Yesterday, I posted this Maybe to “Save S’pore Fund” but No to Lim Tean getting involved and said I’d explain later why the fund won’t raise any money.
Here’s why.
Recently, the Economist reminded readers of Dr Johnson’s response when Boswell asked whether the Giant’s Causeway in Northern Ireland was worth seeing, he replied: “Worth seeing, yes; but not worth going to see.”
Translated into the context of funding a “Save S’pore Fund” to defeat the PAP this means
Worth having effective Oppo, yes; but not worth paying for.
This is the attitude most anti-PAP types* take going by how poorly funded the Oppo parties are.
Johnson’s “Worth seeing, yes; but not worth going to see,” also explains why TOC, TRE and The “Idiots” all have grateful, happy cybernut readers who are unwilling to pay to keep these publications going:
Worth reading, yes; but not worth paying to read.
Seriously, this is the attitude that S’poreans have towards online media in general, be it pro PAP, anti-PAP or anything in between.
Yes, yes: all this is a round about way of saying what Chris Kuan and abc say, “S’poreans are a bunch of cheap skates who deserve the PAP.”
*Especially in case the PAP really loses power. Let’s face it, the rabid anti-PAP types, especially the nutty ones define their very existence by their anti-PAPness. If PAP loses, they will have nothing to live for.
Thoughts of a Cynical Investor 