'China 'tainted milk' kills three children. Three children have died in north-west China from suspected poisoning after drinking milk from two local dairies, state media says.
Thirty-five others, mostly children, are being treated at hospitals in Gansu province, officials said'- bbc
Last month, Wei Chao'an, vice minister of agriculture, said 'The milk products made on the Chinese mainland are trustworthy' - GOV.cn
Yet again China's government has failed in a most basic duty - to provide safe food for its people.
Friday, 8 April 2011
Sunday, 3 April 2011
My thoughts on Singapore Kindness Movement
The following is an excerpt from a comment that has caught my attention:
John’s comment as posted on according2ed’s site
“....It seems that neither the Courtesy Campaign nor the singapore kindness movement is taking any effects in singapore. The fact that there is a need to put in place a kindness movement to call the people (which consists mostly chinese) to become a more caring and gracious society says a lot about the chinese. You can give the chinese education but you can’t educate the chinese!...” - ''Singaporeans' are rude, arrogant, filthy'
Here’s my response and additional thoughts to that article:
When you have a nation that always has a chinese majority and actively promotes the chinese culture, and elevates the chinese culture over all others, it is no surprising that the government has to introduce the singapore kindness movement to ‘fix’ the issues that it has created. The government, over a few decades, has taught the chinese to identify themselves as the preferred race in singapore, and through the self-absorption, the chinese are concerned only with their own interests.
One alternative solution is the promotion of multiculturalism in singapore. It will contribute to the way a person looks at things, enhance empathy, vibrancy and passion. One should not mistake the present singapore culture for the culture of all singaporeans as this is the culture that is left over after the chinese culture is elevated and promoted over all others. Monoculturalism gives rise to self-absorption and narrow-mindedness. Try to be less ‘chinese’ and more ‘singaporean’ - become the best of all cultures.
John’s comment as posted on according2ed’s site
“....It seems that neither the Courtesy Campaign nor the singapore kindness movement is taking any effects in singapore. The fact that there is a need to put in place a kindness movement to call the people (which consists mostly chinese) to become a more caring and gracious society says a lot about the chinese. You can give the chinese education but you can’t educate the chinese!...” - ''Singaporeans' are rude, arrogant, filthy'
Here’s my response and additional thoughts to that article:
When you have a nation that always has a chinese majority and actively promotes the chinese culture, and elevates the chinese culture over all others, it is no surprising that the government has to introduce the singapore kindness movement to ‘fix’ the issues that it has created. The government, over a few decades, has taught the chinese to identify themselves as the preferred race in singapore, and through the self-absorption, the chinese are concerned only with their own interests.
One alternative solution is the promotion of multiculturalism in singapore. It will contribute to the way a person looks at things, enhance empathy, vibrancy and passion. One should not mistake the present singapore culture for the culture of all singaporeans as this is the culture that is left over after the chinese culture is elevated and promoted over all others. Monoculturalism gives rise to self-absorption and narrow-mindedness. Try to be less ‘chinese’ and more ‘singaporean’ - become the best of all cultures.
Sunday, 20 March 2011
In response to an article by according2ed - Jap earthquake: the emperor, the elite, and the 'charitable'
It’s an undeniable fact that quite a few industries have benefit from disasters. That’s where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Shouldn’t the donations be coming from these industries and the rich since they are profiting from the situation. Why should the working people be charitable? The Japan government should be providing jets to get the people out of the affected areas. Why is the rich the ones who get the first chance to survival? That is the issue when you are in a capitalist world! That is the problem when you have hierarchy in the society! I totally agree with you that ‘creating a truly egalitarian society’ is the solution to the problem.
Have they tried to address the root cause? For instance, Wiki leaks has just revealed that the IAEA had warned the Jap elite more than 2 years ago that “its nuclear power plants were not capable of withstanding powerful earthquakes [telegraph]. Why aren’t the Jap elite be held accountable for this disaster and donate their wealth?
It is an interesting thought that in such disasters, it allows people to practise being kind where such kindness is actually supporting a greater evil. If you think deeper, it is true. The opportunity to donate to a famous disaster is the way people tell themselves they have done enough.
Ending my comment with a great quote from Ed – ‘The Root of all evils find its incubatory refuge in all that is perceived to be good’
Have they tried to address the root cause? For instance, Wiki leaks has just revealed that the IAEA had warned the Jap elite more than 2 years ago that “its nuclear power plants were not capable of withstanding powerful earthquakes [telegraph]. Why aren’t the Jap elite be held accountable for this disaster and donate their wealth?
It is an interesting thought that in such disasters, it allows people to practise being kind where such kindness is actually supporting a greater evil. If you think deeper, it is true. The opportunity to donate to a famous disaster is the way people tell themselves they have done enough.
