Yesterday, PAP MP Tan Wu Meng was punched by an angry resident but Singaporeans have instead rallied behind the assailant. The incident interestingly united Singaporeans with many gloating at the PAP MP, saying that he deserved the punch. In fact, there was little sympathy for the PAP MP.
The response from Singaporeans is however not surprising, considering ground sentiments are increasingly bitter by the days. In recent months, money-grubbing tax increases and unreasonable security laws infringing privacy and freedom have came into effect.
As I mentioned before in my submission to the Select Committee, more censorship and laws oppressing the people will result in spontaneous attacks on civil servants and PAP MPs. Unprecedented riots, strikes, political vandalism and other criminal acts will emerge due to pent-up anger from the populace.
A PAP MP getting punched during his course of duty is supposedly unacceptable. However, one has to be reminded that PAP Tan Wu Meng voted yes for GST increase, Malay Presidency and new censorship laws. Does anyone deserve to be punched for these? The answer is subjective, depending the level of awareness one have over the more devastating effects of the PAP policies than being punched in the face. The new policies PAP MP Tan Wu Meng supported landed more people in poverty and dire straits, and it would be fair to believe he got away lightly with only a punch.
Should Singaporeans then be encouraged to engage in violent behaviour against PAP MPs? The answer, again is not a definite no. It is an observation in history that violence always become an outlet after peaceful methods are exhausted. As the Singapore dictatorship become more authoritarian, there will soon be no more legal method to express one’s desire for a regime change.
Singapore’s society will be expected to be more volatile, and spontaneous attacks will frequent if the government continues to tighten it’s grip.