Wednesday, 29 June 2016

‘Double’ Endurance, Timing, Cooling-off, And Brexit.

‘Double’ Endurance, Timing, Cooling-off, And Brexit.

Zhang Liang meeting Huang Shigong and the wisdom of Taoism. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhang_Liang_(Western_Han)]



Endurance is not a one-time endurance. It can be double endurance or endurance ^power of n. (一忍再忍). Besides endurance, timing and opportunity (时与机) are important considerations too.

The following video explains endurance and timing in the famous Zhang Liang meeting Huang Shigong story.     

https://youtu.be/yeEeUQsC-8s


[Cooling-off Day]

In a Market Based Authoritarian Regime likes Singapore, the government can set up many traps  
to catch the oppositions or social activists.

Image result for traps The Way may look even. When you notice the trap, it may be too late.     




Image result for manholes

Sometimes, they just accidentally remove the cover of the manhole. Hence, the Way is not only uneven. It is full of obstacles. You are patient and careful enough with endurance. But you forget the timing. 

Cooling-off day requirement for general election or by-election works like a trap or a manhole. Double endurance is needed. This is also a timing issue which creates opportunity for cooling-off day issues.  

[Brexit - a trap? a manhole?]   

United Kingdom’s PM David Cameron promised to hold a Brexit referendum once he won his second term last year. He was so confident that he thought endurance and timing/opportunity were at his side.

Why he failed?

His endurance becomes the double endurance of the Leave camp. Why did we leave the EU  and other Brexit FAQs   FT.com.png 
ft.com

PM Cameron failed to see the trap and he even removes the cover of the Remain manhole himself.

The lessons for Singaporeans are:

  • There is a clear difference between a market based authoritarian regime and a democracy.
  • The difference between a short and long campaign period. It can change the feng-shui of endurance and timing/opportunity.
  • In Taoism, when you fail, it means people are against you. 52% vs.48% indicates 4% more voters are against ‘Remain’.  
  • If a political party allows two different and opposing views, it will creates more endurance and timing issues. Both Labor and Conservative parties are facing leadership challenges, while UKIP and SNP do not have this problem.     
  • Endurance and timing is a game changer in UK. There are many ways to expose the trap and manhole. But in Singapore, the PAP has full control of the game.  It will be difficult to break the PAP Way and feng-shui.  

In a short brief, the PAP is showing concerns, worry and expressing uncertainty ahead.  However, internally, they are laughing at the British democracy that allows endurance and timing to work against themselves. As we all know the PAP only allows ‘ownself check ownself’.

Saturday, 25 June 2016

英国脱欧之思维大陆化和一带一路高铁化

英国脱欧之思维大陆化和一带一路高铁化

英国脱欧正式终结大英帝国以海权争霸天下,西方海洋思维所主导的经济模式。取而代之的是大陆思维(中国,印度)的经济,甚至政治妥协。欧盟将向东发展,对俄罗斯采取务实态度,加速支持对中国的一带一路的高铁化,和强化对印度的‘香料’贸易。

英国脱欧短期内对世界会造成冲击,但是,这不过是茶杯里的风暴而已。正如美国经济学家Paul Krugman说的,英磅下跌和金融市场的危机在经过调整后,会恢复过来。英磅下跌没有70年代,90年代那么厉害。

paul krugam.png

英国内部的冲击反而更加的大:大英帝国将从一个联合王国变成一个小英格兰。土地和人口将缩小,当然,在世界的影响力也将缩小。相对来说,从货币下跌情形来说,欧元对美元的跌幅(-2.35%)小而英磅的跌幅却很大(-8.05%)。英国脱欧把欧盟的缺点暴露出来,但是,吃亏最多的很可能是英国,一夜之间,从(美元计算)世界第五经济体,下降到第六经济体。

pound.png

如果说欧盟会解体,那么,最先解体的,恐怕是英国。苏格兰独立运动,爱尔兰的统一。。。。

所以,我们看到英国现在不急于申请脱欧,三个月后,保守党新领袖上台后,才来谈。反而是欧盟国家,希望尽快解决英国脱欧的法律程序。



英国的海洋思维,普通法,在欧盟的大陆思维,法律结构下,出现了分歧。表面上看,似乎很在乎移民问题,事实上,英国的政治,经济,文化发展,也要受到欧盟的制约。这就导致英国人寻求‘独立’的决心。难怪,脱欧人士认为6月23日是英国的独立日。

巨变时代?

