Advil expulsion - A student is expelled from high school because she had Advil, an over-the-counter pain reliever, in her purse.
He Who Must Not Be Named urges me to maintain my studied silence regarding the "Best Singaporean blog thing", but I feel compelled to say a few words.
I never imagined anyone would nominate me for this kind of contest, but someone did, so there you have it. I have taken a look at some of my fellow nominees, finding some familiar sites in the process, and the quality of some, truth be told, appall me. Nonetheless, what was meant to be a friendly competition aiming to (among other things) showcase some of the best Asian blogs seems to have degenerated into petty squabbling and sliming. I don't believe in not saying something just because it will "hurt" someone, because when it comes to the crunch, anyone can be offended by anything, but there are limits, and there's a line between being light-heartedly mean for the purpose of getting a few laughs and being vicious (NB: Many people do not make the distinction, but what matters is that the person making the remark has).
Of course, remaining objective and laughing at yourself is hard when you are the one being criticised. Which is one reason why I've gotten into so much trouble over the years, but that is another story.
I will not comment on the other entrants, until perhaps the contest is over. You can always read other's spot-on critiques elsewhere (including below), for I will not tread on this heated battlefield for a change. Besides, I've half-made a resolution to be nice to people on even days, and brutally honest on odd ones :)
Post ID: 107106237595274510
Monday, December 08, 2003
So far Gabriel has studiedly refused to blog about; or even talk about the Best Singaporean blog thing, which appears to be causing a stir among the digital hoi polloi (those who got nominated, anyway)
While I appreciate his utter reticence in the matter - (not entirely a surprise given the issues he's had with this blog and public exposure to date), I for my part feel that he deserves all the recognition he can get; after all there's always the slight probability that some hot, intelligent, morally compromised, geek-fetishistic and yet curiously tolerant babe/hunk who will come into his life, which is something he needs right now. (Alright, I admit it, if he/she comes into his life, he might introduce me to him/her too)
In the meantime, I've noticed that reactions among the nominees seem to be split into these broad categories:
a) Elitist bitching about the quality of language on some of the fellow nominees, be it scansion, grammar, punctuation, or overuse of vernacular. Okay, I have to admit I'm pretty damn sympathetic to this particular beef, because most people on the net trample the language into the mud harder than a Dance Dance Revolution pad in a Sumo wrestlers' frat house. However, this feeling has been leavened somewhat of late by the realization that a lot more bloggers have far better English than they appear to; it's just that when diarizing a rant, the last thing on your mind is whether it passes TOEFL muster - and sometimes it's easier to communicate colloquially leh. (see? note the empathic quality evoked by the "leh"?:) It's kind of like seeing a horde of CHS-HCJC guys in a social function; they'll all be Orc-grunting and conversing about soccer in broken English, then one of them will suddenly ask, "oy you got read Jorge Luis Borges b4? wa see beh cheem leh!", and then a surprisingly erudite conversation on Latin American literature will break out. I've seen it happen. So, with that in mind, I find myself very wary of casting my usual anal aspersions on people's use of language on the net. You never know if its just comfort zone writing or an immensely subtle parody. Conversely, didactically insisting on not just the Queen's English but speaking like the (a) Queen can be a mere testament to one's lack of anything resembling a life, or the quality of the dictionary by one's side. (I recommend the full Collins English; way cheaper than the OED and has etymologies)
b) Multiple auto-fellative high fives, links, encomiums, and kudoses to friends who got nominated, friends who should be nominated, and various calls for incestuous cross-voting between acquainted nominees. Jesus, as if we didn't fucking need Friendster to tell us that the digerati rapidly folds into an inbred mesh of personal relationships.
c) Sniping about layout, colour scheme, frames, scripts, etc. Erm. Given that I originally wanted to blog in .txt files, but was dragged kicking and screaming into CSS perdition by Gabriel's experiments with Dreamweaver (one of the myriad reasons why I don't blog here regularly anymore), I don't think I'm in a position to comment on the aesthetics of other sites. I do feel that content outweighs design; the number of frighteningly well-designed blogs with frighteningly asinine entries/people behind them is staggering - and not a few made it as nominees to the Asianblog thing. (But hey those of you reading this can have fun guessing if I'm referring to you and getting all huffy about my attitude in your own blogs). Frankly I don't mind reading a blog in yellow 36 point Times New Roman on a blue background, with cheesy MIDIs playing if the content is compelling.
d) Embarrassed people playing down how they don't care and speculating about who nominated them and a general "what the hell" clamour but putting up the "Asianblog nominee" bumper sticker on their sites anyway. A variant of this is the pseudo-modest "the other nominees are so much better than me but....".
e) Usual, unabashed, "vote for me!" pleas for attention and love. Yes, guilty as charged, but I swear, it's not Gabriel's fault. He was just misguided enough to let me rant here when whimsy takes me.
f) Studiedly ignoring it and refusing to make any reference or acknowledgement, or simply being unaware of it (I find the latter kind of unlikely given the intrusive ubiquity of instant messaging but it's possible). I obviously can't judge the motivation behind remaining silent either way, so I'll let it slip without some try-hard, smart-alecky barb.
A strange observation about blogging etiquette; people seem to be very free about making links willy-nilly to one another's blogs, referring to each other by first name even they don't *seem* to know each other in meatspce, and giving out critiques of surprising candour and brutality. Guess it's so much easier to bitch about someone or their motivations when you don't know them personally beyond a few cryptic, well-turned paragraphs and can't see them face to face.
Hell, it works for me, I'm just glad none of my few friends who blog actually got nominated because I'd be either be obliged to trash them or encourage all and sundry to vote for them. Or both. Either alternative isn't too pleasant - after all, "making bitchy statements about people and things we hardly know about is the basis for all conversation."
Also spotted a few more archetypes :-
i) Camwhore
ii) "Expatriates seduced by strange alien/Asian culture who can never quite go home" - think James Clavell at the most optimistic, Apocalypse Now (urban version) at the least.
iii) Earnest Christian using the Net as pulpit, prayer wheel and confessional.
iv) The classic "intelligent-and-emotionally-balanced-but-slightly-quirky-and-just-this-side-of-obliquely- literate-somewhere-in-tertiary-education" who's self-conscious enough to think "archetype" refers to her/himself.
In all fairness though, there *are* good blogs in the field; and a few which I think have way better writing than on Balderdash, regardless of whether their tone/content is that of critical assholes, genuinely insightful observations, or adolescent angst. Am tempted to write snap reviews of the entrants so far, but this blog entry has eaten up far too much of my masturbation-to-nurse-pornography, and Knights-of-the-Old Republic-playing time. Out of some obscure, hypocritically self-righteous courtesy, I shall not link to any of the other nominees, whether like or hate, but please do read through some of them, because there *are* good ones out there. (Chances are if you're a nominee reading this that feels offended by what I've written, I actually liked your blog)
Final observation; I seem to be crafting a longer blog entry than the nominees writing about this damn thing, which I suppose would be less pathetic if this was even my blog, if "pathetic" was a value judgement that hurts only if you pay attention to irrelevancies like the opinions of other people, and if my life wasn't such a dysfunctional, loserish quagmire right now that I spend half a night ranting about a fucking blog popularity contest.
While I appreciate his utter reticence in the matter - (not entirely a surprise given the issues he's had with this blog and public exposure to date), I for my part feel that he deserves all the recognition he can get; after all there's always the slight probability that some hot, intelligent, morally compromised, geek-fetishistic and yet curiously tolerant babe/hunk who will come into his life, which is something he needs right now. (Alright, I admit it, if he/she comes into his life, he might introduce me to him/her too)
In the meantime, I've noticed that reactions among the nominees seem to be split into these broad categories:
a) Elitist bitching about the quality of language on some of the fellow nominees, be it scansion, grammar, punctuation, or overuse of vernacular. Okay, I have to admit I'm pretty damn sympathetic to this particular beef, because most people on the net trample the language into the mud harder than a Dance Dance Revolution pad in a Sumo wrestlers' frat house. However, this feeling has been leavened somewhat of late by the realization that a lot more bloggers have far better English than they appear to; it's just that when diarizing a rant, the last thing on your mind is whether it passes TOEFL muster - and sometimes it's easier to communicate colloquially leh. (see? note the empathic quality evoked by the "leh"?:) It's kind of like seeing a horde of CHS-HCJC guys in a social function; they'll all be Orc-grunting and conversing about soccer in broken English, then one of them will suddenly ask, "oy you got read Jorge Luis Borges b4? wa see beh cheem leh!", and then a surprisingly erudite conversation on Latin American literature will break out. I've seen it happen. So, with that in mind, I find myself very wary of casting my usual anal aspersions on people's use of language on the net. You never know if its just comfort zone writing or an immensely subtle parody. Conversely, didactically insisting on not just the Queen's English but speaking like the (a) Queen can be a mere testament to one's lack of anything resembling a life, or the quality of the dictionary by one's side. (I recommend the full Collins English; way cheaper than the OED and has etymologies)
b) Multiple auto-fellative high fives, links, encomiums, and kudoses to friends who got nominated, friends who should be nominated, and various calls for incestuous cross-voting between acquainted nominees. Jesus, as if we didn't fucking need Friendster to tell us that the digerati rapidly folds into an inbred mesh of personal relationships.
c) Sniping about layout, colour scheme, frames, scripts, etc. Erm. Given that I originally wanted to blog in .txt files, but was dragged kicking and screaming into CSS perdition by Gabriel's experiments with Dreamweaver (one of the myriad reasons why I don't blog here regularly anymore), I don't think I'm in a position to comment on the aesthetics of other sites. I do feel that content outweighs design; the number of frighteningly well-designed blogs with frighteningly asinine entries/people behind them is staggering - and not a few made it as nominees to the Asianblog thing. (But hey those of you reading this can have fun guessing if I'm referring to you and getting all huffy about my attitude in your own blogs). Frankly I don't mind reading a blog in yellow 36 point Times New Roman on a blue background, with cheesy MIDIs playing if the content is compelling.
d) Embarrassed people playing down how they don't care and speculating about who nominated them and a general "what the hell" clamour but putting up the "Asianblog nominee" bumper sticker on their sites anyway. A variant of this is the pseudo-modest "the other nominees are so much better than me but....".
e) Usual, unabashed, "vote for me!" pleas for attention and love. Yes, guilty as charged, but I swear, it's not Gabriel's fault. He was just misguided enough to let me rant here when whimsy takes me.
f) Studiedly ignoring it and refusing to make any reference or acknowledgement, or simply being unaware of it (I find the latter kind of unlikely given the intrusive ubiquity of instant messaging but it's possible). I obviously can't judge the motivation behind remaining silent either way, so I'll let it slip without some try-hard, smart-alecky barb.
A strange observation about blogging etiquette; people seem to be very free about making links willy-nilly to one another's blogs, referring to each other by first name even they don't *seem* to know each other in meatspce, and giving out critiques of surprising candour and brutality. Guess it's so much easier to bitch about someone or their motivations when you don't know them personally beyond a few cryptic, well-turned paragraphs and can't see them face to face.
Hell, it works for me, I'm just glad none of my few friends who blog actually got nominated because I'd be either be obliged to trash them or encourage all and sundry to vote for them. Or both. Either alternative isn't too pleasant - after all, "making bitchy statements about people and things we hardly know about is the basis for all conversation."
Also spotted a few more archetypes :-
i) Camwhore
ii) "Expatriates seduced by strange alien/Asian culture who can never quite go home" - think James Clavell at the most optimistic, Apocalypse Now (urban version) at the least.
iii) Earnest Christian using the Net as pulpit, prayer wheel and confessional.
iv) The classic "intelligent-and-emotionally-balanced-but-slightly-quirky-and-just-this-side-of-obliquely- literate-somewhere-in-tertiary-education" who's self-conscious enough to think "archetype" refers to her/himself.
In all fairness though, there *are* good blogs in the field; and a few which I think have way better writing than on Balderdash, regardless of whether their tone/content is that of critical assholes, genuinely insightful observations, or adolescent angst. Am tempted to write snap reviews of the entrants so far, but this blog entry has eaten up far too much of my masturbation-to-nurse-pornography, and Knights-of-the-Old Republic-playing time. Out of some obscure, hypocritically self-righteous courtesy, I shall not link to any of the other nominees, whether like or hate, but please do read through some of them, because there *are* good ones out there. (Chances are if you're a nominee reading this that feels offended by what I've written, I actually liked your blog)
Final observation; I seem to be crafting a longer blog entry than the nominees writing about this damn thing, which I suppose would be less pathetic if this was even my blog, if "pathetic" was a value judgement that hurts only if you pay attention to irrelevancies like the opinions of other people, and if my life wasn't such a dysfunctional, loserish quagmire right now that I spend half a night ranting about a fucking blog popularity contest.
Post ID: 107089217859647015
Sunday, December 07, 2003
A Musical Concoction 6
I managed to procure tickets for RV's latest concert yesterday, held at Victoria Concert Hall. I'd thought that with the Esplanade's opening, no one would want to go to VCH anymore, but I suppose it's now a budget location since they've probably slashed prices to compete with the former.
It was rather embarassing, since I saw a lot of the people 3 years my junior whose names I could not remember even though I recognised their faces. It's been a long 4 years since we parted company, and I was never very good at names, especially not with people I worked with for only a few months.
TBS had invited 2 of his other choirs to perform as guests - Evil Cult (RJ Chorale) and St Hilda's Secondary School (over whom the row of girls behind me were gushing over). He really should have gotten some conducted by other people, for variety. I was disappointed to learn that he didn't let the Sec 4s, those who have the most experience and who in fact came up with the idea for the concert, perform, not even in one or two pieces, or for a batch song. Looks like he's still as evil as ever.
For some reason, it seemed that the majority of the audience were secondary school girls (you can speculate for yourself why this is so, but suffice to say that we can suppose that RV still isn't a very popular ECA in RI). This caused me some modicum of distress, and as expected, I wrinkled my nose in distaste when I was pushing through a throng of them. Worse, a majority of them were shrill and anorexic and a few - god forbid - spoke in chinese. I was afforded no respite, for a majority of the males were spiky haired ah bengs. What is this generation coming to?
I was interested to see how RV would perform under TBS, especially since I hadn't seen him conduct since his return from overseas studies so many years ago. They sound pretty much the same as last time, which probably says more about my ear than their sound (which is why nowadays I revert to my speciality of making semi-snide comments), but his hand movements seem to have become more exaggerated.
The alumni item wasn't bad (because I wasn't performing), except that, where usually the alumni choir's item is ahead of the current choir's item by leaps and bounds, in this case it was about as good. Whether that says something about the current choir, or about the alumni, I will not judge ;)
RV was competent during their first appearance, but after they adjourned for other groups to perform, they began to falter. The sops started straining while hitting high notes, and belted them out without restraint instead of attaining them gracefully. At other times, they sounded extremely muffled. That's the problem when you get previously untrained Sec 1s boys to work at the higher levels of their soprano ranges. [Ed: I paid little attention to the other sections because they rarely sung the melody lines (so sue me, I'm shallow) and also because I was never in them and am less familiar with them] After the interval they became even worse, and by the end of the concert, they were terrible, with flaws so egregious they would be audible to the untrained ear. The songs second and third from the end - Angel's Carol and Do You Hear What I Hear - were the pits (perhaps they sounded abysmal only because I am intimately familiar with the scores), and were much worse than when we did them in our day. Hell, I think even in my current state, I can sing better than they did yesterday. They were that bad.
BEATS did not perform at all. Maybe it's been disbanded, to be replaced with small groups formed from members of the same level ala RGS. The small group which did perform - "Viva" - wasn't bad, though they introduced themselves with the ever-popular: "We all like to make music, so we formed an acapella group". Argh, don't they know that they should avoid cliches like the plague? They performed but one song - All I Ask Of You from Phantom of the Opera. I rather liked the rendition, except that both Raoul and Christine's parts were sung in falsetto and "Christine" sang with a constipated look and hand movements reminiscent of a female Chinese Opera star. The torment this caused me is indescribable, unless they were adapting the song for a lesbian couple :)
Later, TBS came onstage with 11 choir members and started singing "The Christmas Song" in his operatic voice while conducting the 11 of them (a double faux pas). It was so spine-chilling, it almost raised my goosebumps. I wonder why he thinks all songs can be sung in an operatic voice. Or maybe his normal singing voice isn't very good. At least he didn't mangle "The Music's Always There With You" (since it wasn't performed), like he did at his "get lost" (not my invention) concert, and bring down the chandelier.
The repertoire has certainly expanded since the Wu Yi (Wu Jie) days. That is certainly a good thing, but the moves by most choirs that consider themselves to be in the top league to deliberately exclude more common and well known pieces is, I feel a mistake. It is good to perform a wide range of songs, but surely a sprinkling of audience favourites can't hurt. In fact, the move towards esoteric, dischordant avant garde and plain weird pieces (eg all of Goh Toh Chai's compositions) that some are making can only serve to further diminish the popularity of choral music, and we'll end up with either small ensembles that have an audience smaller than their numbers or crossover/pops choirs that sing muzak. Or maybe I can't appreciate modern music, just like I can't appreciate modern art made by splashing a bucket of paint on canvas.
I also had the feeling that too many Asian songs were performed. This wasn't really the case, but I don't like Asian music, so. Anyway, just because we are Asian does not mean we have to sing many asian songs, just like how ethnic Chinese don't need to speak Chinese, Muslim Women don't have to wear tudungs, Sikhs don't have to wear their turbans and Germans don't have to drink beer. I also think that a judicious sprinkling of songs with accompaniment can add variety to a performance, since sometimes the whole can be greater than the sum of its parts. Sad, for it's all because judges like these things (avant garde, asian and acapella music).
According to Tim, Durufle's Ubi Caritas is a favourite piece of TBS' which he does every concert, and he did not disappoint. Bah. At least he didn't prepare an encore piece, unlike a previous RJ concert where he had 2 encore items and pretended that he had not prepared for the second encore.
I miss some things about the Wu Jie days (the stories he told that no one but Jasper understood are not one of them). He made us perform too many songs with accompaniment, partly due to the fact that we weren't very good and would go sharp of flat at the drop of a pin, but I am left with a lingering fondness for hearing such songs, a fondness which I rarely have the opportunity to indulge with live performances. He let us sing more popular music than is fashionable - pieces from operas, oratorios and other classics, but that is how I first heard of The Creation, Messiah or Ave Maria. Maybe performing songs reminiscent of the croaking of frogs being culled turns some people on, but I am not such a person and I do not think I would be the dilettante that I am today without him.
I think MCs should be banned from using the word "enjoy" to end off their interludes.
Mr Ong was there as always, and he was wearing blue SAF New Balance shoes. I think New Balance must have hooked a large fish, seeing how many civilians wear their line of SAF PT Shoes.
Many idiots were taking pictures with their flashes. Good luck for their pictures.
"I don't want to be seen next to you. It's embarassing" - I don't think it's as embarassing as it used to be.
Amusing quote from the past:
Someone (I forgot who): When *** conducts, you give 'A' grade singing. When *** conducts, you give 'B' grade singing. When *** conducts, you give 'C' grade singing.
Me: Maybe that is because *** is a 'A' grade conductor, *** is a 'B' grade conductor and *** is a 'C' grade conductor.
Amusing quote from the present:
Me to the guy next to me: Excuse me, you're alumni also? What year are you free?
Him: Sec 4. You're Gabriel right.
Me: Eh? How do you know?
Him: Your infamous webpage.
Me: *Buries head in hand and shakes it vigorously*
Since my page is so popular, I think I should add a shameless Paypal donation box. I can also capitalise on my notoriety as the person people love to hate by selling dartboards with my face as the bullseye and toilet seat covers with me on them.
The token negroes in Master and Commander rather irked me, for I am pretty sure that in the early 19th Century, blacks did not go to sea as common sailors. If they want to be so politically correct, they might as well include a Korean crew member as well as a blind, albino hermaphrodite.
My Very First Time - Nigel's blog. He makes it sound like he just got deflowered.
I managed to procure tickets for RV's latest concert yesterday, held at Victoria Concert Hall. I'd thought that with the Esplanade's opening, no one would want to go to VCH anymore, but I suppose it's now a budget location since they've probably slashed prices to compete with the former.
It was rather embarassing, since I saw a lot of the people 3 years my junior whose names I could not remember even though I recognised their faces. It's been a long 4 years since we parted company, and I was never very good at names, especially not with people I worked with for only a few months.
TBS had invited 2 of his other choirs to perform as guests - Evil Cult (RJ Chorale) and St Hilda's Secondary School (over whom the row of girls behind me were gushing over). He really should have gotten some conducted by other people, for variety. I was disappointed to learn that he didn't let the Sec 4s, those who have the most experience and who in fact came up with the idea for the concert, perform, not even in one or two pieces, or for a batch song. Looks like he's still as evil as ever.
