The PAP has an aging 'mentor' whose son is the Prime Minister. While the DAP has an ageing 'mentor' also, whose son is a Chief Minister. But this is not the similarity we are concerned with.
What we find disturbing, is the autocratic nature of both these parties.
The PAP, in Singapore, stifles every freedom to perpetuate its rule.
The DAP, on the other hand, claims to support every freedom, yet behaves in precisely the opposite fashion.
Within the DAP, the culture of autocracy runs deep. Their office-bearers are not elected by all members, but by chosen delegates. This makes a poor excuse for a democratic party. In the decades that they have gone around with 'Democratic' in their name, they have never thought to correct this incrongruity. And in democratic implausibility, for decades, one man has been the leader of the DAP, in various different guises. As long, we sadly note, as the demented Mr.Gaddafi. And they both, it appears, would like to hand over the mantle of leadership to their sons.
In the case of Kampung Buah Pala, an Indian village in Penang, they engaged in some terribly tyrannical arm-twisting to get the helpless villagers to accept their terms. Those who stood firm were told they would get nothing. The really ugly part of this incident, to call a spade a spade, is that they would never have dared to do such things or be so cavalier, if it it was a Chinese village they were dealing with. Political calculation, and expedience, is all that matters to the DAP, with Principle reduced to merely a useful vote-getting tool.
The latest example of the DAP's intolerance, and which rankles us to the bone, is a case of animal cruelty involving two junior, callous DAP representatives, Ean Yong and Teo Nie Ching. They held a press conference in the DAP office where they stopped NGO's present from asking questions, in order to protect the monstrous animal-abuser they had chosen to give refuge to.
Upon being criticised, they labelled long-standing Animal Rights Activists, who over a period of many years had fought many an abuse case, often against BN agencies, as being 'politically motivated'. Ironic, coming from politicians who had used official party offices to promote the perpetrator of a vicious crime. If anybody is politically-motivated, it is Ean Yong and Teo Nie Ching, and now, by its unprincipled silence, the DAP.
Animal rights group who attempted to deliver a memorandum on the matter to Mr.Lim Guan Eng on the 12th, were met with deliberately locked doors and switched off lights, despite being told that their memorandum would be received. The DAP will brook, it seems, no criticism.
Yet they are a Pakatan component party, and claim to support the values of Justice and Humane Values. But so gross and unconscionable is the DAP's betrayal of humane values, that they only have to open their hypocritical mouths on any issue of humane values, to set us off.
Despite our unreserved support for the ideal of a two-party state, we are not at all sure anymore that the DAP belongs in Pakatan.
Update : We came upon this article by Mr.Kua Kia Soong titled "Does the DAP know why caged birds sing". Again, the DAP exhibits callousness.
http://malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=8946:does-the-dap-know-why-caged-birds-sing?&Itemid=2
Thank You.
ReplyDeleteReading the pro-DAP commentators on other sites is enough to make you anti-DAP forever.
And thanks for bringing up the KBP incident. That was when most got their first dose of the new DAP ala Lim Jr. What a con job.