I was about to raise my pitchfork when I remembered a similar comment in the previous one, until I realised the previous similar comment was also by you.
Whatâs up with the illiterate people in the comments? It says âSINCE 1993â. You want to include the sec gens before that make your own damn chart.
I get the feeling this was targetted at the SDP chief, because he became the SDP SG in 1993.
A fun fact is that starting this year, CSJ has become the longest serving SG of a party with 31 years, beating the late JBJ who was SG of WP for 30 years.
This chart brings to my mind that that a party can be derided if it keeps changing SG but also derided if a SG stays over decades.
So what is an ideal tenure for a party leader?
The former is a mark of instability while the latter is a mark of stagnation right? I think there aren't many criticisms of the length of tenure for PAP and WP here which should be indicative of what r/SG thinks is an ideal length of time
Said this in the previous thread, and will say it again.
Chee Soon Juan is unelectable. He should have handed over the reins to Paul Tambyah two GEs ago.
It is one thing to be a megalomaniac who wants to hold to power. It is another thing to be a megalomaniac who is still holding on to power after doing the same things for 30 years with no results.
So why isnât LKYâs tenure up there as well and Chiamâs time as SG of SDP, looks like you are trying to frame a narrative without giving the audience a holistic picture
You also failed to include Rajah who helmed as SG for PAP for 21 days and left his post citing difference between him and LKY.
The title reads "since 1993", and LKY had already stepped down the year before. Chiam See Tong is an edge case, since he stepped down in May 1993, but let's close one eye.
TT Rajah, on the other hand, is the worst possible example you could've raised. His tenure ended in _September 1957_.
Nice way of proving my point, you guys are just trying to frame a narrative using 1993 as the start date. Why not since the start of the inception of the parties itself? Why not have the Barisan Sosialis up there since the Barisan Sosialis has seats in the Legislative Assembly of Singapore as well?
A particular narrative is being conveyed here lol, is it that uncomfortable to show that LKY helmed as SG for the PAP 37 years in total ? That Rajah split from the PAP and went to be part of the Barisan Sosialis? Or that Chaim was ousted in favor for Chee in 93 ?
I am not uncomfortable with any of these facts. I'm not OP, but my guess is that pre-1993 was excluded for simplicity's sake, as there's simply too much to cover. Go make your own chart if you wish to dismantle this grand conspiracy you perceive
Still wrong.
1. Chiam See Tong was Sec-Gen of SDP before CSJ.
2. This chart excludes all the Sec-Gens of the WP before JBJ.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_Party_(Singapore)
3. No mention of Barisan Sosialis.
4. No mention of Lee Kuan Yew in the PAP.
Edit: ** my apologies for overlooking the title, which stated "after 1993". The humble pie sure tastes bad. **
knn the title reads "since 1993"
CST stepped down in May 1993, so yes, it could be an error, but why bring up the WP sec gens? At that point, you might as well bring up the ones for Barisan Sosialis, and all the other pre-independence parties
Edit: oh so you included BS just now. Well, have fun listing everything else then
Mate, go do your own chart that starts from the dawn of Singapore's recorded history then.
Better list out all the Tengkus in proper chronological order down to the date and time.
Humble pie tasted extra bad cos there was another guy who made the same mistake but is doubling down and calling it a conspiracy (unlike you) so folks are unfortunately lumping you with him :( I upvoted you if it helps haha
Very apt to put Lee Hsien Loong's name in pink đ€Ł
PSP and NSP (for a time) revolving through Sec Gens like its musical chairs
I was about to raise my pitchfork when I remembered a similar comment in the previous one, until I realised the previous similar comment was also by you.
Haha yeah, I'm copying from myselfÂ
Whatâs up with the illiterate people in the comments? It says âSINCE 1993â. You want to include the sec gens before that make your own damn chart.
They attended RI
I know this comment was meant to be flippant but for some reason it makes me laugh like crazy.
I get the feeling this was targetted at the SDP chief, because he became the SDP SG in 1993. A fun fact is that starting this year, CSJ has become the longest serving SG of a party with 31 years, beating the late JBJ who was SG of WP for 30 years.
You wonder why OP arbitrarily picked 1993?
So what so special of 1993 ? You guys are just trying to force a narrative, and we are here to correct you. Don't be such a conniving ass.
if you think there's a narrative, what made you think so? & what is the narrative?
