I wrote this on my Facebook and thought to share it here.
If we think philosophically about things, in a country, is anyone person better than the other person? How should we judge someone as better? By education level, academic intelligence, or can we? If we can agree that it is not possible to determine who is better than the other, can we say that everyone is equal, or equally as good?
Then, when we look at the wealth generated by a country, if everyone is equally as good, should we not ensure that the wealth that is earned by each individual is as equitably allocated as possible? Sure, some individuals might be more entrepreneurial than another, or better at picking up on wealth-making opportunities and so we should allow them, because everyone is equally as good.
Similarly, there are people who do not believe in picking up more wealth but who want to advance society socially or in terms of its welfare and these individuals should also be equally respected, for everyone is equally as good.
The purpose of money is, at its minimum, to facilitate the transfer of basic essentials to people. But if money is used by those who control it to limit the access of people for these basic essentials, then how can the system be changed to protect people’s access to money and thereby their access to basic essentials?
Where individuals or groups of people come together and take control of power and start hoarding the wealth at the expense of others, is there a responsibility by the other individuals in society to call out such behaviour and ensure that wealth is more equitably allocated?
Where people enrich themselves by hoarding the wealth, it would result in certain segments of society receiving less, and thereby creating a pool of poor in the country.
However, where the people who hoard the wealth hope to justify their riches and thus blame the poor for being less smart or less hardworking, is it fair? If we have decided that no one is better than the other and everyone is equally as good in their own ways, by coming out with reasons to demean people so as to keep them poor, are we coming out with unreasonable excuses so as to hoard the wealth?
It is thus the responsibility of a government to ensure that it has the philosophical understanding of its role and to ensure that it enshrines the equal goodness of its citizens, for is it not that the Singaporean society is based on justice and equality?
If so, a government has to fortify itself from business-centric interests and prioritise its citizens access to wealth and essential services first and foremost.
Where we believe that everyone is equally as good and will thus be able to achieve their fullest potential if we are to respect their individual capabilities, then we have to ensure that each and everyone of us have equitable access of wealth, to advance our personal well-being and talent and thereby grow the country together.
To do so, we have to limit and constraint those who go into positions of power to expand their control and hoard over wealth. Citizens also have to organise themselves and develop ourselves as formidable counterforces to such power so that balance in society can be reached, and where the good of each citizen can be equally enshrined.
It is the case in Singapore where as those in power continue to hoard more and more wealth, that they have demonised the poor and even elderly poor more and more. From a society which used to have greater respect of one another, and where everyone was treated more equally, our society is at risk of losing the balance we used to have, and which had created the dynamism that we had.
For Singapore to be put back on track, we have to dismantle the centres of power and control, and decentralise these, such that balance, and equality, can be brought back to Singapore once again, and so that equality can be the modus operandi in Singapore once again.
When we are able to vote in a new government and where the citizens of Singapore are able to regain our power and balance equation, we can put our country back on the right track.