For some reason, it seemed that the majority of the audience were secondary school girls (you can speculate for yourself why this is so, but suffice to say that we can suppose that RV still isn't a very popular ECA in RI). This caused me some modicum of distress, and as expected, I wrinkled my nose in distaste when I was pushing through a throng of them. Worse, a majority of them were shrill and anorexic and a few - god forbid - spoke in chinese. I was afforded no respite, for a majority of the males were spiky haired ah bengs. What is this generation coming to?
I was interested to see how RV would perform under TBS, especially since I hadn't seen him conduct since his return from overseas studies so many years ago. They sound pretty much the same as last time, which probably says more about my ear than their sound (which is why nowadays I revert to my speciality of making semi-snide comments), but his hand movements seem to have become more exaggerated.
The alumni item wasn't bad (because I wasn't performing), except that, where usually the alumni choir's item is ahead of the current choir's item by leaps and bounds, in this case it was about as good. Whether that says something about the current choir, or about the alumni, I will not judge ;)
RV was competent during their first appearance, but after they adjourned for other groups to perform, they began to falter. The sops started straining while hitting high notes, and belted them out without restraint instead of attaining them gracefully. At other times, they sounded extremely muffled. That's the problem when you get previously untrained Sec 1s boys to work at the higher levels of their soprano ranges. [Ed: I paid little attention to the other sections because they rarely sung the melody lines (so sue me, I'm shallow) and also because I was never in them and am less familiar with them] After the interval they became even worse, and by the end of the concert, they were terrible, with flaws so egregious they would be audible to the untrained ear. The songs second and third from the end - Angel's Carol and Do You Hear What I Hear - were the pits (perhaps they sounded abysmal only because I am intimately familiar with the scores), and were much worse than when we did them in our day. Hell, I think even in my current state, I can sing better than they did yesterday. They were that bad.
BEATS did not perform at all. Maybe it's been disbanded, to be replaced with small groups formed from members of the same level ala RGS. The small group which did perform - "Viva" - wasn't bad, though they introduced themselves with the ever-popular: "We all like to make music, so we formed an acapella group". Argh, don't they know that they should avoid cliches like the plague? They performed but one song - All I Ask Of You from Phantom of the Opera. I rather liked the rendition, except that both Raoul and Christine's parts were sung in falsetto and "Christine" sang with a constipated look and hand movements reminiscent of a female Chinese Opera star. The torment this caused me is indescribable, unless they were adapting the song for a lesbian couple :)
Later, TBS came onstage with 11 choir members and started singing "The Christmas Song" in his operatic voice while conducting the 11 of them (a double faux pas). It was so spine-chilling, it almost raised my goosebumps. I wonder why he thinks all songs can be sung in an operatic voice. Or maybe his normal singing voice isn't very good. At least he didn't mangle "The Music's Always There With You" (since it wasn't performed), like he did at his "get lost" (not my invention) concert, and bring down the chandelier.
The repertoire has certainly expanded since the Wu Yi (Wu Jie) days. That is certainly a good thing, but the moves by most choirs that consider themselves to be in the top league to deliberately exclude more common and well known pieces is, I feel a mistake. It is good to perform a wide range of songs, but surely a sprinkling of audience favourites can't hurt. In fact, the move towards esoteric, dischordant avant garde and plain weird pieces (eg all of Goh Toh Chai's compositions) that some are making can only serve to further diminish the popularity of choral music, and we'll end up with either small ensembles that have an audience smaller than their numbers or crossover/pops choirs that sing muzak. Or maybe I can't appreciate modern music, just like I can't appreciate modern art made by splashing a bucket of paint on canvas.
I also had the feeling that too many Asian songs were performed. This wasn't really the case, but I don't like Asian music, so. Anyway, just because we are Asian does not mean we have to sing many asian songs, just like how ethnic Chinese don't need to speak Chinese, Muslim Women don't have to wear tudungs, Sikhs don't have to wear their turbans and Germans don't have to drink beer. I also think that a judicious sprinkling of songs with accompaniment can add variety to a performance, since sometimes the whole can be greater than the sum of its parts. Sad, for it's all because judges like these things (avant garde, asian and acapella music).
According to Tim, Durufle's Ubi Caritas is a favourite piece of TBS' which he does every concert, and he did not disappoint. Bah. At least he didn't prepare an encore piece, unlike a previous RJ concert where he had 2 encore items and pretended that he had not prepared for the second encore.
I miss some things about the Wu Jie days (the stories he told that no one but Jasper understood are not one of them). He made us perform too many songs with accompaniment, partly due to the fact that we weren't very good and would go sharp of flat at the drop of a pin, but I am left with a lingering fondness for hearing such songs, a fondness which I rarely have the opportunity to indulge with live performances. He let us sing more popular music than is fashionable - pieces from operas, oratorios and other classics, but that is how I first heard of The Creation, Messiah or Ave Maria. Maybe performing songs reminiscent of the croaking of frogs being culled turns some people on, but I am not such a person and I do not think I would be the dilettante that I am today without him.
I think MCs should be banned from using the word "enjoy" to end off their interludes.
Mr Ong was there as always, and he was wearing blue SAF New Balance shoes. I think New Balance must have hooked a large fish, seeing how many civilians wear their line of SAF PT Shoes.
Many idiots were taking pictures with their flashes. Good luck for their pictures.
"I don't want to be seen next to you. It's embarassing" - I don't think it's as embarassing as it used to be.
Amusing quote from the past:
Someone (I forgot who): When *** conducts, you give 'A' grade singing. When *** conducts, you give 'B' grade singing. When *** conducts, you give 'C' grade singing.
Me: Maybe that is because *** is a 'A' grade conductor, *** is a 'B' grade conductor and *** is a 'C' grade conductor.
Amusing quote from the present:
Me to the guy next to me: Excuse me, you're alumni also? What year are you free?
Him: Sec 4. You're Gabriel right.
Me: Eh? How do you know?
Him: Your infamous webpage.
Me: *Buries head in hand and shakes it vigorously*
Since my page is so popular, I think I should add a shameless Paypal donation box. I can also capitalise on my notoriety as the person people love to hate by selling dartboards with my face as the bullseye and toilet seat covers with me on them.
The token negroes in Master and Commander rather irked me, for I am pretty sure that in the early 19th Century, blacks did not go to sea as common sailors. If they want to be so politically correct, they might as well include a Korean crew member as well as a blind, albino hermaphrodite.
My Very First Time - Nigel's blog. He makes it sound like he just got deflowered.
Post ID: 107080296035229437
PerversionTracker: Apparently Useless Software - "We will assume that KillerRobots’ mention of "amazing 3D graphics" was somewhat sarcastic, as all we saw was a insect-riddled rendition of Pac-Man. Given that Gaichu adds only a few minor variations like movable barriers and poison pills, we were not overly impressed in the usual sense of the word. Instead, Gaichu is impressive in the way that a howler monkey’s perfect feces-flinging skills are impressive, as when the excreta achieves perfect coverage across the broad expanses of a suburban family on their first and last visit to the local zoo. So you see, this sense of "impressive" covers the gamut of emotional trauma, the agony of gratingly disparate worldviews, and flan lightly dusted with ginger."
Kazaa Lite shut down - The Kazaa Lite K++ project has been shut down by Sharman Networks on grounds of copyright infringement. How ironic. Oh well, there's always Diet K.
WANT TO BE A MAVERICK?
Friday December 5, 2003
You must have 8 A*s at PSLE, an IQ above 150 and excel in CCA and sports
by mr brown news@newstoday.com.sg
Some call these men the greatest entertainers on earth - flying without wings - defying physical limitations. But the risks these men take are great: Bodies have been battered, heads broken, careers ended in an instant.
Yes, this is entertainment, but the hazards are real: No matter whoever you are, whatever you do, please don't try this at home. Please - don't become part of a confrontational union.
Ok, now that we have got the violent union stuff out of the way, let's talk about wimps.
I was going to talk about Wimp Lizkit, that tough and angry rock group, cancelling their concert here in Singapore because of security fears. (Yes. Those violent car drivers who horn 0.2 seconds after the light turns green can be really scary in Singapore).
But I decided that the Army treadmill story was more relevant.
Apparently, there are soldiers out there who believe the new IPPT (Individual Physical Proficiency Test) in an aircon gym idea is not a good thing. These are the same people who reminisce about the good old days when National Service was a lot tougher.
I think every generation of NSMan believes that their training was the toughest, or at least tougher than the current batch.
1975: "In my day, our officers made us run 10km with our full packs, to reach our training location! Not like you wimps who get there by three-tonner now."
1998: "In my day, our officers made us sit in a hot three-tonner to reach our training location to do our 2.4km run. Not like you wimps who get to do your training without leaving the camp now."
2003: "In my day, our officers made us run our IPPT 2.4km on real roads in our camp, in the heat, not like you wimps who run on a treadmill in an aircon gym now."
2010: "In my day, our officers made us run our IPPT 2.4km on a treadmill. Not like you wimps who now do your IPPT as a written test!"
Singapore soldiers are a funny lot. We bitch when the training is tough and when Mindef comes along and makes things more convenient, we complain that the training has gotten too soft.
I believe that most of us become passionate about the toughness of training only after we finish our full time stint. Because while you are serving those two or 2.5 years, you would be crazy to complain that the training was too easy.
Even if you thought so, you would not come out and complain about it, because your platoon mates would probably beat you up for saying that the training needs to be harder.
"Sergeant! I want to give feedback! I think we should do more than this 24km route march we just finished! I think we should try for marathon distance, like 42km. Or else we will compromise the quality of our army training!"
(Blanket Party follows)
But of course, there is a fear of army training getting too soft. If we are not careful, our fighting men will one day need to get mommy and daddy to sign a consent form to let Ah Boy crawl in the grass or eat the food at the cookhouse.
We need our fighting men to be fit and tough as nails, able to take long periods without canteen breaks and able to work as a team. Build a team player, not a maverick.
That said, top government officials have acknowledged that Singapore needs its share of mavericks to help us make the leap forward.
So all those interested in being a Singapore Maverick, please pick up a form at your nearest community centre - to be an officially-approved maverick.
If shortlisted, you will be required to take an entrance exam, followed by an interview and submit an essay that describes in no less than 3000 words, "Why I want to be a Maverick, and how I can contribute to the good of the nation by being one without being confrontational".
