mediacorp’s pathetic version

 

 

Ignore the fancy name Mediacorp. As a state-controlled broadcaster, it does better if it retains its original Singapore Broadcasting Corporation (SBC) – the propaganda arm of the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP). It is governed not only by its fear of the ruling regime, impotent to offer any feature film, drama series or documentary which appears to be remotely criticising anything from the pseudo-democracy of Singapore, the founding members of its old guard (think of Lee Kuan Yew, Toh Chin Chye and Goh Keng Swee, etc) or the death penalty; but the puritanism of its religious public as well.

 

As one of the more exciting programmes shown on free-to-air Channel 5, Spartacus: Blood and Sand is a pathetic offering that pales in contrast to its original version shown in other countries. Mediacorp scissors away scenes like the above and below, apparently censoring much of the gore, brutality and sex. The general plot notwithstanding, it is the barbarism, gratuitous gore and amoral sexuality which gives the series its power. It aims to depict the society as it was in ancient Rome, and it scores by showing the viewer a very sinister side to a seemingly civilised ancient world, where citizens delight in watching fellow human beings kill one another for entertainment and have views on sex that has nothing to do with a morality that stems from prudish christianity more than civilised humanism.

 

 

Its people indulge themselves in group and homosexual sex as much as they enjoy their food and blood sport. Sex was recreation instead of marital and procreative responsibility. Nudity was common. Such was the moral fabric of ancient Roman society – but you don’t see that in Singapore’s pussy-licking version.

 

 

Many Singaporeans will wince in disgust at how romans love to watch slaves copulating with one another (above: a gladiator was made to fuck a fellow slave for the viewing pleasure of roman nobles) as well as fucking one themselves (below: a gladiator owner fucking his slave).

 

 

But that is what the series is about! It displays, in almost gratuitous fashion, roman society. Disgusting for some, lecherous delight for others, and simply apathy for the enlightened few.

 

Blood and Sand airs in Singapore at the 10 p.m slot, probably to capitalise viewership ratings. That is probably the reason why the meddlesome scissors of the censors had to come in.

 

Then again, maybe it is time to rethink censorship and morality as a whole.

 

If societal mores are anything to go by, Singapore is still far from being a first world country. 

 

 

*******

 

when will the singapore government (PAP) stop its bullying??

 

Our Great Leader, the Holy Prime Minister, successor to the Holy Father of our beloved Lee Dynasty – all praise and honour to Him – exposes his real nature last Sunday when he issued a legal letter to the editors of sociopolitical website, TR Emeritus (TRE), commanding them to withdraw an article which apparently accused the government of partiality (cronyism), when it appointed Our Great First Lady as head of the Asian investment firm, Temasek Holdings.

 

PM Lee sends lawyer’s letter to editors of TR Emeritus

 

The Great Leader, in the letter, reminded TRE of the government’s (the People’s Action Party) terrible and awesome powers, as was demonstrated by the numerous defamation suits it waged against international newspapers and periodicals, such as the Far Eastern Economic Review, and won.

 

And so our Great Leader warned TRE that a similar fate would await them unless they withdraw the article and post an apology on the website.

 

This is Singapore, my motherland and my home. An autocracy which masquerades as a democracy only in theory. Our people has no power at all in deciding how the country is run. Isn’t this what democracy is all about – power of the people? Although I do not suspect any foul play during vote counts, it does not take a rocket scientist to realise how disparate the arena is during election campaigns, with the ruling regime having an obvious advantage over the opposition by constantly fiddling with electoral boundaries as well as having more press and media coverage.

 

TRE has withdrawn the article although it has yet to post an apology, as our Alex Au had done in his blog, Yawning Bread, when a very insecure Minister decided to play the defamation game on him over some rumours about his moral indiscretions. Competent and intelligent as he is, the minister does not realise he is digging his own grave, at least in the eyes of netizens, by using the law to bully Yawning Bread into silence.