英国脱欧不是简单的欧盟和英国之间的问题,或者,只是影响国际贸易,金融和政治的问题。进一步思考,我们现在正处在一个巨变的时代。

  • 地球上已经没有新大陆了。
  • 欧洲的海洋经济思维,从希腊,罗马,再到哥伦布发现新大陆,殖民地,黑奴,最后表演了英国脱欧这出戏。

  • 日本经济产业省2016年版的《通商白皮书》,对日本的出口结构过于依赖向北美市场出口汽车的现状敲响了警钟。白皮书分析称,在高新技术产品的出口方面, 日本正在被中国赶超。
日本通商白皮书称:中国是东亚新动力.png

  • 美国,加拿大在东西两岸火车互通后,经济政治,高度发展。这其实是从海洋思维转型到大陆思维。从普通火车到高铁,经济发展将会是一个什么概念?

  • 一带一路利用高铁,进一步提升大陆思维。而英国脱欧,却加速欧盟向东发展,配合中国和印度的崛起。



在海洋思维时代,在殖民地时代,利用海洋,发展了很多贸易城市,孟买,加尔各答,新加坡,香港,上海。。。
在大陆思维的时代,将会出现不同的新城市,上图的深色红点和蓝点将会出现。经商,做生意,文化交流,政治制度,将会出现什么变化?

大陆思维在高铁的推广下,也很可能延伸到北美。


大陆思维中的中国务实社会主义和印度的务实民主制度,对于新时代,巨变时代,价值判断,会产生什么影响?





新加坡行动党领袖对英国脱欧有他们一套的说法,甚至只是看到短期的利害关系,而没有把中、长期的发展道出。这是否是他们的国际视野局限,还是根本就不理解亚洲的发展?

李总理:英脱欧是“转捩点”

http://www.zaobao.com.sg/special/report/others/brexit/story20160625-633129

Thursday, 23 June 2016

Beyond endurance, there is a Way!


endurance.jpg


Singapore is a Chinese majority city state. The Chinese DNA always consists of Confucian and Taoist philosophy (儒道互补). In a broader definition, educated Chinese have three teachings (儒释道) of Confucianism, (T/)Daoism and Chinese Buddhism.

One may wonder, after 50 years of bilingual education and English (/Singlish) as our first language, whether Singapore Chinese still have these DNAs. Yes. I think so, perhaps, the word ‘Endurance’ indicating such a DNA.

The PAP government stresses our Asian origins and promotes Confucianism amongst Chinese Singaporeans. However, in many ways, they are practising ‘Legalist’ (法) administration. In the above picture, the police was shown raiding the house of Teo Soh Lung after the Election Department filed a complaint to the police about her by-election offence.

The details were well reported in mainstream and social media.

In the name of Confucianism, the PAP government and the police are acting like a ‘Legalist’ - imposing strict law even without proper identification.

In defence, political and social activists can only endure such actions helplessly, effortlessly.

[Beyond endurance]

Endurance (忍) appears in the Three teachings (儒释道).

In Chinese history, Confucianism and Taoism always compliment each others (儒道互补). All ancient Chinese scholars had these personalities. Even in communist China or democratic Taiwan, political leaders there still maintain these characters. When one is appointed an official, his Confucian personality appears. When one is down or demoted, his Daoist (or Buddhist) character shows up.

Throughout Chinese history, Taoism always goes side-by-side with Confucianism. Sometimes they act in concert but sometimes they compete against each other.

[Does it matter to Singapore politics?]

Singaporean Chinese, even the young ones who are less hungry (claimed by DPM Tharman), still have these Ru-Dao (儒道) personalities. Legalistic Confucianism as practised by the PAP can be seen everywhere everyday and needs no further explanations. It represents the ‘Yang’.

And Taoism represents the “Yin” - nature (environment), mothers (Mother’s Day), baby (Children’s Day), ‘Kiasi’, weak, soft, etc. It can also extend to activities like Tai Chi, traditional Chinese medicine, Chinese temples (religious Taoism), etc.

So, Daoism is not foreign to Singaporeans. It provides alternative way or opposite way. It even offers a third way (right, wrong and in between).  