Some schools will offer programmes for students who show the potential to be a Maverick. Maverick Assistance Plan schools, or M.A.P. schools, will have a special curriculum that caters to students with maverick tendencies. Classes will be kept small, around one to two students per class. To qualify, students need to have at least eight A*s at PSLE, an IQ of no less than 150, and excel in CCA and sports.
Singapore will be striving to become the Maverick Hub of Asia, attracting mavericks from all around the world.
But we want quality mavericks, not the kind that snip their (unmentionable) hair in protest, or who vote their union leaders out as and when they feel like it. No, we want the constructive and compliant kind, the type who feel a need to contribute to Team Singapore.
So if you think you have the makings of a Singapore Maverick, start studying hard now.
We want to farm you and nurture you, to help the rest of the non-Maverick but Equally Essential Team-Playing Citizens of this country come up with better ideas than doing IPPT in an aircon gym.
mr brown is the accidental author of a popular website that has been documenting the dysfunctional side of Singapore life since 1997. He thinks IPPT should be done in real combat conditions, like in union meetings.
Visit TODAYonline website at http://www.todayonline.com
THIS DOCUMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS PROVIDED PURSUANT TO THIS PROGRAM ARE
FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.The information type should not be
interpreted to be a commitment on the part of MediaCorp Press Ltd and
MediaCorp Press Ltd cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information
presented after the date of publication. INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS
DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED 'AS IS' WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. The user
assumes the entire risk as to the accuracy and the use of this document.
TODAYonline newsletter e-mail may be copied and distributed subject to the
following conditions:
1. All text must be copied without modification and all pages must be
included
2. All copies must contain MediaCorp Press Ltd's copyright notice and any
other notices provided therein
3. This document may not be distributed for profit
tel: 68725218
Kazaa Lite shut down - The Kazaa Lite K++ project has been shut down by Sharman Networks on grounds of copyright infringement. How ironic. Oh well, there's always Diet K.
WANT TO BE A MAVERICK?
Friday December 5, 2003
You must have 8 A*s at PSLE, an IQ above 150 and excel in CCA and sports
by mr brown news@newstoday.com.sg
Some call these men the greatest entertainers on earth - flying without wings - defying physical limitations. But the risks these men take are great: Bodies have been battered, heads broken, careers ended in an instant.
Yes, this is entertainment, but the hazards are real: No matter whoever you are, whatever you do, please don't try this at home. Please - don't become part of a confrontational union.
Ok, now that we have got the violent union stuff out of the way, let's talk about wimps.
I was going to talk about Wimp Lizkit, that tough and angry rock group, cancelling their concert here in Singapore because of security fears. (Yes. Those violent car drivers who horn 0.2 seconds after the light turns green can be really scary in Singapore).
But I decided that the Army treadmill story was more relevant.
Apparently, there are soldiers out there who believe the new IPPT (Individual Physical Proficiency Test) in an aircon gym idea is not a good thing. These are the same people who reminisce about the good old days when National Service was a lot tougher.
I think every generation of NSMan believes that their training was the toughest, or at least tougher than the current batch.
1975: "In my day, our officers made us run 10km with our full packs, to reach our training location! Not like you wimps who get there by three-tonner now."
1998: "In my day, our officers made us sit in a hot three-tonner to reach our training location to do our 2.4km run. Not like you wimps who get to do your training without leaving the camp now."
2003: "In my day, our officers made us run our IPPT 2.4km on real roads in our camp, in the heat, not like you wimps who run on a treadmill in an aircon gym now."
2010: "In my day, our officers made us run our IPPT 2.4km on a treadmill. Not like you wimps who now do your IPPT as a written test!"
Singapore soldiers are a funny lot. We bitch when the training is tough and when Mindef comes along and makes things more convenient, we complain that the training has gotten too soft.
I believe that most of us become passionate about the toughness of training only after we finish our full time stint. Because while you are serving those two or 2.5 years, you would be crazy to complain that the training was too easy.
Even if you thought so, you would not come out and complain about it, because your platoon mates would probably beat you up for saying that the training needs to be harder.
"Sergeant! I want to give feedback! I think we should do more than this 24km route march we just finished! I think we should try for marathon distance, like 42km. Or else we will compromise the quality of our army training!"
(Blanket Party follows)
But of course, there is a fear of army training getting too soft. If we are not careful, our fighting men will one day need to get mommy and daddy to sign a consent form to let Ah Boy crawl in the grass or eat the food at the cookhouse.
We need our fighting men to be fit and tough as nails, able to take long periods without canteen breaks and able to work as a team. Build a team player, not a maverick.
That said, top government officials have acknowledged that Singapore needs its share of mavericks to help us make the leap forward.
So all those interested in being a Singapore Maverick, please pick up a form at your nearest community centre - to be an officially-approved maverick.
If shortlisted, you will be required to take an entrance exam, followed by an interview and submit an essay that describes in no less than 3000 words, "Why I want to be a Maverick, and how I can contribute to the good of the nation by being one without being confrontational".
Some schools will offer programmes for students who show the potential to be a Maverick. Maverick Assistance Plan schools, or M.A.P. schools, will have a special curriculum that caters to students with maverick tendencies. Classes will be kept small, around one to two students per class. To qualify, students need to have at least eight A*s at PSLE, an IQ of no less than 150, and excel in CCA and sports.
Singapore will be striving to become the Maverick Hub of Asia, attracting mavericks from all around the world.
But we want quality mavericks, not the kind that snip their (unmentionable) hair in protest, or who vote their union leaders out as and when they feel like it. No, we want the constructive and compliant kind, the type who feel a need to contribute to Team Singapore.
So if you think you have the makings of a Singapore Maverick, start studying hard now.
We want to farm you and nurture you, to help the rest of the non-Maverick but Equally Essential Team-Playing Citizens of this country come up with better ideas than doing IPPT in an aircon gym.
mr brown is the accidental author of a popular website that has been documenting the dysfunctional side of Singapore life since 1997. He thinks IPPT should be done in real combat conditions, like in union meetings.
Visit TODAYonline website at http://www.todayonline.com
THIS DOCUMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS PROVIDED PURSUANT TO THIS PROGRAM ARE
FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.The information type should not be
interpreted to be a commitment on the part of MediaCorp Press Ltd and
MediaCorp Press Ltd cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information
presented after the date of publication. INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS
DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED 'AS IS' WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. The user
assumes the entire risk as to the accuracy and the use of this document.
TODAYonline newsletter e-mail may be copied and distributed subject to the
following conditions:
1. All text must be copied without modification and all pages must be
included
2. All copies must contain MediaCorp Press Ltd's copyright notice and any
other notices provided therein
3. This document may not be distributed for profit
tel: 68725218
Post ID: 107077523309438281
From the last page of the "Spot The Fake Smile" Test - "when a smile is genuine, the eye cover fold - the fleshy part of the eye between the eyebrow and the eyelid - moves downwards and the end of the eyebrows dip slightly." - So now I know why my eyes always look closed in photos!
Singapore Paranormal Investigators Proudly Presents "A Night with Tang-Ki" - "SPI cordially invite you to join our forthcoming club gathering with a highlight called "A Night with Tang-Ki". You will get to witness Taoist Tang-Ki's dance in trance, summon deities into their bodies and perform amazing acts like chopping their bodies with sharp swords. What's more. We will work together as a team to investigate the Tang-Ki performance using night vision goggles, measuring atmospheric changes during the ritual and perhaps a short interview with the Tang-Ki's. With luck, we may capture the first paranormal pictures on how spirits enter and leave the Tang-Ki's body, or record some abnormal EMF on the spot. It will nevertheless be a great opportunity to explore into the mystery of Taoism rituals and learn more about them from the Tang-Ki's. So don't miss out."
Photobucket - Good, *free* image hosting allowing direct linking!
Disturbing activities:
"i set eyes upon two young bucks frolicking on the bed, humping one another from various tricky angles."
Singapore Paranormal Investigators Proudly Presents "A Night with Tang-Ki" - "SPI cordially invite you to join our forthcoming club gathering with a highlight called "A Night with Tang-Ki". You will get to witness Taoist Tang-Ki's dance in trance, summon deities into their bodies and perform amazing acts like chopping their bodies with sharp swords. What's more. We will work together as a team to investigate the Tang-Ki performance using night vision goggles, measuring atmospheric changes during the ritual and perhaps a short interview with the Tang-Ki's. With luck, we may capture the first paranormal pictures on how spirits enter and leave the Tang-Ki's body, or record some abnormal EMF on the spot. It will nevertheless be a great opportunity to explore into the mystery of Taoism rituals and learn more about them from the Tang-Ki's. So don't miss out."
Photobucket - Good, *free* image hosting allowing direct linking!
Disturbing activities:
"i set eyes upon two young bucks frolicking on the bed, humping one another from various tricky angles."
Post ID: 107073025813195477
More Miserable Moanings
I remember reading an article about how the American Right Wing has managed to mould public thought in America by its clever manipulation of language to its advantage. This puts me in mind of the SAF. Take the word "National Service" for example. It implies that it is a way of serving one's country, and has the connotation of duty. I refuse to accept the paradigm that the apparatchiks are trying to implant in me subliminally, which is why I call it "National Slavery". For, if not similar then related reasons, Chinx calls it "Neverending Slavery".
Take, then, what the SAF, with its collective wapred mind, considers "privileges". E-mart "breaks" are a "privilege". Canteen breaks are a "privilege". Booking out is a "privilege". By defining basic rights as "privileges" and using the term copiously, they get most slaves to accept implicitly that they are fortunate to be given these "privileges". I reckon that if they had their way, they would proclaim that it was a "privilege" that us slaves do not spend 2 1/2 years imprisoned at the bottom of a pit, wallowing in our filth and excrement, with naught but unleavened bread and brackish water to survive on, and "Property of the SAF" tattooed all over our bodies.
All this just goes to show once again that for all their glowing talk of "duty", "honour" and "sacrifice", and the gold medals Lee Kuan Yew gave the first batch of Slaves, it is all a sham to deceive pre-enlistees and the fortunate members of the public who have not had the chance to "serve" their country. Once you're in, the facade is dropped and you are treated like the inhuman scum that you are, not deserving of humane treatment, to be stripped of human dignity in the name of "discipline" and "regimentation", all because you have little or no rank (a concept that, in the end, is empty and worthless for a surefire way to get it is either through good A level results or signing on)
Meanwhile, in an insidious if ingenious ploy, the best and brightest, the natural leaders of any rebellion from among the ranks, are co-opted into the system as Officers and given a few more "privileges" than the rest to placate them. Some others are elevated to the posts of Specialists - junior commanders and given similar "privileges", albeit to a lesser degree. They are then turned on each other - BMT Sergeants against their Recruits, jailers in DB against the inmates and indeed, Local Third Sergeants against their Men. The fellow slaves who should stand united instead fall to the strategy of Divide and Conquer, and the slavemasters are satisfied.
More and more, I tend to agree with parts of He Who Must Not Be Named's theory - "i admit NS has become more about social engineering and mind control than it has about actual military defense." Why else do they enslave everyone when not everyone is needed? Why can't conscientious objectors choose to do non-military "service", as is the norm in other countries with conscription? And why else is the philosophy behind NS "make them suffer" rather than "make them defend Singapore"?
Only the 4 Ds can end my misery: reDeployment (not strictly a 'D' but we have the 3 'Rs', so) - extremely unlikely due to my lack of skill and impending ORD, Downgrading - unlikely since I'm too stupid, lazy, honest (I don't even take MCs unless I am very sick) and blacklisted, Discharge - only a matter of time (188 days as of 6th Dec) and Death - also only a matter of time. The question is whether it will take more or less than 188 days in 42SAR to kill me.
188 days to go. I've survived this long in oppression before, albeit not in a place where I am Public Enemy Number 1. Sometimes I just want someone to comfort me and tell me everything will be alright soon, and that soon I will be free - except for the 2 weeks of ICT every year and RT sessions lasting 3 hours each, 3 times a week, 8 weeks a year - from this organisation based on lies, and able to get on with what's left of my life with what's left of my energies, mind and sanity.
As Cesspit used to say, "ming2 tian1 hui4 geng4 hao3" (Translation: Tomorrow will be a better day).
The Weekly Grind - 42SAR
Latest tidbit from "Gabriel's Believe It Or Not?": In 42SAR, the Powers That Be have decided that for 3 months, enlistees will only visit the 42SAR Canteen so they can ascertain the quality of the current caterers and decide whether to retain them - as if everyone didn't already know it was a sucky canteen and so voted with their feet and wallets. It seems that, after at least a year of offering mediocre, un-fresh food and overpriced drinks, the stall holders have complained. So much for the free market, and so much for commanders leading by example and suffering with their men.
My company has sent so many people to the Unit Fitness Program that it can be renamed the "42 Fitness Program", seeing as more than 95% of its "participants" are from 42. I wonder what will happen when, one day, we have too many people to fit in the gym comfortably. Furthermore, they told us, at first, that we would have to take attendance at 42 at 4:00pm, a good half an hour before UFP starts officially, so we would have even less time to settle our work. Luckily, they realised their folly and changed the time for attendance taking to 4:20pm.
In one day, we had 5BX, SOC and UFP. Then the next day we had 5BX again, then a run out of camp, to the Scout Camp (Sarimbun - they got lost, incidentally). Gee, I wonder who plans our training program.
My S4 was praising my "not giving up" and continuing to participate in the various physical activities I'm being put through, which set me wondering why I was being so silly as to continue. The reasons are probably the same as why I'm not actively seeking to downgrade (I'm too stupid, lazy, honest and blacklisted) and why I worked relatively hard for our recent IQA - my misguided sense of responsibility.
One Thursday's company PT ended at 10:30 for people like me who got <225cm for standing broad jump. I was so zoned out I could'nt do anything till late afternoon. They must think we're as free as they are. The extra-long duration was justified as being "for your own good" and a way of "helping" us so we wouldn't have to do RT. This is just like saying that gangsters demanding protection money is for our own good and a way of "helping" us so that they do not have to come down with their whole gang to break our legs later.
We had our HQ Company "OC evening" one night. Our fire wasn't burning well, so our Senior Medic brought out his "secret weapon" - the solid fuel from the field rations. It's reputed to be poisonous but apparently some MOs had endorsed it before, so we merrily cooked our satay until we realised that white flecks of solid fuel were appearing on them, whereupon we dumped the solid fuel and Ban Xiong valiantly ate the contaminated sticks (so if he gets stomach cancer in a few decades we'll all know why). Later there was a somewhat ingenious party game where pre-chosen groups of 4 from each platoon had to eat boxes of "delicacies" - pieces of capsicum, lemon, onions, carrots and chili padi generously seasoned with wasabi. I was selected but luckily the others ate the chili padi for me. For our troubles, we won the top prize - 2 boxes of chocolates, but even that wasn't enough to clear the bad taste from our mouths.
People were killing time before booking out, so they bounced a squash ball at my cupboard - at Asian Prince's head. They missed it most of the time, due to his mystical powers, but they hit the picture of Blue Bear and Kimberly a few times! Gah.
Nowadays large parts of our routine orders repeat every few days. I think they ran out of stuff to put in them and just want some filler space, but all that happens is that people ignore what's written in them.
Some time ago, Second and First Sergeants in my unit joined the Third Sergeants and below in having to sign book in / book out books. A pity for them, but it means the rest of us should no longer be imprisoned by arms clearing late, since the 2SGs and 1SGs will kill the armskoteman and poison the Duty Officer if if they clear arms after 6:30pm.
Those who take the shuttle buses out of camp aren't allowed to stand on the buses, contrary to public practice. I think they're kiasu, as usual.
Ban Xiong has finally been promoted to S/3SG (Substantive Third Sergeant), so he will finally earn pay less grossly disproportionate to his workload and responsibility. It's been good having a L-3SG (Local Third Sergeant) around. Having a S/3SG is so boring, as they're a dime a dozen and it's so easy to attain that rank. Now for L-3SG - you need an outstanding individual for him to warrant the favour and recognition the rank confers. And there are fringe benefits too - people get to misuse your name and emblazon it all over the place!
I wonder why people like to make light of my suffering. Perhaps they think that if they can do it, so can I, so all my breakdowns, depressed looks, tiredness and pains must be faked. By the same token, since I do not get footrot, everyone who claims to have it is faking it and should be charged for mutilating their skin to fake the condition.
The Weekly Grind - Medical Centre
One morning, one DXO got bitten by a snake which refused to let go. So he managed to catch it, tie it up in a bag and bring it to the medical centre. In the afternoon, I noticed that the snake was still there, so I decided to kill it so it wouldn't bite anyway. Someone suggested autoclaving it, but I thought alcohol a better choice. So I put the bag in a giant metal bowl, the sort used for kneading pastry. I then poured alcohol in and let it seep in through the small holes in the bag the Senior Medic had poked with a syringe earlier to allow the snake to breathe. After a while, the snake became agitated. Someone suggested injecting alcohol into the bag since it was seeping in slowly. I thought that was a good idea, but while I was waving the syringe around, I poked myself deeply on a finger, so I let someone else do the dirty work. Being bored with just injecting alcohol into the bag, he then squirted alcohol into the snake's mouth when it was open, and later injected alcohol directly into the body of the snake. The snake was in its death throes when someone else came by and snatched the bag away from me, intending to free it. I tried to protect everyone by getting the bag back, but alas, to no avail. He then washed the snake in the drain (it was raining) and flung the now-immobile snake down the slope towards the guardhouse. So if one of the guards gets bitten one day, we all know who to blame.
Idiots always sleep on my mattresses with their boots on and leave dirty stains on the sheets, so I have now made bedsheets items of individual issue. Hah!
The Weekly Grind - Other SAF and Misc Stuff
Why is there a tendency to label all enlistees who display signs of fatigue or injury not readily obvious (eg severed head, haemorrhages, deep lacerations) as "chao keng"? This bashing is regularly engaged in not only by commanders but by fellow enlistees, which makes it particularly disturbing and dangerous to the cause of enlistee unity. One day, one of these "chao keng" enlistees will die. Oh wait. That's already happened. Meanwhile some commanders find ways to disappear or avoid training or work, and/or are forever on MC (maybe regulars who take too many MCs should be discharged w/o a pension for "poor health"). When they come to report sick in camp, they get MCs easily even though they're not really sick - because they're regulars.
Commanders are supposed to lead by example eg not asking their men to do anything unless they are willing to do them themselves. If that is the case, why are they granted so many more "privileges"? Some justify this by saying that they have earned it after going through SISPEC and OCS, but from many accounts, those institutions are not that difficult to pass out from, and sometimes enlistees go through more. Besides, how can 9 months in OCS justify a lifetime of respect? Bollocks. "Rank is worn, respect is earned" - this saying is not uncommon, but how many people with rank actually earn it?
The mini furore over the recent announcement that reservists would be able to do their IPPT in gyms on treadmills was amusing. Some complain of a lack of realism - why don't they do their IPPT in Standard Battle order (Helmet, Webbing and Rifle) then? No one goes to war in singlet and shorts. Anyhow, we all know that the SAF is imbued with a peacetime mentality - why else are the men treated as slaves and inferior beings rather than fellow soldiers to fight and die alongside with? Know what "SAF" stands for? "Singapore Acting Force". 'Nuff said.
My sources inform me that in the near future, officers and specialists will be enslaved for 24 months, and enlistees for 21. Though I will not get to benefit from this, I am happy for all the poor unfortunate souls after me, who will be slightly less poor and unfortunate.
The NKF came down to give us a "free" health screening. I was intensely suspicious and sure enough, it turned out to be a series of cheap tests, ending with a donation drive, and many were conned into signing up for recurring monthly donations. When it came to my turn, I stalwartly refused and was asked why. Each of my points was countered adroitly (or otherwise) by the woman they'd put at the last counter. The temp staff being paid ridiculously ($8/hr?) was justified as getting them to provide "quality service" (from office temps? And I didn't even talk about the perm staff's bonuses). Their lavish building was "sponsored" (for the price of the building, think of how many dialysis machines they could have bought). And they "didn't pay the full cost" for the VCDs they flooded us with and all the TCS Channel 8 TV Shows they commissioned (imagine how many needles could have been bought instead). I didn't even mention how they had a glut of publicity, and even a yearly televised fundraiser. They suck money from the populace unceasingly, and their thirst is never quenched.
I bought this lousy Made in Ma-laysia deodorant some time bad. I do not know what possessed me to buy it, for not only was it from a cheapskate sounding brand, it had an odd rose smell. After my purchase, I found to my displeasure that it didn't last very long and made me smell like a cheap harlot doused with some quantity of hair spray. But since it was for camp use, it wasn't that bad. Then one day, I shook the bottle to ensure the roller was wet. The roller flew off and the liquid spilt all over my bosom and face, some nearly entering my mouth. Wth.
