One downside to more people being aware of your existence is a flood of well-meaning strangers informing you what you should do with your future.  There seems to be three distinct camps: the first, which recommends me to join the PAP so as to work for change from within, the second which believes I should join the Workers' Party, and the third which doesn't seem to care which party I'm in, but believe I should run for elections in five years.  The advice is coming in fast and furious and I thought it warranted a response.

One thing I should make clear is that while I appreciate all your input, it simply isn't the time for me to make any kind of concretized decision as to my future.  Being in my second year in junior college, I need to concentrate on my A'Levels and subsequently my university education.  To do full credit to Singapore, I need to get that straight.  Which means, I doubt you'll be seeing me in GE 2011, when I'll be 23 - and by then, honestly, you'll probably all have forgotten about me anyway.

Next: I genuinely don't believe that I have to join a political party in order to fulfill my goal of encouraging greater political freedom and transparency in Singapore.  Many visitors have said things to the effect of: if you don't join the WP, you're just a useless armchair critic, making empty noise.  I think that entirely discredits the tireless work of the many independent observers who have managed to make waves in our midst.  A simple example - political bloggers.  International journalists have called Singapore GE 2006 our first 'Internet election'.  Credible and respected independents such as Alex Au, whom I hold in high regard, have made great impact on people's views.  Journalists too, albeit in a more constrained manner, have the power to get people thinking.  To a certain extent, such individuals are able to have greater say and freedom of expression and critique because they - or should I say, we? - are not bound to any single political party, and hence its image and its policies.  As outsiders, we can give comment on say, the lack of consultativeness on the part of the PAP, and the lack of practicality on some of the WP's policies, without inflicting harm on the image of the party and create the impression of a divided and incoherent front.

Let's not even restrict ourselves to outspoken or prominent independents.  Let's look at you, the reader, right where you are, perusing this entry.  Must you join a political party to be engaged in Singaporean politics? Must you be a PAP candidate in order to leave a comment on my posts telling me that I'm idealistic and unrealistic if I expect the government to operate internationally on anything other than calculated self interest? Must you be a WP candidate to make yourself heard, to say that there is something disturbing about the fact that GLCs are so often headed by people affiliated to the Lee family and the ruling party? Must we all sign up?

I find myself hurt and a little bewildered by anonymous posters who smugly inform me that I am useless to Singapore if I don't "walk the talk" and join a party.  I think that does all of us a disservice, and underestimates the power that all of us have to influence the future of our country.  It is telling and unique to the Singaporean context that a person who speaks up should be told so quickly and with such definitiveness that she must align herself with any one party.  It seems political discourse is so alien to us that we cannot imagine otherwise.  But we should - that is the whole point of i-speak.  I speak, not as a PAP or a WP member, but as me, myself, a student, a Singaporean, a human being.  As should we all.

But let's examine the possibility that I do join a party - assuming I am even wanted by any of them.  Which one shall it be? In the PAP one would have the ability to translate one's views and reflections into action.  Or so Tharman Shanmugaratnam and Vivian Balakrishnan thought.  Both of them, I have heard from word of mouth, though I have not been able to find corrobating sources on the Internet, were vocal in their criticism of the PAP.  I last saw Shanmugaratnam at the PAP rally in Pasir-Ris Punggol.  He was raising both hands and extolling what the PAP had done for the area.  I last saw Balakrishnan on TV during the election period.  He was pumping his fist in the air and crying out "Majulah PAP!" with the rest of them.  Both of them are capable, intelligent, even kind and amiable men.  I had the chance to interact with them on a Channel i show two years ago, i-Contact.  They were friendly and obviously smart (and ACSian old boys too, interestingly).  But with regards to saying anything that might remotely contradict the party they are in, their hands are tied.  And if there were no Shanmugaratnam, there would be a Teo Chee Hean.  If there were no Balakrishnan, there would be an Abdullah Tarmugi.  There will always be a capable man to take your place, particularly in the PAP where there are so many capable men, groomed, courted, drawn in.

What, then? The SDP? No one has suggested it yet.  The SDA? Not that either.  The Workers' Party then.  Incidentally, I may be attending, if time permits, the WP Open House tomorrow at the Little India area.  They've quite impressed me in GE 2006, and my mind is open to the possibility of involvement there in the future.  It doesn't mean I agree on all of their policies.  While they are heading in the right direction - helping lower income groups, for one thing - I'm not too decided on the idea of, say, compulsory unemployment insurance, or a complete waiver of GST on  all the non-defined 'basic necessities'.  And the same thing applies to joining the WP as it does to joining the PAP; I would be helpless to criticize them if I were a part of them. 

If not the Workers' Party, perhaps as an independent, or a new party.  Speculation is pointless, especially if I am not even certain I will enter the political scene.  Whether I do or not seems irrelevant to the work I try to do here.  Which is to remind everyone that you don't need to be a PAP or a WP candidate in order to have an opinion, and have it heard. 

Many of you may have visited this site out of curiosity because you wondered what a 17+ year old would have to say.  But I'm growing older everyday.  Soon, in three months, I'll be 18.  Then I'll be 25, 30, 40.  And by then, there'd be no novelty to this whole affair.  I'd just be an everyday Singaporean with political views.  Exactly what I want everyone to be! So please don't typecast me into convenient stereotypes like "youth who speaks up", or even the one that surfaced in today's Sunday Times article, where I was "David" to Kausikan's "Goliath".  Flattering, but no - nothing like that.  There was nothing about that encounter that should have been inordinate or extraordinary.  Anyone could have done it, and should have done it, if he had seen something important to comment upon, that he felt others should have heard.  My actions don't warrant rampant speculation as to my future.  I don't even need a future in politics, even if it seems an attractive possibility.  And I'm not sure I can find the words to convey how desperately I want you all to understand that.

I suppose in conclusion, I would simply say this.  Whether you're 17 or 71, in the PAP, WP, or in the comfort of your armchair, never discount your ability and your right to speak up.  And in your anxiousness to usher me into the life-path you feel is most suited for me, please don't discount mine, if I choose otherwise.