The PAP has already occupied the ‘Yang’ activities. Singaporeans do believe the PAP can deliver and the oppositions cannot match them.  Continuing using ‘Yang’ tactics, e.g. better policies, better management, will be less effective in attracting votes.

There was a time the PAP neglected their grassroots and feedbacks from Singaporeans. However, it now shifts to democratic socialism, towards the ‘Yin’. They seem to adopt Confucianism-Daoism complementary. (儒道互补)

Is there a room for oppositions in Singapore? Besides endurance, what can oppositions do?  The PAP will always be a ‘Yang’ party and engages in ‘top-down’ approaches. To offer different things, oppositions may have to offer ‘Yin’ solutions and ‘bottom-up’ approaches. However, it is not an easy task. Voters believe the PAP can shift from right to left and then back to centre. They don’t believe the oppositions can do the same.     

Singaporean’s pragmatism will always give the PAP an edge over oppositions even voters know the election is not a fair game . Moral judgement, value judgement, checks and balances will be assessed in a practical way.

Besides endurance, retreat, re-think, regroup and even absent (meditation) are some ‘ways’ to consider. It needs wisdom as Dao (the Way) is a higher Chinese philosophical thinking.

[Does it matter to new WP leadership?]  

The long-term survival and sustainability of a political party is whether it is represented in the parliament. A long period of absence will make the political party irrelevant.

The recent election of Workers’ Party leadership is not so much of whether it is a democratic election or not. It is a matter of survival, sustainability and expansion.

Whoever leads the WP will have to find the Way for the party, for Singapore.  Look at the Sarawak state election and the twin by-elections in Malaysia, it is really not an easy way. 

wp.JPG

The traditional way of grassroots activities, like legal talk, one-day tour may not be enough.  How can we find a better and alternative way? More people will have to contribute their brains and sacrifice their time to help the oppositions. Is this a dream or a way?

Wednesday, 15 June 2016

英国脱欧, 加速终结西方垄断世界政治、经济、文化的格局

英国脱欧加速终结
西方垄断世界政治、经济、文化的格局


英国即将举行全民公投是否留在欧盟,民调似乎显示脱欧的可能性很高。如果这样,这不过是加速终结西方垄断世界政治、经济、文化的格局。

在人类过去的两千年历史中, 西方世界只有在哥伦布发现新大陆后,才开始兴起。在这之前,罗马帝国曾经在地中海一带称霸。

从公元元年开始,一直到15,16世纪,南亚大陆,现在的印度,巴基斯坦,孟加拉,斯里兰卡,甚至阿富汗,是世界上最大的经济体。一直到了明朝,中国才成为世界最大经济体。不过,也只是维持两百多年。一下子,就被欧美赶超了。

Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia

文艺复兴,新思潮,工业革命等原因,确实造成西方强盛。他们相对少的人口,控制了世界的经济两百多年。

21世纪,世界经济的领头人,回到亚洲。保守的估计,不以人均计算,中国经济总量在21世纪前半段,将是世界第一,而印度以她的年轻人口优势,将在21世纪下半段,成为世界第一。

人生如戏,时局如棋。上面的图表,曲线的发展趋势,似乎往后走,回到500年,1000年前。

英国脱欧,似乎只是西方世界茶杯里的风暴。英国即使留在欧盟,也不可能让欧洲经济成为世界第一。退出欧盟,欧洲经济在世界的比重当然会缩小,而英国本身,也可能变得更加小。留不留在欧洲,真的只是茶杯里的风波,短期内,或许造成一些金融风暴,经济不平衡的现象,从历史的发展看,只能是一场小风波。

西方世界经济在国际经济的比重,将会逐年减少。当你手中的钱越来越少,你的话语权自然就会减少。经济影响政治,两者又影响文化。世界上,现在除了汉语热外,已经开始印度热了。

西方世界的经济饱和,其实跟他们的中产阶级有关。十几年来,西方世界的中产阶级的百分比没有增加,似乎还下降了。新加坡也没有例外。而中国和印度的中产阶级人数却不断增加,还没有到饱和阶段。这无形中,变成一股强大的购买力。

新加坡处于中国热,印度热的中间,是否可以‘趁火打劫’,捞到一些热点,强化本身的经济、政治、文化?

