My first reaction, when the Prime Minister announced a new ruling for the coming general elections—that there will be a ‘cooling off’ period of 24 hours before polling day, during which all campaigning must stop—was of great surprise, followed by a single thought: ‘Why, the PAP must be feeling very insecure!’

And then, like everyone else who didn’t quite believe the reason given, namely that it was for the general public good, allowing for a calm, rational approach to the serious responsibility of voting, I tried to analyse the situation for a more plausible explanation.

My analysis went thus:

1. the decision must have been driven purely by self-interest, as indeed, would be expected of any policy decision by any political party during election time.
2. The motive of self-interest means that the PAP is convinced that the new ruling will give it a clear advantage at the polls, that is, more Singaporeans will vote for the PAP than if there were no ruling.
3. Since ‘cooling off’ can only refer to emotions, there must be the PAP fear that the wildly enthusiastic display of emotion by the large crowds at the opposition rallies during past elections is likely to be exploited to the hilt by the political rivals in this coming one. It will build up to a climax at the end and may substantially affect the voting, to the PAP’s disadvantage. Hence it must be prevented in some way (without antagonizing the people too much)
4. The emotional approach, though it has its uses in an election, is one completely alien to the PAP leadership that has always prided itself on its rational approach, solidly backed up by figures and charts showing its many achievements, and by constant reminders to the people that only the PAP can give them the good life, the ultimate proof being the unfailing re-election of the party over forty years. Indeed, the PAP has always scorned the display of unruly emotion systematically exploited by charismatic demagogues, citing examples seen in many countries. This stance is an essential part of the no-nonsense, hard-headed, pragmatic PAP model of governance best exemplified in its founder Mr Lee Kuan Yew.
5. Despite their distrust of emotion, the PAP realizes that in the coming elections, it could play a part big enough to become the rogue factor in the political equation. For the electorate this time will include a large number of new, young voters who belong to the noisy, rambunctious world of the Internet where strong feeling rather than cool reason predominates. There is no doubt that the opposition will make opportunistic use of this new force.
6. Since the PAP could never adopt the ‘If you can’t beat them, join them’, strategy of using the same emotional approach, the only way is to reduce its impact especially at the point where it is expected to be maximal, that is, just before polling day itself. Hence the imposition of the 24-hour clampdown.

I was surprised that a shrewd leadership like the PAP could come up with a ruling that 1) is of doubtful value to themselves and could even backfire 2) exposes an anxiety that could provide political fodder for the opposition and 3) exposes an insecurity that must make even its supporters wonder about how strong, after more than forty years of leadership, the bond between the government and the people really is.

---

About Vignettes...

A continuing flow of little, readable pieces that will constitute what I feel is an important 'legacy of values' to leave behind. Read more about Vignettes...