Outside the Middle Of Nowhere
Company and organisational "visions" and "missions" always sound suspiciously similar, probably because they are written for their own sake, and not for any further purpose. Anyhow, since only the gullible take heed of them, why do they even exist? I think that visions and missions are the quintessential products of New Age Management Kitsch, or worse - an ISO 900X requirement!
The New Paper reported that a survey of 2 boys' schools and one girls' school found that in the former, requests for games sites far outnumbered those for porn sites, and it was the reverse in the latter. This being "Singapore's Number One Tabloid!", I was immediately suspicious. For all we know, these 3 schools were blips on the radar and the proportion of site requests were the other way around in 30 other schools, and I have my suspicions about which girls school was surveyed. But assuming the story was not misleading - so much for the so-called fairer sex.
I wanted to watch Messiah with Andrew but thanks to 42 which won't let me take half a day off on that Friday afternoon. Gah. Oh well, there's always next year.
Quotes:
Is alcohol a drug allergy? [Me: You're allergic to alcohol? So sad. Then you can't go clubbing.] Oh, shut up.
[Me: Ah, all the action we missed out on when we were 18] Watch 'Girls Gone Wild'.
[On tucking Ban Xiong in] You must read him a bedtime story or sing him a lullaby.
[On CFM] She dresses well
[On CFM] So ugly, so disappointing
[On CFM] Your CFM is CMI - Cannot Make It.
Life in 42 is getting from bad to worse
[On the Casio Exilim] That one's just for girls lah
[On SOC] If you really cannot [do it], then do what I always say - go and injure yourself.
I remember reading an article about how the American Right Wing has managed to mould public thought in America by its clever manipulation of language to its advantage. This puts me in mind of the SAF. Take the word "National Service" for example. It implies that it is a way of serving one's country, and has the connotation of duty. I refuse to accept the paradigm that the apparatchiks are trying to implant in me subliminally, which is why I call it "National Slavery". For, if not similar then related reasons, Chinx calls it "Neverending Slavery".
Take, then, what the SAF, with its collective wapred mind, considers "privileges". E-mart "breaks" are a "privilege". Canteen breaks are a "privilege". Booking out is a "privilege". By defining basic rights as "privileges" and using the term copiously, they get most slaves to accept implicitly that they are fortunate to be given these "privileges". I reckon that if they had their way, they would proclaim that it was a "privilege" that us slaves do not spend 2 1/2 years imprisoned at the bottom of a pit, wallowing in our filth and excrement, with naught but unleavened bread and brackish water to survive on, and "Property of the SAF" tattooed all over our bodies.
All this just goes to show once again that for all their glowing talk of "duty", "honour" and "sacrifice", and the gold medals Lee Kuan Yew gave the first batch of Slaves, it is all a sham to deceive pre-enlistees and the fortunate members of the public who have not had the chance to "serve" their country. Once you're in, the facade is dropped and you are treated like the inhuman scum that you are, not deserving of humane treatment, to be stripped of human dignity in the name of "discipline" and "regimentation", all because you have little or no rank (a concept that, in the end, is empty and worthless for a surefire way to get it is either through good A level results or signing on)
Meanwhile, in an insidious if ingenious ploy, the best and brightest, the natural leaders of any rebellion from among the ranks, are co-opted into the system as Officers and given a few more "privileges" than the rest to placate them. Some others are elevated to the posts of Specialists - junior commanders and given similar "privileges", albeit to a lesser degree. They are then turned on each other - BMT Sergeants against their Recruits, jailers in DB against the inmates and indeed, Local Third Sergeants against their Men. The fellow slaves who should stand united instead fall to the strategy of Divide and Conquer, and the slavemasters are satisfied.
More and more, I tend to agree with parts of He Who Must Not Be Named's theory - "i admit NS has become more about social engineering and mind control than it has about actual military defense." Why else do they enslave everyone when not everyone is needed? Why can't conscientious objectors choose to do non-military "service", as is the norm in other countries with conscription? And why else is the philosophy behind NS "make them suffer" rather than "make them defend Singapore"?
Only the 4 Ds can end my misery: reDeployment (not strictly a 'D' but we have the 3 'Rs', so) - extremely unlikely due to my lack of skill and impending ORD, Downgrading - unlikely since I'm too stupid, lazy, honest (I don't even take MCs unless I am very sick) and blacklisted, Discharge - only a matter of time (188 days as of 6th Dec) and Death - also only a matter of time. The question is whether it will take more or less than 188 days in 42SAR to kill me.
188 days to go. I've survived this long in oppression before, albeit not in a place where I am Public Enemy Number 1. Sometimes I just want someone to comfort me and tell me everything will be alright soon, and that soon I will be free - except for the 2 weeks of ICT every year and RT sessions lasting 3 hours each, 3 times a week, 8 weeks a year - from this organisation based on lies, and able to get on with what's left of my life with what's left of my energies, mind and sanity.
As Cesspit used to say, "ming2 tian1 hui4 geng4 hao3" (Translation: Tomorrow will be a better day).
The Weekly Grind - 42SAR
Latest tidbit from "Gabriel's Believe It Or Not?": In 42SAR, the Powers That Be have decided that for 3 months, enlistees will only visit the 42SAR Canteen so they can ascertain the quality of the current caterers and decide whether to retain them - as if everyone didn't already know it was a sucky canteen and so voted with their feet and wallets. It seems that, after at least a year of offering mediocre, un-fresh food and overpriced drinks, the stall holders have complained. So much for the free market, and so much for commanders leading by example and suffering with their men.
My company has sent so many people to the Unit Fitness Program that it can be renamed the "42 Fitness Program", seeing as more than 95% of its "participants" are from 42. I wonder what will happen when, one day, we have too many people to fit in the gym comfortably. Furthermore, they told us, at first, that we would have to take attendance at 42 at 4:00pm, a good half an hour before UFP starts officially, so we would have even less time to settle our work. Luckily, they realised their folly and changed the time for attendance taking to 4:20pm.
In one day, we had 5BX, SOC and UFP. Then the next day we had 5BX again, then a run out of camp, to the Scout Camp (Sarimbun - they got lost, incidentally). Gee, I wonder who plans our training program.
My S4 was praising my "not giving up" and continuing to participate in the various physical activities I'm being put through, which set me wondering why I was being so silly as to continue. The reasons are probably the same as why I'm not actively seeking to downgrade (I'm too stupid, lazy, honest and blacklisted) and why I worked relatively hard for our recent IQA - my misguided sense of responsibility.
One Thursday's company PT ended at 10:30 for people like me who got <225cm for standing broad jump. I was so zoned out I could'nt do anything till late afternoon. They must think we're as free as they are. The extra-long duration was justified as being "for your own good" and a way of "helping" us so we wouldn't have to do RT. This is just like saying that gangsters demanding protection money is for our own good and a way of "helping" us so that they do not have to come down with their whole gang to break our legs later.
We had our HQ Company "OC evening" one night. Our fire wasn't burning well, so our Senior Medic brought out his "secret weapon" - the solid fuel from the field rations. It's reputed to be poisonous but apparently some MOs had endorsed it before, so we merrily cooked our satay until we realised that white flecks of solid fuel were appearing on them, whereupon we dumped the solid fuel and Ban Xiong valiantly ate the contaminated sticks (so if he gets stomach cancer in a few decades we'll all know why). Later there was a somewhat ingenious party game where pre-chosen groups of 4 from each platoon had to eat boxes of "delicacies" - pieces of capsicum, lemon, onions, carrots and chili padi generously seasoned with wasabi. I was selected but luckily the others ate the chili padi for me. For our troubles, we won the top prize - 2 boxes of chocolates, but even that wasn't enough to clear the bad taste from our mouths.
People were killing time before booking out, so they bounced a squash ball at my cupboard - at Asian Prince's head. They missed it most of the time, due to his mystical powers, but they hit the picture of Blue Bear and Kimberly a few times! Gah.
Nowadays large parts of our routine orders repeat every few days. I think they ran out of stuff to put in them and just want some filler space, but all that happens is that people ignore what's written in them.
Some time ago, Second and First Sergeants in my unit joined the Third Sergeants and below in having to sign book in / book out books. A pity for them, but it means the rest of us should no longer be imprisoned by arms clearing late, since the 2SGs and 1SGs will kill the armskoteman and poison the Duty Officer if if they clear arms after 6:30pm.
Those who take the shuttle buses out of camp aren't allowed to stand on the buses, contrary to public practice. I think they're kiasu, as usual.
Ban Xiong has finally been promoted to S/3SG (Substantive Third Sergeant), so he will finally earn pay less grossly disproportionate to his workload and responsibility. It's been good having a L-3SG (Local Third Sergeant) around. Having a S/3SG is so boring, as they're a dime a dozen and it's so easy to attain that rank. Now for L-3SG - you need an outstanding individual for him to warrant the favour and recognition the rank confers. And there are fringe benefits too - people get to misuse your name and emblazon it all over the place!
I wonder why people like to make light of my suffering. Perhaps they think that if they can do it, so can I, so all my breakdowns, depressed looks, tiredness and pains must be faked. By the same token, since I do not get footrot, everyone who claims to have it is faking it and should be charged for mutilating their skin to fake the condition.
The Weekly Grind - Medical Centre
One morning, one DXO got bitten by a snake which refused to let go. So he managed to catch it, tie it up in a bag and bring it to the medical centre. In the afternoon, I noticed that the snake was still there, so I decided to kill it so it wouldn't bite anyway. Someone suggested autoclaving it, but I thought alcohol a better choice. So I put the bag in a giant metal bowl, the sort used for kneading pastry. I then poured alcohol in and let it seep in through the small holes in the bag the Senior Medic had poked with a syringe earlier to allow the snake to breathe. After a while, the snake became agitated. Someone suggested injecting alcohol into the bag since it was seeping in slowly. I thought that was a good idea, but while I was waving the syringe around, I poked myself deeply on a finger, so I let someone else do the dirty work. Being bored with just injecting alcohol into the bag, he then squirted alcohol into the snake's mouth when it was open, and later injected alcohol directly into the body of the snake. The snake was in its death throes when someone else came by and snatched the bag away from me, intending to free it. I tried to protect everyone by getting the bag back, but alas, to no avail. He then washed the snake in the drain (it was raining) and flung the now-immobile snake down the slope towards the guardhouse. So if one of the guards gets bitten one day, we all know who to blame.
Idiots always sleep on my mattresses with their boots on and leave dirty stains on the sheets, so I have now made bedsheets items of individual issue. Hah!
