Blog Assessment

http://www.asiaone.com/News/the%2BStraits%2BTimes/Story/A1Story20080613-70568.html

This article talks about the fact that 2 fatalities had occurred at the Brunei Training Facility, and within 2 days. The soldiers were then exempted for a total of 3 days while investigations were carried out to find out what exactly was the cause of the deaths of the 2 NSmen.

National Service has been a topic of much speculation, controversy and debate among Singaporeans and international audience alike. It has also been the target of much criticism by many Singaporeans. For example, Evil Bunny’s creation, known as the NS Song, mocks National Service without an ounce of regret. 

However, I do feel that National Service is advantageous to Singapore and that it is more justifiable than it is not, due to its advantages that clearly outweigh its disadvantages. 

Firstly, National Service helps to build a sense of belonging to the community and fosters friendship amongst the different individuals that together make up the working population of Singapore’s society. This is unable to be done by any other mass participation involving activities, and thus makes National Service unique in this regard. National Service makes the conscripted individuals aged 18-20 serve and train for military action for 2 years. This prepares them for war, in case Singapore is attacked, Singapore will be able to retaliate fast, with the huge amount of conscripts that it has. By making this young men train under extremely tough situations together, the men wil inevitably grow closer towards each other and start feeling for one another. This would then proceed to bond them, and as a result the population of Singapore, given enough time will be very united. 

Secondly, NS is a powerful deterrent to countries who are thinking of invading us. With a total force larger than that of Malaysia and Indonesia  combined, Singapore has a force that all of the world are weary of. This can only be due to the success of National Service, and we have to give it this credit that it deserves as National Service has given us a strong international presence that many other countries are trying to still achive. Singapore is now, thanks to National Service, friends with America, the world’s biggest superpower, and they will even come to our aid and need if the matter arises. Malaysia too, is Singapore’s accomplice, and they have been faithfully pumping us their water.

However, National Service can be disadvantageous at times. In particular, National Service has utter disregard for the individual rights to choice of any human. By forcing those physically able  into joining the army and serving for the compulsory 2 years, national service exerts its supposed superiority over our lives and our individual rights to freedom. In doing so, we are no longer accorded the individual freedom to think and do what we would like to do for ourselves, as during that age of 18-20, we have been fully “employed” by the government to serve National Service.
 

I still feel that National Service is more advantageous to Singapore than it is not. By comparing the short term and long term effects of National Service, we can arrive at this conclusion. National Service, in the short term, shows absolutely no regard for the rights of all men aged 18-20, they would be forcefully made to serve 2 years in the National Service. However, In the long term, Singapore’s citizens would be bonded so strongly that adverse circumstances would not be able to destroy this foundation of closeness to one another. This is very beneficial to a society such as Singapore, as due to its deep complex roots and multi racial, religious and ethnic population, conflict can arise very fast if the public does not feel united as one Singapore.

Therefore, I state that NS is justifiable.

Coolness.

Trying out the new blogger post editor. This is SO COOL

Democracy creates stability in society

Democracy creates stability in society

Democracy, a system of governing a country or multiple states where there the country is actually is a federation of states, is a rather popular system in use by the world’s countries today. It is widely recognised and sought after as the form of ideal government for a new country, as it is recognised as the best form of government compared to others. Many kinds of democracies exist, some of which are representative democracy, parliamentary democracy, liberal democracy and direct democracy.

Democracy entrusts the power of the ruling of the country into the people. Representative democracy is probably the most commonly practised in the world today, which countries such as the US, Singapore, Australia and European countries are using. In a representative democracy, the people in the country usually vote for the people they want to form the new government, and then the person for whom the majority voted for would be in the Parliament. In Singapore, the country is divided into districts, which are usually governed by an individual or a team of up to 6.

Stability is a key area of concern for many countries, particularly countries where there is a limited natural resource available, or to developing or new countries. In the area of this essay, stability shall be defined as able to survive even when there are adverse changes in the country’s and the global economy, social stability (no riots), and steady improvement in terms of living conditions, life expectancy and the norm. Equality between all the people and good social stability is key to a country’s stability as well.

Firstly, democracy creates a sense of equality in a society. There might be certain minority groups or under-privileged people in any aspect, and therefore by having a representative democracy, the people are able to choose their own leaders. Therefore, the people feel that they are in control equally over their country, as they have a sense of “power” in terms of choosing in which direction the country is heading. In the case of a multi-racial society, the minority groups would actually be represented in the government, as is the case of Singapore, where the majority Chinese and the minority Malays and Indians are represented as well in the government.

Secondly, democracy is a drastically much more peaceful way of choosing a government compared to, for example, a revolt, overthrow, or military coupe. This is because the government is being chosen by the people themselves, and is therefore a choice of the majority. If an attempt to win power, was made through say, a revolt or a mass bloodshed involving the existing government, chaos would ensue and the resulting carnage could permanently affect the country’s progress. Furthermore, as the government being picked represents the majority view of the country, the people would agree to the government and not protest against its election.

Thirdly, a democratic country, and the resulting elected government, would be, for lack of a better word, be able to “rule” the country properly. As the elected government was chosen by the majority of the people themselves, the majority of the country would trust in the government and not oppose or protest against most, or even any rulings made. This case of trust in the government would lead to the government ruling the country well, which would therefore ensure the continued progress and growth of the country as a whole in terms of its social, economic and political status.

However, there are disadvantages with a democracy. In this case, as the democratically elected government represents the view of the majority community, there will be the people who voted for those who were not elected. These people would be dissatisfied with the government and may want to revolt or protest against many of the things that the new government would bring up. Furthermore, every representative democracy has a minority; in fact every society in existence has a minority. These would be the people whose wishes and choices for the government were not realised. These people would be disadvantaged and angry, and could potentially cause trouble.

Secondly, another problem with a democracy is that the voters may be deceived. A classic example would be Hitler, who promised, among others, success and probably enticing stuff that convinced his countrymen to vote for him. But as a great leader, after being voted, Hitler didn’t fulfil his promises, instead using his position of power to express his personal hatred, and he ultimate achieved his innate desire of the killing of the Jews, which while wasn’t successful, result in the bloodshed of 6 million or so innocent Jews. Leaders such as these may be voted anytime into the government, provided their election campaign is enticing enough. This could pose problematic for the society.

Despite the above disadvantages, however, I feel that a democracy creates stability in society. The advantages outweigh the disadvantages, and the disadvantages themselves rarely occur. For example there has only been one Hitler, a circumstance which proves that the scenario is unlikely to occur again. Furthermore, in most societies, the minority have not revolted but have simply submitted to the usually good ruling of the elected government. This therefore convinces me that democracy creates stability in society.