 

Dear PAP, if you are innocent, just say so – and debunk the allegations once and for all by speaking the truth. There is no need to emotionally and psychologically abuse and bully Singaporeans into withdrawing their comments. Where is civil discourse in all of this? Why the need to use the law to threaten and frighten us?

 

WHEN WILL THE RULING REGIME STOP ITS BULLYING TACTICS?? When will the PAP stop its thuggish ways on its people like a hysterical parent brandishing a chopper over mischievous children?

 

The Holy Father, peace be upon Him, claimed in the past that any political accusation against the government taints their reputation and as such a legal victory, via defamation suit, would always be the right thing to do as it vindicates the ruling regime. Besides, this is politics. Shouldn’t we be unscrupulous against our political “enemies”?

 

Our Holy Father thinks he is Cao Cao living in ancient China.

 

On the contrary, the megalomaniacal antics of the PAP has time and again allows itself to be exposed to the world as a strangely first world country with third world ethics.

 

Mature individuals pay attention to constructive criticism and simply ignore unwarranted and unjustified ones. One does not see the governments in the US or UK lash out against all the rude and critical comments made of them by the many newspapers and tabloids.

 

Human beings have the right to say anything they want, even if such speech is irresponsible and rude. This is life.

 

And it takes a mature and self-secure government to accept it.

 

*******

 

a shrewd political move?

 

Some have lauded the recent expulsion of the Hougang MP by the Workers’ Party (WP) as a brave and shrewd political move. They have “taken, boldy, the moral high ground”, to quote Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Eugene Tan, the assistant professor of law at the Singapore Management University.

 

The expulsion was carried out in response to a very immature Singaporean society which still holds on to very quaint ideas of public civil service and its supposed moral standards. The media cannot seem to keep their partisan hands off the poor gentleman and his personal life. It was also his mistake to remain silent amid the media silliness…he should either reaffirm his innocence, if he is, or come out in the open and confess to his indiscretions and apologise to the residents of Hougang.

 

The latter would indeed place him on the moral high ground. I will applaud him for the moral courage and the strength in humility to be transparent to the people.

 

UNLIKE the schemes of the ruling regime…which only “appears” CLEAN because they are craftier and more skilled in covering up their tracks. I always believe in the adage that there can be no senseless smoke without fire…and the disparity is so obvious for any discerning individual – the media is so quick to pick up on any rumour of moral indiscretion on the part of the political opposition but if it comes to the ruling party, ALL IS SILENT.

 

Of course, the testicle-squeezing silence can be attributed to the classic Singaporean fear of being legally sued by the ruling regime if there is any sign of criticism (think of Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, Chee Soon Juan and Alan Shadrake). The capacity to sue has nothing to do with moral innocence but with resources and power, full stop.

 

We are not fooled, though. Until the day when the Internet is cruelly and senselessly censored and squashed (thank goodness for twinkles of humanity in our current PM) by the powers that be, netizens in Singapore would always be the watchdog against a government that is constantly suppressing our civil rights to free speech and expression.

 

Are Singaporeans so naive as to think that the PAP (People’s Action Party) is really that CLEAN and FREE of moral indiscretions? Have you ever wonder why the people of Singapore are in the dark when it comes to the families of the ruling regime, apart from the Lees? We are hardly acquainted with the kin of most of our parliamentarians, let alone MPs and those on the ground.

 

A very good strategy, if you ask me. If the public knows next to nothing about the personal life of their leaders, there is no way we could hold them to account for any moral indiscretion, if they exist.

 

Contrary to propaganda, the truth is really out there. In the worldwide web.

 

While there is still hope for a liberal society, and a fairly liberal internet, please traverse far and wide for the truth.

 

Before even the Internet is unjustly censored.

 

*******

 

can we really look toward a multi-party government?

 

Singapore is as small a nation as it is young, a 46-year-old full stop on a world map, not counting the years between its official founding in 1819 by a Sir Stamford Raffles of the East India Company and its separation from the Malayan Peninsula in August 1965.