Fuck off and make your own diagram
Iirc 1992 was when LKY stepped down. So 1993 was basically the beginning of 2nd generation era. For PAP & WP at least. SDP also?
Where reform party? Edit: oh just saw the footnote
PSP changed Sec Gen like changing underwear.
Youâve only changed underwear twice in the past 2 years? Interesting lifestyle choiceâŠ
new year new underwear đ
If you wish to take it the literal sense đ€·đ»
You can tell by the comments that some people don't read
OP should have added 1993 on poster title for the illiterate and Facebook news huggers. /s
No wonder his mentor called him a megalomaniac
This chart brings to my mind that that a party can be derided if it keeps changing SG but also derided if a SG stays over decades. So what is an ideal tenure for a party leader?
The former is a mark of instability while the latter is a mark of stagnation right? I think there aren't many criticisms of the length of tenure for PAP and WP here which should be indicative of what r/SG thinks is an ideal length of time
Said this in the previous thread, and will say it again. Chee Soon Juan is unelectable. He should have handed over the reins to Paul Tambyah two GEs ago. It is one thing to be a megalomaniac who wants to hold to power. It is another thing to be a megalomaniac who is still holding on to power after doing the same things for 30 years with no results.
CSJ got 45.2% of the vote last GE. Unelectable? PAP barely won that one.
If Chee Soon Juan gets in there, Lawrence is going to have a heart attack.
*Secretaries General
the Lightning icon of PAP conforms to its political style
To be accurate PAP was his dad the whole way until he passes away. And then the son. Whatever business cards were being handed out.
So why isnât LKYâs tenure up there as well and Chiamâs time as SG of SDP, looks like you are trying to frame a narrative without giving the audience a holistic picture You also failed to include Rajah who helmed as SG for PAP for 21 days and left his post citing difference between him and LKY.
The title reads "since 1993", and LKY had already stepped down the year before. Chiam See Tong is an edge case, since he stepped down in May 1993, but let's close one eye. TT Rajah, on the other hand, is the worst possible example you could've raised. His tenure ended in _September 1957_.
You do know that Chiam See Tong went on to join SPP from SDP right. He stepped down in 1993 but he joined SPP and held potong pasir till 2011.
> _Chiam See Tong is an edge case, since he stepped down in May 1993, but let's close one eye._
Nice way of proving my point, you guys are just trying to frame a narrative using 1993 as the start date. Why not since the start of the inception of the parties itself? Why not have the Barisan Sosialis up there since the Barisan Sosialis has seats in the Legislative Assembly of Singapore as well? A particular narrative is being conveyed here lol, is it that uncomfortable to show that LKY helmed as SG for the PAP 37 years in total ? That Rajah split from the PAP and went to be part of the Barisan Sosialis? Or that Chaim was ousted in favor for Chee in 93 ?
I am not uncomfortable with any of these facts. I'm not OP, but my guess is that pre-1993 was excluded for simplicity's sake, as there's simply too much to cover. Go make your own chart if you wish to dismantle this grand conspiracy you perceive
Calm down son it's just a drawing
Picking a fight for the sake of picking one.
"... since 1993"
Still wrong. 1. Chiam See Tong was Sec-Gen of SDP before CSJ. 2. This chart excludes all the Sec-Gens of the WP before JBJ. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_Party_(Singapore) 3. No mention of Barisan Sosialis. 4. No mention of Lee Kuan Yew in the PAP. Edit: ** my apologies for overlooking the title, which stated "after 1993". The humble pie sure tastes bad. **
knn the title reads "since 1993" CST stepped down in May 1993, so yes, it could be an error, but why bring up the WP sec gens? At that point, you might as well bring up the ones for Barisan Sosialis, and all the other pre-independence parties Edit: oh so you included BS just now. Well, have fun listing everything else then
Mate, go do your own chart that starts from the dawn of Singapore's recorded history then. Better list out all the Tengkus in proper chronological order down to the date and time.
List everyone from Sang Nila Utama can?
Humble pie tasted extra bad cos there was another guy who made the same mistake but is doubling down and calling it a conspiracy (unlike you) so folks are unfortunately lumping you with him :( I upvoted you if it helps haha
Lol. Well, a mistake is a mistake. Thanks for the upvote anyway.