The Weekly Grind - Other SAF and Misc Stuff
Why is there a tendency to label all enlistees who display signs of fatigue or injury not readily obvious (eg severed head, haemorrhages, deep lacerations) as "chao keng"? This bashing is regularly engaged in not only by commanders but by fellow enlistees, which makes it particularly disturbing and dangerous to the cause of enlistee unity. One day, one of these "chao keng" enlistees will die. Oh wait. That's already happened. Meanwhile some commanders find ways to disappear or avoid training or work, and/or are forever on MC (maybe regulars who take too many MCs should be discharged w/o a pension for "poor health"). When they come to report sick in camp, they get MCs easily even though they're not really sick - because they're regulars.
Commanders are supposed to lead by example eg not asking their men to do anything unless they are willing to do them themselves. If that is the case, why are they granted so many more "privileges"? Some justify this by saying that they have earned it after going through SISPEC and OCS, but from many accounts, those institutions are not that difficult to pass out from, and sometimes enlistees go through more. Besides, how can 9 months in OCS justify a lifetime of respect? Bollocks. "Rank is worn, respect is earned" - this saying is not uncommon, but how many people with rank actually earn it?
The mini furore over the recent announcement that reservists would be able to do their IPPT in gyms on treadmills was amusing. Some complain of a lack of realism - why don't they do their IPPT in Standard Battle order (Helmet, Webbing and Rifle) then? No one goes to war in singlet and shorts. Anyhow, we all know that the SAF is imbued with a peacetime mentality - why else are the men treated as slaves and inferior beings rather than fellow soldiers to fight and die alongside with? Know what "SAF" stands for? "Singapore Acting Force". 'Nuff said.
My sources inform me that in the near future, officers and specialists will be enslaved for 24 months, and enlistees for 21. Though I will not get to benefit from this, I am happy for all the poor unfortunate souls after me, who will be slightly less poor and unfortunate.
The NKF came down to give us a "free" health screening. I was intensely suspicious and sure enough, it turned out to be a series of cheap tests, ending with a donation drive, and many were conned into signing up for recurring monthly donations. When it came to my turn, I stalwartly refused and was asked why. Each of my points was countered adroitly (or otherwise) by the woman they'd put at the last counter. The temp staff being paid ridiculously ($8/hr?) was justified as getting them to provide "quality service" (from office temps? And I didn't even talk about the perm staff's bonuses). Their lavish building was "sponsored" (for the price of the building, think of how many dialysis machines they could have bought). And they "didn't pay the full cost" for the VCDs they flooded us with and all the TCS Channel 8 TV Shows they commissioned (imagine how many needles could have been bought instead). I didn't even mention how they had a glut of publicity, and even a yearly televised fundraiser. They suck money from the populace unceasingly, and their thirst is never quenched.
I bought this lousy Made in Ma-laysia deodorant some time bad. I do not know what possessed me to buy it, for not only was it from a cheapskate sounding brand, it had an odd rose smell. After my purchase, I found to my displeasure that it didn't last very long and made me smell like a cheap harlot doused with some quantity of hair spray. But since it was for camp use, it wasn't that bad. Then one day, I shook the bottle to ensure the roller was wet. The roller flew off and the liquid spilt all over my bosom and face, some nearly entering my mouth. Wth.
Outside the Middle Of Nowhere
Company and organisational "visions" and "missions" always sound suspiciously similar, probably because they are written for their own sake, and not for any further purpose. Anyhow, since only the gullible take heed of them, why do they even exist? I think that visions and missions are the quintessential products of New Age Management Kitsch, or worse - an ISO 900X requirement!
The New Paper reported that a survey of 2 boys' schools and one girls' school found that in the former, requests for games sites far outnumbered those for porn sites, and it was the reverse in the latter. This being "Singapore's Number One Tabloid!", I was immediately suspicious. For all we know, these 3 schools were blips on the radar and the proportion of site requests were the other way around in 30 other schools, and I have my suspicions about which girls school was surveyed. But assuming the story was not misleading - so much for the so-called fairer sex.
I wanted to watch Messiah with Andrew but thanks to 42 which won't let me take half a day off on that Friday afternoon. Gah. Oh well, there's always next year.
Quotes:
Is alcohol a drug allergy? [Me: You're allergic to alcohol? So sad. Then you can't go clubbing.] Oh, shut up.
[Me: Ah, all the action we missed out on when we were 18] Watch 'Girls Gone Wild'.
[On tucking Ban Xiong in] You must read him a bedtime story or sing him a lullaby.
[On CFM] She dresses well
[On CFM] So ugly, so disappointing
[On CFM] Your CFM is CMI - Cannot Make It.
Life in 42 is getting from bad to worse
[On the Casio Exilim] That one's just for girls lah
[On SOC] If you really cannot [do it], then do what I always say - go and injure yourself.
Post ID: 107073041623206038
Friday, December 05, 2003
Balderdash is in the big leagues now!
Vote for us.. er... i mean, Gabriel right here
The line-up, so far as I can see at this point in time are:
a) A narcissist with a pastel colour-fetish and punctuation issues
b) An origami site
c) A classic Amy Tan-esque "banana-re-exploring-roots-in-a-voyage-of-self-discovery-between-generations -and-cultures"
d) Another classic "intelligent-and-emotionally-balanced-but-slightly-quirky-and-just-this-side-of-obliquely -literate-somewhere-in-tertiary-education" archetype
e) A fat autistic whining about NS in copious torrents of prose and his no-life, dysfunctional, sometime contributor.
*Thankfully*, none of the nominees *appear* to be Goths, self-mutilators, poets, template whores, camgirls, RPG addicts, Adrian Moles, or those who think the web serves exclusively as an amphitheater for their soliloquies of obtuse whining about emotional issues which they refuse to elaborate on but insist on publicising anyway.
[Ed: Update - as of 6th Dec, 11:25pm, Balderdash is in first place - 20 votes to the runner up's 19 and the second runner up's 18]
Vote for us.. er... i mean, Gabriel right here
The line-up, so far as I can see at this point in time are:
a) A narcissist with a pastel colour-fetish and punctuation issues
b) An origami site
c) A classic Amy Tan-esque "banana-re-exploring-roots-in-a-voyage-of-self-discovery-between-generations -and-cultures"
d) Another classic "intelligent-and-emotionally-balanced-but-slightly-quirky-and-just-this-side-of-obliquely -literate-somewhere-in-tertiary-education" archetype
e) A fat autistic whining about NS in copious torrents of prose and his no-life, dysfunctional, sometime contributor.
*Thankfully*, none of the nominees *appear* to be Goths, self-mutilators, poets, template whores, camgirls, RPG addicts, Adrian Moles, or those who think the web serves exclusively as an amphitheater for their soliloquies of obtuse whining about emotional issues which they refuse to elaborate on but insist on publicising anyway.
[Ed: Update - as of 6th Dec, 11:25pm, Balderdash is in first place - 20 votes to the runner up's 19 and the second runner up's 18]
Post ID: 107063305774065258
Thursday, December 04, 2003
Caught the Swingle Singers last Saturday. For some reason there was a bag search - maybe they were afraid someone wanted to shoot them. It was my first time in the Esplanade Concert Hall - the layout was interesting but didn't seem an optimum way to squeeze in more seats. I didn't get any reception inside, so maybe it was an evil plot to disable mobile phones.
The first half of the concert was a tribute to the first Swingle Group from the 60s, so I recognised most of the songs. Given that it was supposed to be a "tribute", I'll forgive their sounding almost exactly like the tracks on "Jazz Sebastian Bach".
In the second half, they strode onto stage in these grotesque red and white outfits. I think they should fire their current designer - the one who clothed them 2 years back was much better.
Yechao, David, Screwed Up Girl and I went for a spot of ice cream after the concert, and found that Haagen Dazs' prices were daylight robbery - $4.20 for one scoop - so we got 2 double scoops.
I gave Hwa some Vanilla Ice Cream and he thought it was Banana. Oh well, this can't beat the time he thought Durian was Pear.
Visited Bodyworlds on Sunday with our "Poor Suffering Substantive Third Sergeant, Formerly a Poor Suffering Local Third Sergeant, the Self-Proclaimed 'Master of Office' yada yada" and his Unspecified Friend. It seemed that almost all the bodies on display were of males. Maybe females don't like to pledge their bodies to science. We also felt cheated, for we were led to believe that the bodies of a horse and its rider would be on display. Maybe it's in the Hamburg exhibit.
I don't think that all those people thought, when they pledged their bodies to scince, that they'd be on display in a travelling exhibit. I also wonder where they got all the fetuses from - I don't think that many mothers pledged their aborted fetuses to science, or pledged their own bodies and died in various stages of pregnancy.
Why is Singapore filled with "shrill, anorexic, Chinese-speaking Ah Lians" (a phrase I coined a few weeks ago and am quite proud of)?
The first half of the concert was a tribute to the first Swingle Group from the 60s, so I recognised most of the songs. Given that it was supposed to be a "tribute", I'll forgive their sounding almost exactly like the tracks on "Jazz Sebastian Bach".
In the second half, they strode onto stage in these grotesque red and white outfits. I think they should fire their current designer - the one who clothed them 2 years back was much better.
Yechao, David, Screwed Up Girl and I went for a spot of ice cream after the concert, and found that Haagen Dazs' prices were daylight robbery - $4.20 for one scoop - so we got 2 double scoops.
I gave Hwa some Vanilla Ice Cream and he thought it was Banana. Oh well, this can't beat the time he thought Durian was Pear.
Visited Bodyworlds on Sunday with our "Poor Suffering Substantive Third Sergeant, Formerly a Poor Suffering Local Third Sergeant, the Self-Proclaimed 'Master of Office' yada yada" and his Unspecified Friend. It seemed that almost all the bodies on display were of males. Maybe females don't like to pledge their bodies to science. We also felt cheated, for we were led to believe that the bodies of a horse and its rider would be on display. Maybe it's in the Hamburg exhibit.
I don't think that all those people thought, when they pledged their bodies to scince, that they'd be on display in a travelling exhibit. I also wonder where they got all the fetuses from - I don't think that many mothers pledged their aborted fetuses to science, or pledged their own bodies and died in various stages of pregnancy.
Why is Singapore filled with "shrill, anorexic, Chinese-speaking Ah Lians" (a phrase I coined a few weeks ago and am quite proud of)?
Post ID: 10706303016330909
It took me an hour and 8 minutes to come back, by TIBS buses 61 and 855, from Andrew's house. This is ridiculous.