相对落后的中国和印度,人均收入比新加坡低,整体经济,法制,政治结构也比较差。但是,在文化上,却高出几倍。同时,在电脑科技的运用上,却似乎在新加坡之上。中国的互联网,云技术,银行的转账的功能可以说已经在新加坡之上。而印度以跳跃式的科技进步,直接进入云时代,利用手机进行各种官方和私人交易,是新加坡人很难想象到的。

文化优势加上科技优势,新加坡又再往后落了几十步。

还有一点,经济政治有时做不到的事,文化和科技一下子就做到了。互联网举报贪官已经很普遍,在印度通过手机,直接把救济金打入贫民手中,也开始流行,这同时可以避免中间转账出现救济金失踪的现象。

人民行动党政府就是只知道控制经济政治,利用‘居高临下的Top-down方式’,主导国家。因此,它才会想到公务员不可以在办公室使用互联网的妙方,还沾沾自喜,认为这样做最网络安全。充其量,这只能做到比较安全,而不是绝对、完全的网络安全。

当然,行动党也控制文化和科技。文化活动由它来主导,已经不是新鲜事了。科技,互联网的控制也没有放松过。但是,文化和科技的结合,再加上国内外互通,要做到完全控制,就犹如政府办公室不能用互联网一样,只能做到局部控制。

文化科技是一种广泛,由下而上的bottom-up运动。使用者最多,广而深,一呼百应,说变就变。在21世纪,偏偏就是人类的最爱。你拍路边的小吃,生动吸引人的话,一下子就传开来了,不然,Alice Fong 和洪素珠,Bryan Lim,怎么会一下子就成网络红人。

文化科技也加速中国和印度的发展,提升软实力。印度是世界上最大的民主国家。中国虽然不是民主国家,但是,由下而上的一些社会运动,却可以导致一些建筑,基础设施改变计划,如:环保项目。这是新加坡人想象不到的地方。

话说回来,中国印度两大文明古国,加上他们的科技优势,其后果不是一般新加坡人可以想象得到的。甚至行动党的第四代领导,只知道要‘居高临下’,‘故步自封’走老路,也很难想象到未来的外部变化。

新加坡政府继续控制经济政治,继续控制文化科技,如何在未来,利用中国热,印度热来点燃自己?行动党的那一套Top-down居高临下,目空一切的治国方式,似乎要把国人变成井底之蛙。我们很可能步欧美国家的后尘,看着沙煲的热火,慢慢燃起,而没有自我觉醒。

归根究底,我们一直太天真的认为行动党什么东西都行,什么事情都有办法。同时又能自我检讨,自我觉醒能力特强。这些刚好都是居高临下的Top-down管理,一个只有阳刚,而没有阴柔Bottom-up的新加坡,如何在中、印热中取火?

Monday, 13 June 2016

Social Divide: From Singapore’s Alice Fong To Taiwan’s Hung Su-chu (洪素珠)

Social Divide: From Singapore’s Alice Fong To Taiwan’s Hung Su-chu (洪素珠)

hate culture.jpg


The Singapore story

Many years ago, then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong aimed to make Singapore a Gracious Society. However, from the infamous story of Alice Fong, it proves we are really very far away from the gracious society. Goh’s Marine Parade GRC teammate, Minister for Social and Family Development Tan Chuan-Jin commented in his Facebook that he has slammed the woman, Alice Fong, who shouted at the deaf-mute foodcourt cleaner. Mr Tan said, “whether you have flu or not, or if a person is disabled or not, one shouldn’t have behaved in the way the woman did. Respect our fellow workers.” Tan also reminded Singaporeans to be conscious how we interact with one another.

Is this enough?

It sounds like another calling of Gracious Society. But it has not touched on the basic philosophy: hate culture and social divide. As I have explained in previous post on ‘Chinese Helicopter’ that the PAP has consistently promoting a social divide and hate culture.  In the early time of independence, they targeted the Chinese educated Singaporeans. This leads to the emergence of ‘Chinese Helicopter’. After the PAP has successfully tackled the Chinese educated problem, they shift their focus to English educated Singaporeans, first the pro-workers student leaders, then the so-called “Marxist Conspiracy”. When they import more and more foreigners, they shift the target to local Singaporeans who ‘are lazy, not hungry enough, demand freedom, liberal, high pay, want transparency…’.