 

The first generation of Singaporeans lived through the labour pains of a seedling nation to the turbulent years of its adolescence and has since appreciated the competence in which the founding men of the PAP wield their iron fists adorned in velvet gloves.

 

They knew it would take the cunning genius of a Lee Kuan Yew to reign in a diverse immigrant country and lead it to where it is today – a multinational corporation with over seven million workers.

 

The younger generations, with me among them, will never understand the complexities our ancestors faced and thus may never see beyond the bias we already have of a perceived one-party autocracy. We blame the PAP for its control of the media and the press. We bemoan our legal system which still uses an archaic and barbarous form of criminal punishment. We wonder when will our society stop stigmatising the LGBT community. We wish we could have more liberties in expressing ourselves and speaking our minds.

 

And so we root for the political opposition like the Workers’ Party, the Singapore Democratic Party, the Reform Party and the Singapore People’s Party. We cheer for our champions in the likes of Chen Sao Mao, Low Thia Kiang, Chiam See Tong, Kenneth Jeyaratnam, and even the Freedom Prize-winning self-professed liberal democrat, Chee Soon Juan.

 

They loom large before us as our patron saints of political and civil liberty, and we listened, enraptured, by their rhetoric. We get drunk over the preachers who scream the loudest, we shriek alongside some of them when they conquered Aljunied GRC last year. But the chimera of the reel world aside, when the banal and mundane sets in, we start to witness how the scraps start to fall from the rusty junkyard that they really are.

 

If these blokes cannot even keep their houses in order and their respective parties united, can we trust them to lead the country? Tsk, tsk. If you want to play with fire, you should prepare the extinguishers. Will democracy – the power of the people – be nothing but a dream we erect like sandcastles on the beach?

 

The lesser of two evils will get my vote. And it is no surprise who the devil would be.

 

*******

 

thank the gods for singapore

 

The significant number of Singaporeans who are dissatisfied with our current government, which is really just the People’s Action Party (PAP), should ask themselves what they are really disgruntled about.

 

Many rant about the inefficient public transport (think of the recent Singapore Mass Rapid Transit fracas) and healthcare systems in our country but do not have the relevant experiences overseas to make such value judgements. Many grumble about the high costs of living but never stop to think how much costlier it is to live in Japan, London and New York. It is erroneous to make comparisons with “cheaper” places like some of our neighbours in Southeast Asia as costs of living are rather relative to the quality of living as well. Many nag on and on about the salaries of our public ministers, even after the proposed paycuts, when they do not realise how morally upright and efficient our government is when compared to governments all over the world. And why is that so? We do not believe in having a populist leadership where any joe blow can run for the top post in the land (think of the US) – political leadership has to be from among the best of the best, the cream of the crop – and such can only be acquired by good salaries.

 

Of course, service and loyalty to the country is paramount – but one has to be pragmatic about it – if a highly competent and intelligent individual can make more money and have the social privacy for his family along with it by being a CEO of a multinational company, why not? There is so much at stake by being a public servant and if the lure of a high salary compensates, why not?

 

Others murmur about the lack of social welfare but do not know how much taxation welfare countries impose on their citizens. Some moan about the prices of cars in Singapore but seem to be ignorant about the social consequences of having highly congested streets (it is already relatively crowded) in a very tiny city as Singapore.

 

And the list goes on and on.

 

Human beings can be very colour-blind, often assuming a greener pasture on the other side, when they do not have all the facts. And Singaporeans especially so, with our notorious “kiasu” and “kiasee” mentalities that make us a very selfish people.

 

It is time we stop throwing stones at our government and wonder where all this resentment comes from in the first place.

 

Besides, I cannot fathom, for the life of me, how an uncouth individual like Low Thia Kiang can be a prime minister of Singapore.

 

Eeeehh.

 

*******