Ending my comment with a great quote from Ed – ‘The Root of all evils find its incubatory refuge in all that is perceived to be good’
Sunday, 7 November 2010
In response to an article by a2ed “In sum, singapore, the chinese, and the opposition. A personal journey.”
I recall a decade ago when Ed started talking about social political issues that came across as too radical to me as I could not understand his perspectives and thus thought he was too harsh in his comments. Back then I thought he had over-reacted (now I know that’s passion). I like all the other chinese, just turned a deaf ear and ‘switched off’ from the conversations, and all the other so-called chinese ‘friends’ also reacted the same way toward him. Without our realisation, we were forcing him to come down to our level, talked only the mundane issue or discussed politics at very superficial level. Otherwise he will be ‘guilty of’ being long-winded. I didnt realise this until i came to the UK a few years ago and observe that most of the Brits I have spoken to, approach conversation/topic the same way as he does. They can have dialogues on any topic with some depth in their analysis and very engaging in conversations. I can have conversation with them and not get any childish/immature responses. Really a stark difference in reaction between the Brits and the Chinese. With this exposure and on trips back to Asia, interacting with the chinese makes me realise how difficult and stifling it has been for Ed living among the chinese.
My association with him has made me become more self-aware. I have developed further by how he treats me.He is a true friend, as he never fails to give critique when it’s due. True friend does not only say the good things, s/he also needs to critique in order for you to improve and grow and likewise do the same toward him/her. I have also observed over the years that among his/our friends, the Indians and Filipinos are more receptive to new ideas as opposed to the chinese. During conversations, i noticed that when he started to analyse and discuss significant issues, the chinese will shrug off his ideas and comments with responses like ‘it’s like that, lah’, ‘they are they, we are we, go live in the UK’,’ why you so long-winded’,..etc. While with the Indians and Filipinos, they may disagree with his ideas at first but when he goes more in-depth and analyse further, I can see they start to engage further and ask questions, not necessary agreeing all the time but definitely more open to ideas and willing to think further.
Ed is very spot-on in his observation - “...the initial phase of a relationship with a chinese is very crucial. If one does not push for adaption or integration on their part, they become adept at ignoring those aspects of your persona that is different from them. Unfortunately, 9 out of 10 times, to push for adaptation would see them distancing from you from the outset. So it was a catch 22 situation.” I have been through the cycle with him and truly would have moved away from him had it not been for his persistence and perseverance. I would have remain a lesser person.
On hindsight, when I ignored his perspectives, it truly wasn’t done willfully or purposely, it was reflexive to turn a deaf ear or get space out when the topic is not within my interests or requires further thoughts. I grew up with my mother always telling me ‘don’t ask questions’, ‘ just do as you are told’, ‘just follow the orders of the elders’,..(all the wrong values that all parents should not impart to their children). My perspectives and views have started to change since I got to know him.
Thank you, Ed for being a true mate :)
My association with him has made me become more self-aware. I have developed further by how he treats me.He is a true friend, as he never fails to give critique when it’s due. True friend does not only say the good things, s/he also needs to critique in order for you to improve and grow and likewise do the same toward him/her. I have also observed over the years that among his/our friends, the Indians and Filipinos are more receptive to new ideas as opposed to the chinese. During conversations, i noticed that when he started to analyse and discuss significant issues, the chinese will shrug off his ideas and comments with responses like ‘it’s like that, lah’, ‘they are they, we are we, go live in the UK’,’ why you so long-winded’,..etc. While with the Indians and Filipinos, they may disagree with his ideas at first but when he goes more in-depth and analyse further, I can see they start to engage further and ask questions, not necessary agreeing all the time but definitely more open to ideas and willing to think further.
Ed is very spot-on in his observation - “...the initial phase of a relationship with a chinese is very crucial. If one does not push for adaption or integration on their part, they become adept at ignoring those aspects of your persona that is different from them. Unfortunately, 9 out of 10 times, to push for adaptation would see them distancing from you from the outset. So it was a catch 22 situation.” I have been through the cycle with him and truly would have moved away from him had it not been for his persistence and perseverance. I would have remain a lesser person.
On hindsight, when I ignored his perspectives, it truly wasn’t done willfully or purposely, it was reflexive to turn a deaf ear or get space out when the topic is not within my interests or requires further thoughts. I grew up with my mother always telling me ‘don’t ask questions’, ‘ just do as you are told’, ‘just follow the orders of the elders’,..(all the wrong values that all parents should not impart to their children). My perspectives and views have started to change since I got to know him.