Humour on the M$ website:
Tweakomatic
"The problem we faced, though, was this: how can we outdo a
piece of software as slick and as useful as TweakUI? How can we find a
way to provide even more of what customers need and desire? How
can we justify playing Age of Mythology all day when we're supposed to
be working? We pondered this dilemma long and hard when suddenly it hit
us. There's only one way to outdo a great piece of software like
TweakUI: the Tweakomatic. (Yes, it's so obvious you're probably
wondering why you didn't think of it.)"
Sexual syndrome that takes joy out of life - 'The syndrome is the opposite of the usual female sexual complaint -- difficulty getting aroused. Instead, patients sustain unrelenting physical arousal, no matter how many orgasms they have. They are not nymphomaniacs; they do not experience desire. Rather, they feel the vaginal congestion and pulsation of arousal, and it is not about pleasure -- far from it.
"It's just a horror," said Lila, a 71-year-old woman who has had the syndrome since brain and bladder surgery in 1999, and said she often has 200 small orgasms a day. "It bothers me more than the breast cancer," an advanced case that was diagnosed two years ago.
"This never stops, it never lets up," she said, and it ruins everything, including car travel, dinner parties, and simply sitting on the couch. "It colors your whole life."
"If you gave me the choice of this or never having another orgasm as long as I live," Lila said, "I'll take never having another one as long as I live."'
Humour on the M$ website:
Tweakomatic
"The problem we faced, though, was this: how can we outdo a
piece of software as slick and as useful as TweakUI? How can we find a
way to provide even more of what customers need and desire? How
can we justify playing Age of Mythology all day when we're supposed to
be working? We pondered this dilemma long and hard when suddenly it hit
us. There's only one way to outdo a great piece of software like
TweakUI: the Tweakomatic. (Yes, it's so obvious you're probably
wondering why you didn't think of it.)"
Sexual syndrome that takes joy out of life - 'The syndrome is the opposite of the usual female sexual complaint -- difficulty getting aroused. Instead, patients sustain unrelenting physical arousal, no matter how many orgasms they have. They are not nymphomaniacs; they do not experience desire. Rather, they feel the vaginal congestion and pulsation of arousal, and it is not about pleasure -- far from it.
"It's just a horror," said Lila, a 71-year-old woman who has had the syndrome since brain and bladder surgery in 1999, and said she often has 200 small orgasms a day. "It bothers me more than the breast cancer," an advanced case that was diagnosed two years ago.
"This never stops, it never lets up," she said, and it ruins everything, including car travel, dinner parties, and simply sitting on the couch. "It colors your whole life."
"If you gave me the choice of this or never having another orgasm as long as I live," Lila said, "I'll take never having another one as long as I live."'
Post ID: 107046787426975200
Sunday, November 30, 2003
Differences between Men and Women - Boys Toys are so much Better than Girls Toys
Have you noticed at Christmas that boys get toys that are just so much better than girls toys? Boys will get things like Lego or Construx, models of air planes and air-craft carriers, rocket kits, chemistry sets, electronic boards, robots and cars that actually drive. Girls on the other hand get junk like little Barbie dolls, or even worse horrendous little fake babies that pee and poop when you feed them. If they are real lucky the girl might get a play house that they can pretend to be a bitter married middle-aged house wife in.
Boys toys are better for two reasons:
1) They are just plain funner. I mean seriously, what's cooler: constructing and blasting a model rocket thousands of feet into the air, watching it come down on its parachute (if it deploys properly - its even funner if it doesn't deploy), or mindlessly brushing the nylon hair of the useless hunk of plastic that is a Barbie, muttering how pretty she is all the while resenting her long legs and big bust.
2) They are educational. Chemistry sets, lego and construx are all preparing the little scientists and engineers of the future. They all teach the basics of science and engineering: the driving forces behind civilization. What are Barbies and other dolls teaching little girls? How to feel bad about themselves because they cannot possibly achieve the ideal that Barbie creates? Or with the pooping baby: seriously, there will be more than enough time in the future to clean up poopy diapers. Same with playing house. Come on now, how boring and pointless is that. I play house all the time now and it sucks big time.
Little girls, get out there and make something! Use lego, contstrux, even popsicle sticks. Then once you make it, blow it up! Like the boys do! Believe me, its a lot of fun. A lot funner than those rancid pooping babies that's for sure. Parents take note.
This all leads to a much larger social issues as well. It is because of how we condition our children with these gender roles from such an early age that you don't see nearly as many women in the useful jobs like scientists or engineers. Women generally go into more pointless 'nurturing' and 'people-oriented' jobs like school teachers and strippers. It sickens me. There is nothing sexier in this earth that a woman in a lab coat with splash goggles or a hard-hat on, but damn are they hard to find (and if you do find them, they are taken!).
These toys also leads to how women and men differ as consumers. Any TV commercial you see directed towards woman will be one of these 3 types of products:
1) Stuff to make women look pretty - Things like clothes and cosmetics. I find cosmetics hilarious: little greasy creams and paints that women spread around on your face to try and cover and mask up their natural features. Think about how ridiculous it would be for men to put on makeup (ok, straight men). I hope one day women come to their senses and scrap this bullshit. Anyways, my point is that the unholy obsession with Prostitute Barbie, with her raccon eye shadow and strumpet lipstick is partly to blame for this state of affairs
2) Stuff to keep the house clean - Notice even today how all household cleaning commercials have still have only women in them. If I was a woman, and not even a feminist I would be outraged by this. As a man I'm outraged because I do lots of cleaning, but is there ever a man with his arm in the toilet up to his elbow scrubbing away? No! But playing house has conditioned women to accept this sorry state without question.
3) Feminine Hygiene (this one maybe doesn't have anything to do with toys - is there a menstruating Barbie out there? I would not be suprised if there was) - We won't even go too far down this road, 'cept to say there should be laws against these commercials.
Young girl to her mother says: 'Sometimes I feel, you know, not so Fresh-'
Me watching commercial: 'NOOOOOOOO! THE HORROR! LALALALALAL'
Me: *Flips channel to good old wholesome show with people being blown to bits*
Men on the other hand get all the cool adverting directed towards them: beer, cars, TVs, computers, electronics, food, you name it. Any funny and clever ad, (and they are few and far between) will be directed towards men. If I was a woman, I would once again be outraged by this, but since I'm a man I just sit back and enjoy.
So in conclusion I just want to say to all of you parents of little girls out there - think carefully before you buy your daughter the all new Pooping Menstruating Barbie for Christmas, or whatever girly bullshit you were thinking of buying her - her entire future is at stake.
Historic Tale Construction Kit - Make your own Bayeux Tapestry
The Troth - A group of people who worship the old Viking Gods - Odin, Thor, Frigga and others
Have you noticed at Christmas that boys get toys that are just so much better than girls toys? Boys will get things like Lego or Construx, models of air planes and air-craft carriers, rocket kits, chemistry sets, electronic boards, robots and cars that actually drive. Girls on the other hand get junk like little Barbie dolls, or even worse horrendous little fake babies that pee and poop when you feed them. If they are real lucky the girl might get a play house that they can pretend to be a bitter married middle-aged house wife in.
Boys toys are better for two reasons:
1) They are just plain funner. I mean seriously, what's cooler: constructing and blasting a model rocket thousands of feet into the air, watching it come down on its parachute (if it deploys properly - its even funner if it doesn't deploy), or mindlessly brushing the nylon hair of the useless hunk of plastic that is a Barbie, muttering how pretty she is all the while resenting her long legs and big bust.
2) They are educational. Chemistry sets, lego and construx are all preparing the little scientists and engineers of the future. They all teach the basics of science and engineering: the driving forces behind civilization. What are Barbies and other dolls teaching little girls? How to feel bad about themselves because they cannot possibly achieve the ideal that Barbie creates? Or with the pooping baby: seriously, there will be more than enough time in the future to clean up poopy diapers. Same with playing house. Come on now, how boring and pointless is that. I play house all the time now and it sucks big time.
Little girls, get out there and make something! Use lego, contstrux, even popsicle sticks. Then once you make it, blow it up! Like the boys do! Believe me, its a lot of fun. A lot funner than those rancid pooping babies that's for sure. Parents take note.
This all leads to a much larger social issues as well. It is because of how we condition our children with these gender roles from such an early age that you don't see nearly as many women in the useful jobs like scientists or engineers. Women generally go into more pointless 'nurturing' and 'people-oriented' jobs like school teachers and strippers. It sickens me. There is nothing sexier in this earth that a woman in a lab coat with splash goggles or a hard-hat on, but damn are they hard to find (and if you do find them, they are taken!).
These toys also leads to how women and men differ as consumers. Any TV commercial you see directed towards woman will be one of these 3 types of products:
1) Stuff to make women look pretty - Things like clothes and cosmetics. I find cosmetics hilarious: little greasy creams and paints that women spread around on your face to try and cover and mask up their natural features. Think about how ridiculous it would be for men to put on makeup (ok, straight men). I hope one day women come to their senses and scrap this bullshit. Anyways, my point is that the unholy obsession with Prostitute Barbie, with her raccon eye shadow and strumpet lipstick is partly to blame for this state of affairs
2) Stuff to keep the house clean - Notice even today how all household cleaning commercials have still have only women in them. If I was a woman, and not even a feminist I would be outraged by this. As a man I'm outraged because I do lots of cleaning, but is there ever a man with his arm in the toilet up to his elbow scrubbing away? No! But playing house has conditioned women to accept this sorry state without question.
3) Feminine Hygiene (this one maybe doesn't have anything to do with toys - is there a menstruating Barbie out there? I would not be suprised if there was) - We won't even go too far down this road, 'cept to say there should be laws against these commercials.
Young girl to her mother says: 'Sometimes I feel, you know, not so Fresh-'
Me watching commercial: 'NOOOOOOOO! THE HORROR! LALALALALAL'
Me: *Flips channel to good old wholesome show with people being blown to bits*
Men on the other hand get all the cool adverting directed towards them: beer, cars, TVs, computers, electronics, food, you name it. Any funny and clever ad, (and they are few and far between) will be directed towards men. If I was a woman, I would once again be outraged by this, but since I'm a man I just sit back and enjoy.
So in conclusion I just want to say to all of you parents of little girls out there - think carefully before you buy your daughter the all new Pooping Menstruating Barbie for Christmas, or whatever girly bullshit you were thinking of buying her - her entire future is at stake.
Historic Tale Construction Kit - Make your own Bayeux Tapestry
The Troth - A group of people who worship the old Viking Gods - Odin, Thor, Frigga and others
Post ID: 107015606772691459
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
