Alternative Elite: Can they exist?

Sometime back, Gerald wrote an interesting article that discusses the need to have an alternative elite, echoing the view posed by a former civil servant, Ngiam Tong How (who I came across his book recently in a friend's office and flipped through a few pages). This notion of alternative elite has bugged me for some time because there is a notion that our society will have lots of difficulty in working towards a society where we can accommodate the views of the different social classes. While I appreciate Gerald's argument that the existence of alternative elite is to provide checks and balance to the ruling government, I want to present several arguments for and against the idea of an alternative elite, and hopes to extend the implications to the growth of our society in general.

If you are cynical, there is no such thing as equality for a society, otherwise communism will have worked many years ago in Soviet Union. The capitalist society seems to be the optimal (and not necessary the best) solution for different nations. In Singapore, other than being a capitalistic society, we have the ruling elites who take on many roles and responsibilities for our governance and growth of the economy in general. So, the unfortunate reality in a capitalist society is that there will exist inequality within society, and there will be forever the war of the classes, between the working class and the elites. The question is how both the ruling elite can find the balance to appease the working class.

The term "alternative elite" has been proposed as a solution to the current sorry state of Singapore politics. Its existence seeks to provide checks and balances to the present system and offers a forum for different people to voice their views. In Gerald's final remarks on alternative elite, he made this interesting point, "Singapore is co-opted to be part of the ruling party's machinery, whether as PAP politicians, NMPs, ambassadors or civil servant-scholars. needs an "alternative elite" that is prepared and ready to take over should the "starters" falter. This alternative elite need not reside in the Opposition parties (for now), but it is not healthy to continue this situation whereby almost every high-powered critic of the government — including CEOs, top academics and even popular bloggers ..."  So, this is where the notion of alternative elite becomes a double edged sword. I am going to assume that there are two possible groups of alternative elite: either they are in the opposition or just a group of accomplished people.

Let's start with the premise that the alternative elite exists within the opposition. If that is the case and someday the opposition comes to power, the situation will be the same. If you are the party in power, other than serving your own constituents, your other task is to consolidate power and have the mandate to make decisions to steer the interests of your country ahead. To consolidate power, you need to ensure that you have the major pool of talent. So, the unfortunate slippery slope argument is to say that they end up in the same situation like the present ruling elite of Singapore. Does that sound familiar? Do remember, the ruling party is also once an alternative elite in the old times. Perhaps, you cannot use alternative elite in this case, because in most situations, it is just a matter of contest between political parties to win the mandate to govern the country.

If I go with Gerald's definition, there is another problem. Even if the alternative elite is not part of the machinery, they will stand out more as individuals rather than able to have the ability to exercise checks and balances as a group. Here's the way to see this: if you are part of this alternative elite (CEOs, top academics, NMPs, popular bloggers), the moment you form a group, in essence you are already forming a political party. So, with a political party, you will end up in the same situation like the opposition. So, how do we conduct checks and balances if the group of non-partisan elites do not have the ability to exercise some form of group think or present some form of challenge to the ruling class?

Even as I spell out a very cynical or bleak view about the existence of alternative elite, the contest for talent still exists. My view is that the alternative elite argument only works if this group of people are already in the opposition parties. So if Mr Ngiam is so concerned about this issue, he should have gone into politics. But he did not. That's unfortunate but sadly true, because the legality to conduct checks and balances is through the parliament. However, there are implications to the whole of society. The notion of alternative elite do suggest that there must exist another fraternity such that they can work out a new social contract with the working class. Would it be better if that social contract can help to raise more people from the working class into the middle class?

Comments

[NoName]

Seemingly monolithic entities like the old soviet\chinese communist parties have factions. Even ancient emperors rarely have absolute power and then not for very long.

Singapore is hardly special. Equilibrium is the natural(optimal) state. Balance of power has proven itself to be the best "long term" solution.

There is always be an "alternative elite" ... if my beloved Singapore can survive the final years of the undying Father.

[Andrew]

Hi guys,

Allow me to jump in here.