Thank you, Ed for being a true mate :)
Sunday, 24 October 2010
Are you angry at social injustice and inequity? in singapore?
When I saw this post on TOC (the workshops for “Rights and Responsibilities” organised by Maruah), my first thought was the only rights and responsibilities we have seen in singapore are the “rights” of the government telling the people what they can and cannot do, and the “responsibilities” of the people to take care/fend for themselves when they grow old, despite the amount of taxes they have paid and the amount of revenues/profits that they help singapore to generate.
“All of us have something we care about – be it poverty, environment, health issues, financial protection or education”. The concerns listed are just different category of issues. Have the wrong doings done to the minorities in the past decades been highlighted and rectified? How little has been said by this group about the inequality treatment of the minority races that perpetuated and still perpetuates in singapore. They have not been making progress in the past decade to address the issues/consequences brought about by the chinese-centric policy of singapore. It is not what Maruah say, also what they fail to say.
“All of us have something we care about – be it poverty, environment, health issues, financial protection or education”. The concerns listed are just different category of issues. Have the wrong doings done to the minorities in the past decades been highlighted and rectified? How little has been said by this group about the inequality treatment of the minority races that perpetuated and still perpetuates in singapore. They have not been making progress in the past decade to address the issues/consequences brought about by the chinese-centric policy of singapore. It is not what Maruah say, also what they fail to say.
Is philanthropy still important?
In response to an article by a2ed “...At the end of the day, viewing philanthropy as 'philanthropy' helps people move on from questioning after the justification for the existence of the filthy rich by way of getting us to thank them for giving back part of the loot. It's a movement from, 'Isn't his taking for himself the fruits of everyone's labour wrong'? to, 'thank you for giving us a portion of the fruits of another's labour. What a great bloke you are'.
The rich people amass their wealth from the labour of those who work under them and from the consumers. In order for people like BG to become so rich, there is a wider issue about wealth distribution. If wealth were more equally distributed, do we still require philanthropy? If we need philanthropists, then society has failed in its duties!
Philanthropy is important to the world. People have grown accustomed to/accepted the disproportionate wealth distribution (if not the gap would not have existed till today). With the limited resources, we do need the rich people to give back (if not a portion of) what they have taken from the people.
The rich people amass their wealth from the labour of those who work under them and from the consumers. In order for people like BG to become so rich, there is a wider issue about wealth distribution. If wealth were more equally distributed, do we still require philanthropy? If we need philanthropists, then society has failed in its duties!
Philanthropy is important to the world. People have grown accustomed to/accepted the disproportionate wealth distribution (if not the gap would not have existed till today). With the limited resources, we do need the rich people to give back (if not a portion of) what they have taken from the people.
Sunday, 17 October 2010
Thoughts on an article - "Don't Get Burnt" by illegal cigarettes
'As part of a campaign to drive home the anti-illegal cigarette message, Singapore Customs has launched a new round of 25 roadshows, five times more than last year.' source - CNA
Why do we need such campaign?
Are there safer options to traditional cigarettes?
This anti-illegal cigs campaign could be deemed as an act to safeguard the government’s profits. Why are cigs so costly in singapore and one reason given was to deter more people from smoking cigs. If that is truly effective, the cost of cigs will not be increased time and again. It is precisely the high cost of cigs that is driving the smokers to look for cheaper sources. Should the people now ask the government to look at and address the true problem?
I am not a smoker and certainly do not promote smoking but I do ask are there other safer options than smoking traditional cigarettes. Are e-cigarettes safer alternatives to traditional cigarettes? I do understand that traditional cigarettes have about 4000+ chemicals and carcinogens as opposed to e-cigs that do not have them. Sure, e-cigs is not as safe as not smoking altogether but we need to consider if they are safer than traditional cigs. Here’s an article by Ed on the Compilation of net critique of e-cig ban.
Why do we need such campaign?
Are there safer options to traditional cigarettes?
This anti-illegal cigs campaign could be deemed as an act to safeguard the government’s profits. Why are cigs so costly in singapore and one reason given was to deter more people from smoking cigs. If that is truly effective, the cost of cigs will not be increased time and again. It is precisely the high cost of cigs that is driving the smokers to look for cheaper sources. Should the people now ask the government to look at and address the true problem?
I am not a smoker and certainly do not promote smoking but I do ask are there other safer options than smoking traditional cigarettes. Are e-cigarettes safer alternatives to traditional cigarettes? I do understand that traditional cigarettes have about 4000+ chemicals and carcinogens as opposed to e-cigs that do not have them. Sure, e-cigs is not as safe as not smoking altogether but we need to consider if they are safer than traditional cigs. Here’s an article by Ed on the Compilation of net critique of e-cig ban.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)