There is no stopping of ‘hate’ promotion in Singapore.  Always in Singapore society, if you act against the PAP, you are subject to some kinds of discrimination - academic  failures (e.g ITE), political failures (like Chee Soon Juan), or not up to standard as compared to foreigners, etc.  

The Taiwan story

Hung Su-chu is now the public enemy number one in Taiwan. Both the ruling party, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the oppositions criticized her.  Here is her story in brief:

[The clip, posted on Facebook on Thursday by Hung Su-chu (洪素珠), a contributor to the People Post (PeoPo) citizen journalist platform operated by Public Television Service (PTS), shows Hung chasing an elderly Mainlander man at the 228 Memorial Park in the southern port city.
Off screen, Hung asks the man why he came to Taiwan. The man responds that he came in 1950 with his parents. Hung then starts yelling at the Chinese man and accuses Mainlanders of living off the Taiwanese. After she tells him he should go back to China, the man responds, “I live here, I have an identification card of the Republic of China.”
“I work here, and have contributed to this land,” he continues. “Why would I go back?”
“I do not want you Chinese people in Taiwan,” she screams.]


Political motivated ‘hate and social divide’ in Singapore

Alice Fong incident will likely be a non-event after a few months. The PAP social engineering machinery, through both mainstream media and social media, will have the capability to accomplish the job. However, will the political motivated ‘hate and social divide’ go away? Most likely not.

So do the DPP in Taiwan.

Relatively speaking our ‘hate’ situation is still not as bad as in Taiwan. However, the Taiwan experience serves as a reminder to Singaporeans. Political parties, searching for power like DPP or fighting to remain in power like the PAP or UNMO, will always like to engage in ‘hate’ and ‘social divide’ political campaigns.    

For this, we must give credit to Singapore oppositions, especially the main political parties, like Workers’ Party or Singapore Democratic Party.  They are always subjected to the ‘hate’ campaigns, for example, failures, inexperience, lack of management skills, infighting, never consider long-term interest, scoring political points, polarization etc.

On the contrary, Singapore oppositions seldom fight back with the same ‘hate’ messages. Perhaps, thanks to the PAP, they are limited by media exposure due to the press control in Singapore?  


#




Wednesday, 8 June 2016

10 Examples of Market Based Authoritarian Regime

10 Examples of Market Based Authoritarian Regime

Image result for cpf logo
You make contributions, the government decides on distributions.
Image result for LTA COE logo
The government controls the quantity, you decide the price.
Image result for HDB logo
The government fits the supply, you have options to buy or not to buy.
Image result for singapore telecoms market
The government creates artificial competitions, you choose amongst the three GLCs.
Image result for moe singapore logo
Every school is a good school, you have options for supplementary tuitions.
Image result for election dept singapore
The government draws the constituency boundaries, oppositions can then decide where to stand.  
The government defines cardboard collection as an exercise, you can choose not to join them.  
The government controls the number of beds in public hospitals, but you can go to private hospitals or JB for treatments.
Image result for upgrading in singapore politics
The government offers upgrading programs and you vote for them.
Image result for "The Government's general position has always been that foreign entities ... "Pink Dot SG started off first and foremost as a platform on which
Singapore domestic affairs is a closed economy, external market forces are not allowed in this monopoly.

#Photos from Internet

#For Market based Authoritarian Regime:

Thursday, 2 June 2016

新加坡的两面镜子:权力膨胀和权利克制

新加坡的两面镜子:权力膨胀和权利克制


人民行动党调教下的新加坡务实,权利的自我克制、自废武功,导致的结果是当权者的权力膨胀。最近发生的几件事情,尤其是从相片和录像中,我们就可以很清楚的看到这种现代文明的怪现象。

或许,我们已经变成惊弓之鸟,如果不是发生在自己身上,还是作为一个旁观者好些。依照行动党的规划和方式生活,也是一种选项,有些人还乐在其中,享受行动党所安排一切。

谁来监督权力膨胀

新加坡警方的权力,很可能比你想象中还要大,几乎可以说是大膨胀。而以下这些相片和录像,你很难在主流媒体中看到。

一句“arrestable offence”, 就可以无需搜查令进入屋内,带走个人物品。原来警方一接到选举局的投诉,就已经认定这是”serious breaches of the rules”#1, 想好下一步要什么做了。

#1http://www.straitstimes.com/politics/wp-concerned-about-police-investigations-into-online-posts-related-to-bukit-batok-by

