The Dartmouth Observer |
|
|
Commentary on politics, history, culture, and literature by two Dartmouth graduates and their buddies
WHO WE ARE Chien Wen Kung graduated from Dartmouth College in 2004 and majored in History and English. He is currently a civil servant in Singapore. Someday, he hopes to pursue a PhD in History. John Stevenson graduated from Dartmouth College in 2005 with a BA in Government and War and Peace Studies. He is currently a PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of Chicago. He hopes to pursue a career in teaching and research. Kwame A. Holmes did not graduate from Dartmouth. However, after graduating from Florida A+M University in 2003, he began a doctorate in history at the University of Illinois--Urbana Champaign. Having moved to Chicago to write a dissertation on Black-Gay-Urban life in Washington D.C., he attached himself to the leg of John Stevenson and is thrilled to sporadically blog on the Dartmouth Observer. Feel free to email him comments, criticisms, spelling/grammar suggestions. BLOGS/WEBSITES WE READ The American Scene Arts & Letters Daily Agenda Gap Stephen Bainbridge Jack Balkin Becker and Posner Belgravia Dispatch Black Prof The Corner Demosthenes Daniel Drezner Five Rupees Free Dartmouth Galley Slaves Instapundit Mickey Kaus The Little Green Blog Left2Right Joe Malchow Josh Marshall OxBlog Bradford Plumer Political Theory Daily Info Andrew Samwick Right Reason Andrew Seal Andrew Sullivan Supreme Court Blog Tapped Tech Central Station UChicago Law Faculty Blog Volokh Conspiracy Washington Monthly Winds of Change Matthew Yglesias ARCHIVES BOOKS WE'RE READING CW's Books John's Books STUFF Site Feed    |
Saturday, November 08, 2003
Random post on non-American politics Hi again. I haven't been here in a while. I should be writing a Donne paper for my English freshman seminar (it may be Donne but I still have to Do it) but I'm pointedly distracting myself. -- Excerpt from transcript of BBC HARDtalk interview with PM Goh Chok Tong, aired September 23, 2003 (BBC's Tim Sebastian): "(Human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson) says one of the great ironies is how Singapore's Internal Security Directorate concentrates on prosecuting liberals instead of worrying about the people who are running unlawful arms and explosive shipments which would cost hundreds of lives in the region." Mr Goh: "No, that's not so. The Internal Security Act has not been used against the liberals. I mean, you have so many of them running around in Singapore. They are free to air their views. They are not persecuted." Mr Sebastian: "They are not free to air every view that they want, are they?" Mr Goh: "No. They are (free)." Mr Sebastian: "You need to get a police permit for more than five people to assemble." Mr Goh: "Within the law, within the law, yes, you have to do that." Mr Sebastian: "And the permits are often turned down." Mr Goh: "Yes." Mr Sebastian: "Aren't they?" Mr Goh: "Yes." Mr Sebastian: "So that's not exactly freedom of expression, is it?" Mr Goh: "No. That's freedom because it depends on your definition. In our case, the laws have been there all the time and it is for the parties concerned to change the laws if they win the elections. So they've got to convince the people that we are wrong and they are right." -- I spy with my little eye a tiny difficulty in that last sentence. It's a lot harder than PM Goh makes it sound, to 'convince the people that (the PAP is) wrong and (the opposition is) right'. Particularly if you as an opposition party are not allowed to assemble with more than five people in a public place. What other (cheap easy speedy) means do you have of convincing the populace at large? |