I feel that opposition politics is still a rather 'scary' undertaking for most singaporeans, and especially for those with 'much to lose'. (Heck, even the PAP have problems finding new candidates at each elections.)

This being so, the situation is that even if some non-PAP elites feel the PAP is doing wrong, they'd rather keep quiet - and perhaps plan a getaway, ie emigrate, to another place. What would hold them here, anyway?

Thus, I agree with Ned that at the end of the day, it is the ordinary singaporean who must stand up. It is, when all is said and done, the ordinary people who will ensure that the country does not go down the drain, so to speak.

It is the ordinary folks who will ensure that the integrity of our institutions are not compromised.

I think at some point in our history, we have been schooled into thinking (and accepting) that only elites can run the country. Although I do not disagree that we do need people with brains, I am also of the view that ordinary folks do have and can have a part to play.

But sadly, in Singapore, even the presidency is beyond the reach of ordinary folks. You'd have to be an 'elite' to become president.

Point is, how does that inspire the average singaporean in wanting to do something for the country?

Perhaps what we need is not an alternative elite - but an alternative way of seeing things, a change in perspective - where ordinary folks can be inspired to stand up and be counted.

That, I feel, would stand us in better stead than 82 selected elites in parliament.

So, what I am saying is empowerment of the ordinary folks. (Funny how we never hear this word spoken by the PAP, huh?)

Just my view.

Regards,
Andrew

[Ned Stark]

Bernard and Gerald,

If you are considered young punks, then what does that make some other bloggers? Gin nah :P?

Regarding your post, i think what will make the alternative elite an effective check which will not entrench itself once it gains power is the people. And so at the end it boils down to creating awareness among people so that they will start to get the idea that voting is more than an off day, that they do have the ability to determine how effective an "alternative elite" would be. David Marshall was said to have managed to get the common man interested in politics in the past. While it is important that there are people who will stand up, there also needs be people who will stand up for those who stand up. And that is what is missing today.

[Bernard Leong]

Hi Gerald,

Thanks for dropping by. Yes, you are spot on with the point that my central thesis is on the alternative elite being effective rather than just being an alternative.

If you look at the history of civil society organizations and independent non-government think-tanks, most of the members in those groups have all ended up in politics. My argument is that they are not as effective as those we see in the US and UK because they have lack of information.

That is not to say that all civil society organizations are not doing well. I would say that the environmentalists, the bloggers, the media socialists and the technologists have been effective in some sense as alternative elite when it comes to issues concerning them. However, on the economy, given how much we do not know about Temasek or GIC, and very few checks and balances on EDB (which we now know have some audit issues) and other organizations, it is hard for the alternative elite to be effective.

As I am making this argument, I am beginning to realize why most of them in this group ended up as politicians. It is because they can have access to the information which they so desire. :)

[Gerald]

Hi Bernard,

Thanks for your commentary on my article. If I understand your argument correctly, you meant to say that any effective "alternative elite" has to either be part of an "alternative elite group" (whether oppo party or activist group) in order to be an effective counter balance to the PAP.

I agree with you that the best way to counter-balance the PAP is to join the Opposition and get elected to Parliament. Even our dear PM has said he cannot handle more than 10 opposition MPs in Parliament.

However not everyone is inclined towards partisan politics. Civil society organisations and independent non-govt think tanks should be a viable alternative. Currently we have very few such organisations.

At the very least, our high-achievers should remain independent and not always gravitate towards being PAP yes men the higher up in society they go.

Just to put things into perspective: If you read all the alternative intellectual viewpoints on local blogs, newspaper forum pages, magazines like Lexean, how many of them come from distinguished senior members of our society? Very few. Most alternative viewpoints come from young punks like you and me who are not afraid of being told how dumb our arguments are.

Our society's elites are so comfortable in their MIW world they don't want to open their mouth to say anything remotely critical of the govt in public. Ultimately there will be a degree of idealism and sacrifice needed. Perhaps Singaporeans are not ready to make that sacrifice yet.