选举局,警方和政府要这么想,一般人是无可奈何的。甚至,有人还鼓掌叫好。或许,有人认为这是选择性办案,但这是新加坡人务实的地方。也确实如此,这样的发展,当权者的权力才会在没有监管下,膨胀起来。尤其是在我们自我克制权利下,膨胀更快。

下面的报道,让我们看到务实选择的代价。当然,如果我们听话,我们就能享受看到别人不务实的后果。

police search teo

Roy NgerngYouTube)


自我矮化、克制权利:

新加坡宪法给予公民的权利,很多人不知道。即使知道,也尽量克制。国家的稳定最重要,个人牺牲是务实的选择。所以,我们选择放弃权利,而让政府更有权力。

singapore-reporters-without-borders-2016

第一个例子,当然就是新闻的自由度。目前新加坡的世界排名是第154。这个排名已经肯定告诉我们,我们的主流媒体的功用何在。事实上,不需要克制,不需要指导,主流媒体已经知道怎么做了。


第二个例子是有关法院。大法官说的很清楚,我们强调集体利益在个人利益之上。这种对法律法制和集体利益的信任是’舒服的并存‘。

(CJ Menon said Singapore's fidelity to the rule of law has "coexisted comfortably" with an emphasis on communitarian - involving dialogue, tolerance, compromise and placing the community before self - over individualist values.)

大法官在向美国人诠释新加坡法制时指出,最终分析,法制的强与弱取决于其他立法架构(政府)如何看司法。以及政府是否诚实,有能力,和独立的行动。

(The CJ said: "In the final analysis, the robustness of a nation's rule of law framework depends greatly on how the other branches view the judiciary and whether it, in turn, is able and willing to act honestly, competently and independently.")

美国最高法院,被认为是世界上权力最大的法院,因为它对美国宪法有诠释权。总统和国会也要尊重它的决定。听了新加坡大法官的这些发言,不知有何感想。

事实上,这篇报道的标题是:政府的承诺对法律法制尤为重要。(Commitment of Government critical for rule of law)
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/commitment-of-government-critical-for-rule-of-law-good-governance-chief

大法官的这些话,值得三思,回味无穷。谁来决定集体利益?谁能了解政府对司法的看法?

第三个例子,说出来都不好意思。我们大家都知道,就是说不出口。为什么我们只听到来自新加坡的好消息?(Why there is only good news from Singapore.)
onlygoodnews.png

这才是问题的所在。原来我们一直不敢说真话。因为大家都知道务实,也知道代价。

在回答为何国内外只有新加坡的好新闻时,这位新加坡政府投资公司前首席经济师说,我们一直在自我克制,不敢直言,因为代价太高。不论学术界,商界,还是其他行业,大家都“明哲保身”。

这位经济师形容这是历史上最成功的“以市场经济为主导的威权专制政体” (market based authoritarian regime)。 除非我们打破’这个政府只需要预定价格,其他人跟着服从的制度‘,不然,我们的命运就是如此这般 - 继续听着好消息。无奈的等待行动党对新加坡、新加坡人的命运安排。

权力膨胀和权利克制的结果

一方面当权者的权力不断的扩大,另一方面,国人对于本身的权利,却自愿放弃,自我克制,自己审查自己(不是PAP’s self checks 行动党自己审查自己).

这一比较,两者的距离有多大?悲剧发生的可能性无形中增加了。当然,对于行动党政府来说,这些都是个别事件,行为失当的结果,政府只是依法办公吧了。

当我们看下面的画面时,的确,看热闹的人很多,其中只有一个老外还多管闲事,多说了几句。

amos-yee-jurong-point

不幸事件,人命伤亡,也是可能发生。但是,这些可以避免的悲剧,可以减少的悲剧,在经济效益,在“以市场经济为主导的威权专制政体”背书下,似乎是无关痛痒的事情。

Teens may not know their legal rights  Teen death in Yishun raises issue  AsiaOne Singapore News.png
http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/teens-may-not-know-their-legal-rights-teen-death-yishun-raises-issue

在克制权利,放任权力膨胀的背景下,少数人的个人利益,必须在集体利益下被牺牲。大法官已经表明立场。因此,我们只能祈祷自己不是一个牺牲者。难怪人说:识时务者为俊杰。