Recently, I’ve noticed two distinct camps on social media. Those defending the government voraciously while ravenously attacking the opposition vs. those attacking the government aggressively while enthusiastically defending any form of opposition.
My personal preference is moderation. Regardless of the good that we think the government has done, e.g. nation-building, low crime rate, etc. (the former camp) or the shortcomings, e.g. overcrowding, cost of living (the latter camp), I prefer not to take camps and instead objectively think and politely engage.
I say this because, as a born-Singaporean, if I question (not even criticise) government policies, I run the risk of being labelled “ungrateful.” If I defend government policy, I run the risk of being labelled a “brainwashed minion”.
In this environment, civil discourse can often become difficult.
I’d prefer to take ideologies and partisan sentiments out of the equation and discuss the issues objectively. Then, whomever is to be taken to task, should be alerted. If the majority are not happy, there is the election process. (OK, I admit GRC makes the democratic process a little challenging).
I’d like to have a civil discourse without the flaming. Admittedly, I’m a bit of a wimp but I’m guessing more people with become engaged in a tempered environment.