COMPLICITY AND WHITE-WASHING IN #SINGAPORE, A THREAD
1/ There are a number of PAP MPs who are very popular, and/or those who don't come from the more conventional PAP recruitment pools (civil service, military, legal fraternity) and seem more progressive than the rest.
1/ There are a number of PAP MPs who are very popular, and/or those who don't come from the more conventional PAP recruitment pools (civil service, military, legal fraternity) and seem more progressive than the rest.
2/ When it comes to popularity, the obvious example is Tharman Shanmugaratnam, the nation's favouritest PAP minister. There's also Louis Ng, who was known as a dedicated activist for animal rights and welfare even before he became a PAP member.
3/ To their credit, MPs like Tharman and Louis Ng work hard, and might have commendable records of raising important issues in Parliament, eg. access to affordable housing for single mothers. BUT... (you knew there was a "but")
4/ ...we can't forget that these MPs exist within a wider context, and that they're part of a bigger party. And this is a party that has a history of bullying, harassment, "fixing" political opponents and dissidents. Once they became PAP members, they became part of this legacy.
5/ Conversely, we also have to think about what the PAP gets out of fielding progressive candidates. These candidates—who are lovely as individuals—help the party sell a softer image when necessary, and to present itself as a party that's open to civil society.
6/ In #GE2020, another civil society advocate was added to the PAP slate: Carrie Tan, who founded Daughters of Tomorrow, a group that works w/ low-income women. I met Carrie years before she joined PAP, and can vouch that she's very nice in person and has been kind to me.
7/ But again, what is Carrie participating in when she enters the PAP fold? Here she is, praising Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam as a "kind and open-minded and all round awesome leader", even though he has been involved in harassing and attacking PAP critics. 
8/ The problem with Shanmugam is not a "strict and solemn persona". He's the man behind #POFMA, behind the contempt of court law that has been used against @jolovanwham, and other oppressive legislation. There is a reason why @sonnyliew drew a portrait of Shanmugam this way.
9/ When Carrie Tan gushes over Shanmugam like this—as if he isn't directly involved in authoritarianism, but is just misunderstood—she's helping to white-wash the PAP's hardline, anti-democratic tactics.
10/ Her civil society credentials also means that this plays into the "good activist/bad activist" trope. PAP can point to Carrie and Louis as evidence that they work with civil society, and therefore those who *can't* work with them must just be "doing it wrong".
11/ So yes, while we might appreciate people like Tharman, Louis, or Carrie as individuals, we should never forget that they are part of a wider system, and acknowledge their complicity in this wider system.
12/ They might not be vicious or maliciously complicit—perhaps they've convinced themselves they can do more good within PAP than without—but they're complicit all the same. Just 'cos they aren't the ones doing the PAP's dirty work doesn't mean they have no responsibility.
13/ I haven't seen any of these progressive PAP MPs pushing back against rhetoric or tactics, from within their party or among party supporters, that smear opponents/critics. I haven't seen them take up this suggestion put forth by @cheriangeorge et al. academia.sg/academic-views…
15/ Until they take clear action—that we can see, not secretly behind closed doors!—to push back against PAP's habit of harassment, bullying, "fixing", the only reaction we should be having to their earnest tributes to their PAP seniors is
🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀
🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀🙀
