Why Singapore “meritocracy” isn’t meritocracy
September 30th, 2009 | 
Author: By Abdul Gafoor, Social Correspondent
Singapore is a strange country where everything suggested, which is contrary what the government, politicians and policy makers claim, has to be “substantiated with evidence” even though the same government, politicians and policy makers are not required to substantiate their claims with any evidence. No other country has such an idiosyncratic attitude which was introduced by Lee Kuan Yew given his background as a lawyer. He tries to make the country a court room where the rules apply to everyone except government, politicians and policy makers.
The claim that meritocracy exists is one of the various notions that PAP has successfully marketed to the people even without having gone the length to ever proving it actually exists. Other such successes include Singapore being a developed country, education system being one of the best in the world etc. However PAP has had its fair share of failures in some of its baseless claims such as in eugenics where in order to produce smart kids, graduate men should marry graduate women.
The reason why many Singaporeans want to accept this baseless claim that meritocracy exists instead of rejecting is because they are afraid to deal with the factual situation where meritocracy does not exists.
The majority Chinese are afraid that they will fall into the shallowness as the majority Malays of Malaysia. The minority Singaporean leaders are afraid that they have not responded to a situation for fifty years where their bright and smart have been sidelined.
The minority Singaporean masses are afraid to even imagine they may have been systematically marginalized in last five decades because it shatters their crystal image of their state. Furthermore since they are clueless of how to respond they rather imagine it does not exist pretty much like how a person at health risk refuses to go for a screening test because they are not sure how to cope if they are diagnosed with a condition.
I have talked to so many academics, writers and thinkers around the world and everyone tend to point out to two characteristic in Singapore which will never allow meritocracy to exist.
Firstly income inequalities across the ethnic groups. Most Singaporeans even policy makers do not seem to understand what this means. Income inequalities across the ethnic groups does not mean a Chinese, a Malay, a Tamil and an Eurasian are earning not the same dollar as lame cynical Singaporean critics will foolishly claim.
Income inequalities across ethnic groups mean, the difference in incomes across ethnic groups is too large and significant. This is too visible and obvious to deny. Given this reality, meritocracy cannot exist even if you say the highest marks get the scholarship blah blah. You will have to level the playing field before you let them compete.
With the perverse income inequalities, the minorities will not be able to achieve equivalent or better successes than Chinese masses in examinations and job interviews even though they may have the capacity and potential.
What many Singaporeans tend to naively say is that because the minorities do not achieve as much, that is why their representations in ministries, scholarships etc etc are lower than their population proportions and they claim therefore their “meritocratic” system based on “scores and results” qualify as meritocracy.
This then brings to the second reason why meritocracy cannot be existing in Singapore. The way Singapore implements meritocracy is invalid. You cannot use past “scores and results” which is the main method in Singapore used to award scholarships, jobs etc. What you instead require is past, present and future performance because meritocracy is supposed to be based on potential not past achievements.
What someone achieves in the past indeed shows his potential but what someone does not achieve in the past does not show his potential. Therefore assessments have to be based on potential and for that past performance alone cannot be used. Secondly the proper assessments must be used for to evaluate a person for the job or scholarship.
In Singapore a government scholar typically gets to become a senior military officer or police officer not because he is brilliant in military work or police work but because he scored high marks in GCE O and A level examinations and managed to complete his degree on scholarship and survived through the fast tracked career. That is not meritocracy.
Singapore employers are also extremely subjective when assessing employees. I have seen far too many non-Chinese friends applying to banks only to be rejected. The reasons the employers give are that these friends do not have relevant experience if they are crossing over from say engineering industry. However many (a large number) of Chinese friends who were formerly working as engineers have crossed over into banking industry within the same banks and same departments which rejected those non-Chinese friends.
I also have seen non-Chinese friends with business and finance degrees not even getting interviews whereas their Chinese classmates do. Almost all my non-Chinese friends from JC who got straight As in GCE A Levels are now working as teachers as they could not find employment in the industry for which they were trained for. Likewise I have seen so many non-Chinese friends who have migrated being able to secure jobs in banks which in Singapore rejected them, in industries which in Singapore also rejected them.
What is clear is employers are not giving fair and equal opportunities to minorities in Singapore. What is also clear is that assessment and evaluation of candidates for scholarship and jobs in Singapore is not consistent. Race is a factor.
For many years, there have been calls to set up a labour laws and labour courts to address this just like in any developed and civilized country. Every PAP labour minister over last 50 years have refused. The fact they refused only shows they know the above problems exists and that they are not confident in tackling them.
Singaporean politicians, policy makers and ordinary people refuse to acknowledge these realities and instead insist on imagining Singapore offers a level playing field for all races. The problem is they fail to realize they are unnecessarily creating instabilities into the country with this. A small country like Singapore despite its size does have the capacity to offer sufficient opportunities to everyone in education and jobs.
Having a kiasu attitude and creating unleveled playing fields and believing the whole system functions as a meritocracy only makes Singapore an unsafe place because social unrest will eventually be the natural outcome as proven in so many cases around the world in just the history of the last 100 years.
Part of the problem is fueled by Malaysian Chinese who want to create an impression that what exists in Malaysia does not exist in Singapore. The forms of the problems that exist in the two strange twin countries maybe different but essentially they are the same. They are two sides of the same coin.
What change is required basically in Singapore or even in Malaysia is a leveled playing field for everyone. The governments will have to work towards eliminating income inequalities across the ethnic groups.
Opportunities for education need to be created such that dreams and potential be the criteria for selection. Opportunities also need to be created for promising students who are caught in the storms and shortcomings of their family backgrounds. These opportunities should be available, accessible, universal and abundant such that should any student with potential can reach and attain them easily. Sometimes opportunities should be extended to test to even identify where the brightest and smartest are.
In terms of employment same criteria for evaluations need to be put in place. The culture of rewarding and measuring a person through relationships should be stopped. Instead workplace should be about performance and potential. Legal safeguards must be put in place to make every employer a fair and equal opportunity employer.
Courts must be there to strike fear in those employers who want to select one over the other based on instincts, relationships and subjective evaluations. None of solutions I have said is utopian. They basically are the realities that exist in the developed and civilized world.
About the Author:
Abdul Gafoor is a researcher based in the United Kingdom
Posted in 
I assume Malaysia is a Level Playing Field for all its citizens and PRs regardless of race.
If so, I have a choice for migration.
wah , so many zeroes!
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
Abdul Gafoor is a researcher based in the United Kingdom.
You education attainment must be pretty inferior if you can even analyse and conpare.
You can fool some but not all.
Singapore’s just a MICROCOSM.
Look at China, Taiwan & HK on one hand and Indonesia, Malaysia (Malays) and the Indian sub-continent on the other.
It cannot be clearer than that. Right?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Well if Singapore’s meritocracy isn’t meritocracy, then maybe Singapore shd emulate –
(1) Malaysia’s majority NEP or
(2) India’s caste system.
so that their minorities won’t be uprooting and applying in droves to become Singaporean. Btw, not vice-versa. Very telling, right?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Malaysia is not a level playing field true…to chinese..and other minorities…
Singapore is also not a level playing field true too…to malays..and other minorities…
the current thinking is of the guys who went thru NS…and once pass thru it…many of us are no longer chinese, indian, malay or whatever color or blood or religion…we are all singaporeans and we are equal in each of our eyes respectfully…
LKY never serve NS [unless you count the time he help out the japanese during the occupation of singapore during WWII]…His son went thru NS via special white elephant route…
So?
I have more respect for my fellow brothers and sisters [those who choose to become regulars as a career] as they really went thru all suffer the same kinda of route in NS…
I guess i understand why the malays in malaysia worried about their minorities…those who run to singapore actually show their true colors…
So be very careful what you say…
people may just mention racism is involved.
Rationale is as rational does.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
confucius
i was about to go swimming liao then i read your post. huh? why is it that if singapore’s meritocracy isn’t meritocracy then they should emulate these two systems?
that singapore provides a comparatively better system that attracts them here doesn’t mean that it is a meritocracy.
imagine you want have a choice of living in two houses.
house 1 has no windows. house two has one window. of course, all these being the same, you would want to live in house two.
but if we want to judge if house two has proper ventilation, is the fact that it is superior to house 1 a consideration in judgment, or should we appeal to the criteria of what determines proper ventilation?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
“Malaysia’s majority NEP?”
I tot Singapore has an unofficial one as mentioned by the writer in his article. It is called the civil service in the senior positions. If those minorities formerly from Malaysia who crave the same crutches of the Malays in Malaysia dont like having a genuinely meritocratic Singapore based on merit and not race, please go back to your country since your kind are in ascendancy right now.
Go back and serve your country instead of whining about how NEP has destroyed some MEDIOCRE people’s chance of striking it rich like some guy featured in ST recently and fantasizing that they are victims of real racism like the blacks in America with their high rates of incarceration and police brutality.
Possibly in some people’s mind, Ris Low is smarter than a non Chinese (and non Caucasian) lady with PhD credentials and/or actual achievements in business.
And dont tell me that mainland Chinese are coming to Singapore because of racism. Nowadays it is not even Communism.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Between 2 PSLE level students, one whose parents can afford to pay 4 figure private tuition fees against the other who has to settle for CDAC classes. Who do you think have the advantage? It’s a no brainer, even education is no longer a level playing field anymore. How many scholarship bond breakers from well to do families? We simply do not have the statistics.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
level playing field? you’ve got to be joking right? you should know there is really no such thing.
that aside.. this article sucks. seriously.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Clueless author
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
meritocracy in PAP lingo means marry into famiLEE has maximum merit….don’t believe just ask Ho Ching,
and for subsequent level of meritocracy it is imperative to be parotting, subservient and conforming….don’t believe just look at the 81 PAP stooges in parliament who are suppose to be the creme,
in reality, what we get in Singapore is the PAP’s perverted version.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
I would like to ask what kind of “researcher” Mr Gafoor is. Whereas the general idea promoted by this article may point out some truth to the situation in Singapore, it is so riddled with grammatical and spelling errors, purely anecdotal evidence, as well as simply outrageous, incomprehensive and circular arguments; that any glimmer of sense and authenticity is severely compromised. On the whole, this is a ludricrous article that seems to have been written by an immature 8 year old arguing with his 6 year old sister about why he gets to go first on the merry-go-round.
Just to point out a few :
1. “I have talked to so many academics, writers and thinkers around the world and everyone tend to point out to two characteristic in Singapore which will never allow meritocracy to exist.” – Really? Everybody tend to point that out to you? Well, I would tends not to think so..
2. “The reason why many Singaporeans want to accept this baseless claim that meritocracy exists instead of rejecting is because they are afraid to deal with the factual situation where meritocracy does not exists.” – Oh my god my head hurts. The reason that they accept something exists is because they are afraid that is doesn’t exist? What a fantastically intelligent and insightful argument!
2. The reason why many Singaporeans want to accept this baseless claim that meritocracy exists instead of rejecting is because they are afraid to deal with the factual situation where meritocracy does not exists.
3. “I have seen far too many non-Chinese friends applying to banks only to be rejected…. I also have seen non-Chinese friends with business and finance degrees not even getting interviews whereas their Chinese classmates do.” Um, pardon me, where did you say you were based again? OH, THAT’S RIGHT – THE UK! If you’d like to make a convincing arugument based on anecdotal evidence, it helps if you were actually in the right geographical location instead of pretending to be a far-removed outside analyst.
4. “What someone achieves in the past indeed shows his potential but what someone does not achieve in the past does not show his potential. Therefore assessments have to be based on potential and for that past performance alone cannot be used. Secondly the proper assessments must be used for to evaluate a person for the job or scholarship.” – Seriously, I don’t even know what to say to this. Can anyone follow that? Anyone? It’s like saying: I don’t eat apples because I have never eaten an apple. But just because I haven’t eaten apples, it doesn’t mean that I might not like apples. Everybody should eat apples because they are aupposed to be good for you.
If you want truly to make a convincing point about anything at all, may I suggest that you make quantum leaps in your command of the English language before even thinking about publishing anymore ridiculous articles such as this.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2
“. “I have seen far too many non-Chinese friends applying to banks only to be rejected…. I also have seen non-Chinese friends with business and finance degrees not even getting interviews whereas their Chinese classmates do.” Um, pardon me, where did you say you were based again? OH, THAT’S RIGHT – THE UK! If you’d like to make a convincing arugument based on anecdotal evidence, it helps if you were actually in the right geographical location instead of pretending to be a far-removed outside analyst. ”
Look at the outcome. Singapores’ achievements in international examinations, tops in this and that.
Where do countries practise NEP and the caste syatem stand?
We export self-made arms and our scholars top foreign premier universities.
Something in our selection must be right otherwise this sizeless, no resource island would not have been one of the richest in the world.
Look at our per capita income against others where the minorities here are majorities there. Given their huge numbers against their minotities here the catch of brains must be batter? Is it showing?
Finally, our meritocractic selection must be working otherwise we wouldn’t have celebrated 44 good years with only our HUMAN RESOURCE. Its our HUMAN CAPITAL that got us here. OUTCOME!!!!
Like or Dislike:
1 
2
Meritocracy? I thought LKY recently mentioned all the inspirationsal terms used in Singapore are known to be HIGHFALUTIN!! So yes!! meritocracy doesn’t exist. The Wayang Parliament were brought down to earth by MM and everyone’s heart became weak & betrayed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
21
Just read Michael Barr’s article and you will get a better historical perspective on the decline in meritocracy in Singapore
http://udhr19.blogspot.com/2006/10/charade-of-meritocracy-by-michael-d.html
Singapore may have been closer to a meritocracy prior to 1980 according to Barr.
In fact, if you look at Singapore’s King Edward VII College Graduates from 1905 to 1949, the ethnic breakdown is 37% Chinese, 40% Indian, 15% Eurasian, 7% Malay the rest others(Faris DWG Med J Mal 1949)
Of course affirmative action in all of the societies listed by the other commentators including Singapore has helped the majority community. Stop pretending that we are any different.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
If we had meritocracy, we would NOT need GRC. Our prime financial institutions managing our reserves would not have lost incredible billions and called it “honest mistake” instead of incompetency when the rate of returns over the years are so deep sub-par that it can’t pay for our retirement funding needs. If we had meritocracy, our home-grown MNCs would be dancing on the world stage after 44 so-called “good” years but only a depleted small competing few to show. If we had meritocracy, our GLC would have successfully brave foreign shores but dare not venture out. If we had meritocracy, our investment of billions won’t have been eaten up like a meal considering that our great scholars top “foreign premier universities” but foreigner investing in China made money. If we had such merit-based success, one wonders why we don’t have integrated globally export-oriented business unlike the Koreans and Taiwanese.
The puzzle don’t add up – maybe there is an elephant in someone ’s bedroom that he gets too frightened to think logically.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
My dear friend, you’ve mentioned that there are large income inequalities. But may I know where you’re quoting that from or do you just happen to make it up out of nowhere? Even critics of Malaysian’s political system do fork out figures.
To put it really simply, until you back up your evidence with actual statistics, this article is utterly ridiculous.
Like or Dislike:
34 
0
It you don’t get a job and if you were the minorities blame it on “discrimination” or “non-Meritocractic.”
Easy right. But wait. Unlike Malaysia and elsewhere where discrimination is prcatised, the minorittes here don’t uproot and migrate unlike the majority Chinese. Surprise?
Oraganisations select the best from a big pool of applicants. Supply exceeds demand.
Professor Shih, a Singaporean, is selected to head a Middle Eastern University. Rich patients from elsewhere are flocking to see our meritocracy doctors. Hyfux Olivia Lum makes her name internationally. There are 1 000 more from Creative CEO Sim to our SIA chairman.
Yes! Singapore thrives on MERTIOCRACY. Our success depends on it MM Lee is a doble-first at the prestigious University of Cambridge and so is his son. You want to look for non-meritocractic and racist countries you don’t have to look far. Many of their good but side-lined citizens have come here to grow and contibute to Singapore being a 1st WORLD COUNTRY today.
ALL THIS IS POSSIBLE. THE ONE AND ONLY ASEAN DEVELOPED COUNTRY. WHY? BECAUSE OF OUR MERITOCRACTIC SYSTEM NOTHING ELSE! Remember there are no charitable businees organisations but PROFIT-making ones. Simple Economics!
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
Paul Ananth on Wed, 30th Sep 2009 10:34 pm
If the majority here are prctising discrimination then why are 1 0000 upon 1 0000 of Indians applying to come here to be discriminated?
Not vice-versa?
I’m told many India Indians are flocking to HK & China today. Again not vice-versa. Why/ Why? Why?
Discrimination?
Paul Ananth you are deeply conscious of such make-belief stuff because the caste system is born and originates from India. It’s in your blood.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Hi Jae,
Since Gafoor is not around, let us answer on his behalf.
In this internet age, anybody can check out the answers on the net in a matter of seconds.
Go to Wikipedia and key in “Gini Coefficient”, a measurement of income inequalities.
Singapore has a Gini Coefficient of around 4.8 which is one of the highest amongst the 30 most developed nations in the world. In fact, our Gini Coefficient is comparable to some third world nations like Kenya and Russia.
Check out singstat.gov.sg to find a graph depicting the rise of Singapore’s Gini Coefficient over the last decade except 2008 when there is a slight dip.
Sorry we won’t spoon-feed you here. Please go and do your own research and prove Gafoor wrong. Even the state media seldom quote the source of its figures.
Like or Dislike:
20 
0
This article is very poorly written. The author is just giving opinions and passing them off as facts. Then repeats himself and reinforces his assertions by giving more opinions or made up anecdotal evidence.
I agree that the situation in Singapore is hardly ideal, but to argue that it is not meritocratic?? I would suggest the author pick up a dictionary and find out what meritocratic actually means.
So he wants to give minorities more benefits compared to others due to unequal backgrounds? It may seem fairer but please don’t argue that it would be more meritocratic. The whole point of meritocracy is to disregard any other factors and base decisions entirely on results. That is what Singapore has been doing and will be doing for years. Any consideration of ‘race’ or ‘background’ may be fairer, but NOT more meritocratic.
I agree with the idea of the author that such a system will not benefit certain segments of society, but it is damn well meritocratic.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Admin,
As a starhub user, I was blocked from temasek review’s website for the past 2 days. Was however able to access via neoproxy.org.
Coincidentally, PAP just started a new internet spy agency for the purpose of “anticipating and neutralising emerging threats,” said Second Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam, who announced the set-up of SITSA.
Like or Dislike:
0 
27
When the public service is admitted to be ideologically driven by MM’s (confessed) careful selection and grooming of 15 years duration, it is difficult to see how meritocracy overrides ideology. Organisation culture do NOT exists in vacuum and it starts from the top.
I am sure if meritocracy is so sweet of practice, the public service of secured employment would have been favoured destination given the vagaries of present day economic turbulence instead of migration abroad for talents well sought for in foreign shores.
So I see a lot of the arguments here presented is just opinion passing of as facts – the same tar of brush against this author. For example..comments like..”I’m told many India Indians are flocking to HK & China today. Again not vice-versa.. The truth is that people moving to HK & China for reasons of economic opportunity seeking just like I did. IT DID NOT SAY THAT THERE IS MERITOCRACY IN BOTH HK AND CHINA. Hong Kong is very competitive business centre and meritocracy would apply most likely without the degree or even semblance of political ideology infiltrating organisatinal culture. But in China – meritocracy???? You must be joking – the corruption is not public or published information, IT IS THERE RIGHT BEFORE YOUR EYES. What meritocracy in China because Indian going there??
And then you have strangest of slippery slope thinking and utterances like…. Hyfux Olivia Lum makes her name internationally. There are 1 000 more from Creative CEO Sim to our SIA chairman…..What has this truth of fact of relevance to meritocracy. Without meritocracy Olivia Lum would not make Hyflux out of her own talent??? Don’t America got Jack Welch Jnr, John Chambers, the success of Googles, Yahoos, Bill Gates and Warren Buffets that Singapore is unique of “1 000 more from Creative CEO Sim to our SIA chairman…”? These facts DO NOT prove or disprove meritocracy?
The author is right about equal opportunity of selection based on merits in the way he probably experienced of EEO in the west. Appointments to EEO-mandated positions, as I know is Australia is subject to challenge and if challenged the job cannot be filled until proper enquiry of fairness selection procedures have been satisfied. And there had been challenges in legal jurisdiction not applicable or of legal precedent in this part of the world. Unless one has foreign experience like him, it is difficult to understand his angle. He is not talking from the perspective of NEP or caste systems.In EEO-mandated position in Australian public service, a member of the selecton must be from minority group and has no work relationship with the organisation seeking to fill the position. And if the appointment is challenged by this “independent”, the grounds must exists for legal challenge in the courtroom that EEO requirements for selection has NOT been met.
The merit game can be played many ways. One can get an outside candidate into a job impossible of accomplishment. Sacking the incoming incumbent then provide the excuse and opportunity to restructure and redesign the job and lifting a preferred internal candidate to fill the revamped role and call it merit because “outside” best candidate proved “unable”. So meritocracy is not a black or white dichotomy. It can be a withcraft under all kind of false pretext and it is a reality in all seemingly saintly organisation.
Don’t kid yourselves otherwise.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And just remember one simple truth – once you start down the track of oppression of freedom of speech to question, enquire and demand for substantiation, the devil falsity is likely to be found in the detail of “seeming truth” which must include meritocracy is suspected of overtaken by ideology and other contaminants including corrupt conduct of favouritism.
If you favour meritocracy in opportunities, you have no need to be fearful of “discovery” of truth and facts. A lie always fear truth of its exposure ( and if need be ) via Freedom of Information law application of a search enquiry – Or is it not??
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Poorly written article
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
anonymous
i enjoyed reading your posts. you brought up many good points, especially the overridingness of ideology. for a system so shaped by a guy who believes in racial superiority, it is quite burdensome not to imagine that the meritocracy he espouses is merely an illusion.
and also the point about having systemic oversight to guard against human bias, the EEO example. in the absence of such, any claims of meritocracy is as filmsy as saying the election system is fair because look everyone play by the same rules, when the truth is the rules are created by them and final.
look forward to reading more from you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
yeah…The security agency is set up to guard against sites like this.
Sad sad.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
i shall not argue from an inequality of race stance, but by going into the concept of meritocracy.
the purpose of our education system is to produce elites fit for leadership in the government administrative sector. in other words, technocrats.
in other words, it is not to nurture creative thinkers, explorers of life, unique talents, compassionate humans. in fact, any kind of merit not relevant to being a technocrat, or worse ,threaten the formation of one, is not considered, or shunned like a plague in its meritocracy.
education being the foundational proclaimer/ giver of merits, the paper you get from your school determines to a very large extent for most singaporeans what kind of jobs you get, what kind of life you live. those who do not go on to become technocrats, in other words, the entire population minus the oligarchic few, will be made to think that the examinations they took, being the same exams taken by everyone, is a fair measurement of their talent.
this assumption overlooks the systemic bias instrumented by a government using state resources to perpetuate its ruling. its definition of merit is not fair in the first place, does not take into account the various talents human potential awaits for emergence into.
in such a case, may i ask, how fair can our meritocracy be? it will only be fair if our entire school going population aspires to be technocrats.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The author seems to have an axe to grind with Spore. Is he suggesting that we should also adopt the NEP policy of Malaysia where the minority is given head start in all aspects of life ?. In Spore, competition is extremely keen and if a minority candidate did not get the job, it does not mean he/she is being discriminated. It could simply means that there are better candidates to choose from.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
anonymous
you brought up many good points, especially the overridingness of ideology. for a system so shaped by a guy who believes in racial superiority, it is quite burdensome not to imagine that the meritocracy he espouses is merely an illusion.
and also the point about having systemic oversight to guard against human bias, the EEO example. in the absence of such, any claims of meritocracy is as filmsy as arguing the election system is fair because everyone plays by the same rules, when the truth is the rules are created by them and final.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
sheldon, like to see how real “MERITOCRACY” works in real life? It is better the invisible highfalutin illusion.
Read on
http://www.cnbc.com/id/32690111
The author calls it misnomer
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
anonymous of 1110am
not surprising the free market is not really free anyway, resting in historical bias of a world capitalistic system created by imperialists. the field of play was never leveled to begin with. power, domination, dog eat dog, has been the rule of the game, as world system analysts wonder about whether the increasing interconnectivity of the the globe will subsume these power games into a mutual interdependence game. we shall have to wait and see.
when the financial cost of domination outweighs that of mutual cooperation, men will have no choice.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“Professor Shih, a Singaporean, is selected to head a Middle Eastern University. Rich patients from elsewhere are flocking to see our meritocracy doctors. Hyfux Olivia Lum makes her name internationally. There are 1 000 more from Creative CEO Sim to our SIA chairman.”
Not a thousand more, only those few Singaporeans you mentioned. And how is SIA doing these days? Good? Btw, Hyflux was started with some soft loans from the government if I am not mistaken. Prof Shih got what discoveries ah? Can enlighten me?
Meritocracy doctors lol…It is a matter of price and convenience and a reputation of safety and care, which is an issue of competence, not brilliance. But standards appear to be dropping, I know a few family members with anecdotal evidence of incompetent and inexperienced doctors. If you want cutting edge treatments against cancer for example, people go to Australia and the States.
“It can be a withcraft under all kind of false pretext and it is a reality in all seemingly saintly organisation.”
I begin to suspect this poster is not Singaporean but a PR. His bad England is not the same as our bad England.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“the minorittes here don’t uproot and migrate unlike the majority Chinese. ”
Yes they do actually.
“Professor Shih, a Singaporean, is selected to head a Middle Eastern University”
Not Harvard meh.
“Many of their good but side-lined citizens have come here to grow and contibute to Singapore being a 1st WORLD COUNTRY today.”
Please go back and make your country a “1st World Country” instead. Could it be these marginalized people are of the same “caliber” as the poster, with bad English and all?
Of course these “talents” want the same no-accountability iron rice bowl jobs as the majority race in Malaysia. They cannot compete with the other Chinese who are successful in Malaysia in the private sector despite unequal PRIVILEGES.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“Look at the outcome. Singapores’ achievements in international examinations, tops in this and that.
Where do countries practise NEP and the caste syatem stand?”
India has Nobel Prize winners and many brilliant scientists, mathematicians. The competitions that Singapore win are kacang putih ones with no prestige. Since when is Singapore anti-Indian?
As much as the average racist Singaporean of a certain race think that another race is stupid, this is far from reality.
“We export self-made arms and our scholars top foreign premier universities.”
So do many other countries. What kind of weapons are you talking about? Fighter jets? Missiles? Helicopters? Or just standard bullets to questionable regimes like Burma?
“Something in our selection must be right otherwise this sizeless, no resource island would not have been one of the richest in the world.”
Fair enough, this has happened due to a few good policies by a few good men in the PAP in the PAST. Nowadays….
“Look at our per capita income against others where the minorities here are majorities there…”
Rich is a relative term. Ask the majority of Singaporeans whether they are the ones who are rich, having to bear the burden of the high cost of living imposed by the PAP, or is the PAP government itself that is rich.
As for rich people, we do have quite a few of them, but much fewer smart people, regardless of their education in comparison to “motherland” China.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Sorry, Singapore doesn’t work on meritocracy. It works on marrytocracy. It depends on whom you marry!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dear Researcher Abdul Gafoor,
You are seriously misguided. I won’t speak of your over-zealous reliance on anecdotal to support your thin arguments.
In the first place, you need to some grasp of definitions first. Meritocracy simply means to judge by merit. It does require any levelling of the playing field. That would require affirmative action. For example, the rich in Singapore are subject to much higher Income Tax than the poor.
But levelling the playing field is a question of extent. To advocate a complete levelling of the playing field nothing short of arguing for COMMUNISM. Regarding building a communist society, history is not on your side. Good luck.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Precisely meritocracy means hierarchical but when ideology of political correct, the hierarchical DOES NOT ARISE BECAUSE OF MERITOCRACY and it in fact perpetuate the myth that meritocracy exists when it is ALL IDEOLOGICALLY DRIVEN.
You need to break down the Berlin Wall to bring freedom and democracy and so must you tear down ideology in public service before meritocracy has any chance of germination.
To talk about meritocracy in isolation of definition is like chasing the conceptual ghosts of deception to the detriment of real substance – the ideological frustration of meritocracy CAN ONLY BE MANIFESTED IN THE ANECTODAL EVIDENCE BROUGHT UP BY THE AUTHOR, GAFOOR.
When you have GRC in election, where can you find meritocracy except in ghosts of truthfulness, perhaps????
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Outright Blatant . . .
The majority Malaysian Malays will show you what meritocracy is. After all they have had it for 40 years already. How many generations already? They monopolise the pubic service and practically everything they can lay hands on short of businesses when they don’t have the acumen and capital for. Even that, if it becomes a thriving business later they will want a share through various means eg official harrassment.
So here I am in Singapore. Already 21 years to be exact.
Indian meritocracy needless to say is tied to the caste system where you are born into it. So if you’re Hindu you are in fact a racist. Some window dressing perhaps by the government but it is too embedded into the people’s psyche. The root and source of international racism therefore comes from India. Well, it’s in the culture. So there is no point finger pointing at others when the truth and fact shows.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Meritocracy is just another highfalutin aspiration of the government. There is an uneven playing field especially for the minority races and those low and middle income people who mostly live in HDB flat. Being born into a rich family provides a good head start to to your life, because your parents can send you to music classes, tuition, workshops, boot camps and other enrichment classes. Of course many employers and the civil service still discriminate against the minorities themselves. Examples include Malays cannot be promoted to General (there was a Malay General recently), disproportionally high numbers of Malays and Indians in the Police, Civil Defence, Security, Delivery Men, Cleaners and other lowly rated jobs. The Chinese on the other hand dominate the leading roles in the Civil Service and banks. Singapore’s meritocracy system only serves to widen the gap between the haves and the have nots and this is a potential problem to create social unrest.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Some people are really afraid meritocracy doesn’t exist.
Meritocracy in Singapore? Is it a fact or fiction?
Does it exist in real life or just in the Pledge?
Do really talented people get to stay on top due to meritocracy, even after losing billions?
Sadly we are worse off than the Malaysians. At least they are honest enough to admit they have Bumiputra policies, but we pretend to be meritocratic. Which is worse?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“They monopolise the pubic service and practically everything they can lay hands on short of businesses when they don’t have the acumen and capital for.”
Sounds like some people we know in Singapore. Why no complaints about Singapore? Lets be fair. And I thought there are a lot of Malays in Malaysia who are also anti NEP as demonstrated in March 2008 elections. Kudos to them. And for the Malaysians who didn’t serve OUR NS, please go back and make your country a “1st World Country” under Pakatan Rakyat. Please dont complain about something that wont exist after 2013 or earlier. Unless you are worried your MEDIOCRACY, not meritocracy, will be exposed.
Who would want to work in the Malaysian civil service when the pay, inclusive of fringe benefits, is so much lower than that of Singapore’s civil service OR the private sector for that matter? Unless one wants to be a politician and get huge “payouts” (illegal but thriving corruption in Malaysia)later on. I think a lot of Malaysian politicians and civil service can only fantasize about how generous the Singaporean (and admittedly foreign) taxpayer has been to LKY and gang.
P.S. In 2009, according to BBC caste has been abolished in major cities and caste discrimination is illegal. Mahatma Gandhi has been dead for a long time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Representation is not equal to meritocracy. If we had done that we would not be here today. Best airport, best seaport, or reserves wouldn’t have grown, Temasek wouldn’t have grown to $150 BILLION from a mere $300 million, etc. FORBES speaks and also let the facts speak.
If we put duds in charge, the duds will influence the others in the selection panel to select duds asw well. This is a fact of life. You can see that across the causeway where duds pick duds for all kinds of top jobs in the public service & quasi-public service. Students holding up 11As are not getting a place in the university! Result?
Meritocracy in Singapore means having yourselves pass through the University of Cambridge ‘O’ and ‘A’ levels examinations. In Malaysia, the papers are set and marked in Malaysia itself. If that’s not enough, one has to pass the “very diffoult” Malay lanugae paper before the certificate is awarded. I’ll leave it to your imagaination as to why it is done and not done here.
Representation simply means shortchanging the paymasters (private sector taxpayers). Sitting there and collecting the high civil servive pay and giving high output. For every top job, the suppy exceed demands and only the best is picked. And if one is not picked for it in Singapore simply means someone is better than you.
Just watch the Chinese 60th Anniversary on CCTV internet. Only 30 years when Deng Xiaoping says “Black or white cat is immaterial if it CATCHES MICE”.
Well, Singapore is on the right track. We don’t believe in racial visibility. For that we can look across the causeway and somewhere else.
We will follow the Far Eastern nations of China, Taiwan\, HK, Korea, Japan, etc. The OUTCOME is for all to see.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“If we put duds in charge, the duds will influence the others in the selection panel to select duds asw well. This is a fact of life.”
That’s true. We see it here as well.
“Students holding up 11As are not getting a place in the university! Result?”
They DO get places in universities but not the bigger public scholarships with it, not to say Malaysian public universities are up to par, which is probably the real reason why Malaysia is lagging behind Singapore in certain areas.
“We don’t believe in racial visibility.”
Dont understand your PR England. I think you need the integration voucher from PAP.
“We will follow the Far Eastern nations of China, Taiwan\, HK, Korea, Japan, etc.”
Rubbish. All the above are democracies with the exception of China. Even in China’s case, the leaders are accountable to the people.
“Sitting there and collecting the high civil servive pay and giving high output.”
High output measured by what? The goods and services they produce? They do not need to comptete.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“If we put duds in charge, the duds will influence the others in the selection panel to select duds asw well. This is a fact of life.”
That’s true. We see it here as well.
“Students holding up 11As are not getting a place in the university! Result?”
They DO get places in universities but not the bigger public scholarships with it, not to say Malaysian public universities are up to par, which is probably the real reason why Malaysia is lagging behind Singapore in certain areas, instead of discrimination per se. Even if all the scholars (including the no talent ones) were to return to Malaysia after 2013, I doubt nothing will change due to the political nature of Malaysia.
“We don’t believe in racial visibility.”
Dont understand your PR England. I think you need the integration voucher from PAP.
“We will follow the Far Eastern nations of China, Taiwan\, HK, Korea, Japan, etc.”
Rubbish. All the above are democracies with the exception of China. Even in China’s case, the leaders are accountable to the people. I believe if China was to run a SWF, they will pick the top HK fund managers from the private sector, and select one as CEO, instead of installing President Hu Jin Tao’s wife for example. If they did so, they would have to face the wrath of the people especially after such massive losses.
“Sitting there and collecting the high civil servive pay and giving high output.”
High output measured by what? The goods and services they produce? They do not need to compete in the real world and just suck money. This is NOT meritocracy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
If we compare ourselves to Zimbabwe, the OUTCOME will look even more stellar of achievements.How come achievement is always measured against defeated LOWER BENCHMARKS when we always boast of our first world status? No cognitive dissonance of logic thoughts and reasoning?
It is condescending of our neighbours and IRRELEVANT of comparison. If they are as efficient as us, we would still be economically relevant in this part of the world for them to need us to our advantage in the last 4 decades?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is patently obvious that there are many TR readers – presumably Chinese – who get extremely defensive when the topic turns to racial discrimination.
There is only one known cure for this: persist in writing on similar topics until readers get used to the fact this as much an issue of the public interest as any other, and is an equally legitimate topic of discussion. To that end, I thank the author for this article, though I’ve not had the time to write much here.
On a related note, while the fringe values media consisting of the SPH and Mediacorps stables will dutifully use the vocabulary of the fascist PAP, such as with “meritocracy”, the centrist media can afford to use more descriptive terminology and take the lead in Singapore’s political culture. After all, it wasn’t the PAP who first introduced or increased the currency of vocabulary such as “secularism’, “the rule of law” and all other terminology used by professional politicians.
“Meritocracy” is closely related to at least four (of eight) types of equality in political theory:
1. formal equality (or “equality of treatment’ or sometimes “equality of input” – it is the committment to treat like cases alike);
2. equality of opportunity;
3. equality of outcome; and,
4. equality of acess.
The last three above are quite self-explanatory.
The fascist PAP uses “meritocracy” to distract Singaporeans away from the fact that there is no ‘meritocracy’ in Singapore; this is an often-used tactic of the fascist PAP. I strongly suggest a shift to my suggestion.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Meritocracy at its best in Singapore. You wouldn’t see this across the causeway. Watch Singapore Idol.
Watch how the 3-man panel appraise their multi-racial contestants.
Given that Singapore is 77% Chinese, Malays were named Singapore Idols since the centent began in Singapore. It’s very telling. Right?
That meritocracy is well-placed in the minds of Singapore.
Correct me if I’m wrong. I heard when a Chinese Malaysian won the Malaysian Idol in 2005, subsequent contests were closed by the authorities.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To Robox
“there is no ‘meritocracy’ in Singapore.”
You need to get your head examined first. There are at least five good ministers of Indian descent in the Singapore Cabinet. Meritocracy is not representation in 50-50 proportion.
Only when the minorities are put in charge, regardless of their capabilities and capacities then there is meritocracy?
Your solutions please?
India’s caste system? Perhaps today it is only unwritten but still enforced socially.
Or Malaysia’s apartheid NEP?
Come, come, give solutions. How do we go abt it when the public service is paid for by the private sector taxpayers i.e. the paymasters are Chinese (check out the Treasury). They demand quality! We can leave the private sector out for they exist for profit not charity; unlike PROTON in Malaysia as someone has pointed out earlier.
The very fact that the easier Malay & Tamil mother tongues are used for ascension throughout our schools to up the COMMON education ladder is a big compromise already, isn’t it?
Yes Robox, there is no curry campaign here and minoritiues are not discriminated. The great number of India Indians flocking to live in a Chinese majority island is testimony. Not vice-versa. Yes? Let the facts speak. Singapore is meritocratic. One of our twin pillars of success.
Either you are ill-informed or you’re a ?????????
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Fandi Ahmad alone does not prove meritocracy but GRC proved meritocracy is dead from the mindset of the political apex. Unless you want to kid yourself again.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Meritocracy?
Let just say its: Merry-tok-kok-only.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To Bruised Ego Lee on Sat, 3rd Oct 2009 11:51 am
1. The first thing you need to get into your thick head is that we are talking about meritocracy IN SINGAPORE? How does bringing up examples of inequity in India and Malaysia help to address the lack of a claimed and supposedly official ‘meritocracy’ in Singapore? Unless of course what you are saying is that if Indians and Malays raise the issue of racial discrimination, then we should ‘go back to where we came from’ to see if it is any better.
That’s the typical Chinese racism that we really SHOULD be talking about; you don’t even think that we belong in Singapore. According to racists like you, only the Chinese do.
Don’t try this typical racist tactic to deflect from the issue because it won’t work on me.
2. Re: “There are at least five good ministers of Indian descent in the Singapore Cabinet.”
So what? Is that the same proportion of Indians in every strata, and in every sector and industry? What about jobs such as lwith low paying security guards where Chinese employers are only too happy to employ Indians.
3. Re: “The great number of India Indians flocking to live in a Chinese majority island is testimony.”
Again you are only able to see issues at a superficial level; not surprising given your cultural and genetic deficit.
Indians from india are here for the MONEY.
Period.
They are not here because of an undying love for a hateful ( and hatefilled) race such as the Chinese.
In time, they too will learn all the truths about you Chinese just as we have.
4. Re: “Your solutions please?”
If the solutions aren’t obvious to you by now, then they will never be. Don’t arrogantly position yourself as if you are interested in problem solving on this issue. You’re not, and you know it.
You are only interested inperpetuating the problem of Chinese racism and it shows in every line in your post.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I had written in my post on Sat, 3rd Oct 2009 11:04 am that:
Re: “Meritocracy” is closely related to at least four (of eight) types of equality in political theory.”
and I had named the four types of equality. On further thought, there is one more type of equality – or lack therof – that affects Indians and Malays in Singapore, namely, *legal equality*.
Article 154 of the Constitution states:
[start]
Impartial treatment of Government employees
154. Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, all persons of whatever race in the same grade of the service of the Government shall, subject to the terms and conditions of their employment, be treated impartially.
[end]
In lay terms, the Article means:
1. If there are other provisions in the Constitution to invalidate it – there aren’t – the provisions in this Article do not apply.
2. The government is legally obliged to treat minorities in any civil service grade equal to the Chinese in the same grade – this section of the Constitution deals with minority rights, after all.
3. However, #2 is subject to the *terms and conditions* of employment of Indians and Malays. In other words, there CAN be terms and conditions in employment to institutionalize unequal treatment of Indians and Malays vis a vis the Chinese: institutionalized racism.
The most publically known example of this is probably with regards to Malays in the SAF, though it applies to the entire civil service.
Specifically, there can be – and probably are – terms and conditions of employment at PSC Grade 4, say, that make Grade 4 the “glass ceiling”, as an example, for racial minorities. I have heard, and not just once, that the government ‘doesn’t want too many Indians’ in certain civil service positions.) Just anecdotally, it is not difficult to obeserve that a disproportionately large number of top civil service positions are held by Chinese individuals.
To make things worse, the racism institutionalized in Article 154 is inconsistent with Article 152, which obliges the government to correct any disadvantage, among other disadvantages, caused by Chinese racism.
[start]
Minorities and special position of Malays
152. —(1) It shall be the responsibility of the Government constantly to care for the interests of the racial and religious minorities in Singapore.
(2) The Government shall exercise its functions in such manner as to recognise the special position of the Malays, who are the indigenous people of Singapore, and accordingly it shall be the responsibility of the Government to protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote their political, educational, religious, economic, social and cultural interests and the Malay language.
[end]
Thus, the empty claim of ‘meritocracy – and as I said, probably to distract Singaporeans that there isn’t any – that creates an uneven playing field for Indians and Malays from the word “go” in early childhood in terms of the Chinese educational culture imposed on Indians and Malays, follows him/her throughout his/her life.
The Chinese supremacist government continues to neglect the impact of racism that it has a big hand in bringing about in the first place, even though it is legally obliged to.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Dear Robox
Your definination of meritocracy hinges on –
“Is that the same proportion of Indians in every strata, and in every sector and industry?”
You’re in fact not taking abt meritocracy but REPRESENTATION. Right?
Are you aware the Indians are already over-proportioned in the public sector? Find me a country where its PUBLIC servants don’t have converse in the mother tongue of their paymasters? Isn’t this another compromise?
The private sector? Please. He who pays the piper calls the tune. Right? Robox can choose to employ from his own pocket a Chinese or Indian chaffeur if he so wishes, right?
Joke aside. Again, several bloggers have written that the private sector exists for PROFIT not CHARITY or RACE. Given that the supply of applicants always exceeds demand, surely if an Indian can deliver the goods better than another, any company will employ him. In fact, quite a number of northern Indians have clinched top posts in the private sector in Singapore!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
i think defenders of meritocracy need to differentiate between wayang and reality.
you think if the pap are racist, they will tell you in big headlines ‘ we are racist ha ha ha, don’t dream of equality on this island, ha ha ha. chinese is the superior race, hahaha.’
of course they cannot afford to lah. if they are, they will have to do it subtly, dio bo? they will have to say it’s meritocracy dio bo? even it’s not, dio bo?
at the back of my head, there’s this suspicion that some of you already believe in chinese as the superior race, so what’s there to say man?
maybe we should debate whether chinese is a superior race.
which of you defenders, bruce lee, jim chew, ben hee, william wang, confucius, believes in chinese as a superior race? come on, raise your hand…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Just passing by . .
Aiyoh . . yoh . . . Mr Robox.
Don’t worry be happy lah. Think out of the box for a while. Just imagine this island to be Indian majority for once (minus the built-in caste system in the bloodstream and Dalit stuff, ok).
The majority i.e. taxpayers give free education to ALL races, pay for the Chinese & Malay language school teachers, provide subsidised HDB flats for ALL races, free texbooks and pocket money for ALL needy pupils. Food rations from the CDC for ALL needy Singaporeans.
The taxpayers give out annual Bonus & Growth Dividends to ALL citizens. The taxpayers pay for Channel 8 & Suria TV. The taxpayers pay for the over-represented Chinese and Malay public servants to serve them. Wealthy Indian businessmen generously donate to the building of all Chinese temples.
If you’re unconvinced, visit India lah (your ancestral home) and you’ll appreciate Singapore better when you return.
This is actually what one of my Indian colleagues once said. She is Dravidian (S Indian). “I’m so lucky to be born here in Singapore.” Rushing off home to catch an old MGR movie on Vasantham.
Endless lah. Learn to count our blessings instead of crying wolf all the time. Let’s ALL share and contribute – to each his own; one for, all for one!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Much as I disagree that meritocracy is practised here, I share Micheal Tan’s thoughts that Let’s ALL share and contribute – to each his own; one for, all for one!
We are one nation still and those stronger help those weaker in our midst within our means.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
just passing by… you are right…hahahaha
all the posters with two name combo arranged in [christian name][surname] , how many hands do you all have?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
There have been good articles but this is not one. The discrimination against minorities happens not only in Singapore but everywhere. It is happening in Australia where an ANU survey found that employers when seeing an application with a non-white surname, particularly if it is Chinese would tend to put the application aside or more likely throw it away. (So for those who thinks that Australia is a haven, check again). In the US, the discrimination against minorities is fading but has been on as long as one can remember. It is hope that the election of Obama as president is a sign that this discrimination is ending. Discrimination against minorities is natural in society but it does not equate to a lack of meritocracy.
The second point made about measurement of merit should not be about past performance, like as in examination results is also not a good argument. The sustainability of Chinese civilisation has always been about searching for the best, to administer the country, through examinations. It has worked for China for 5000 years and its working now still.
It is hard to measure future potential by any other means and so far no methodology has been found; if it has, the West would have found and adopted it already. However, it is a fallacy to say that a person should be judged on pure examinations results alone. Even Lee Kuan Yew has admitted as much, some years back, when he related how he had to put the scholars through the hard paces of real life to find a good candidate. However, I understand this had since been abandoned and replaced by who you are connected to; the PAP crowd has attained enough of a critical mass to produce their kind, to allow this.
In Australia, the best performing individuals are not scholars; in fact they rate among the less accomplished. The best admired are successful businessmen, sportsmen, media personalities and politicians. How do they judge who’s best; by pure achievement! You may be good at studies or sports or whatever at schools or universities; but it does not matter until you have shown something later like being a great footballer, successful writer or a young millionaire. In fact, as many scholarships are awarded first rate plumbing or bricklaying apprentices as academic achievers. Non-white migrants often survived by academic scholarship or entrepreneurship. These are possible routes for non-white migrants.
Singapore’s form of meritocracy however would not last. It would eventually create a gradually oppressive ruling class and a rapidly dis-privilege slave class. The taxi drivers and low rank army personnel who are happy with their lot would die out and be replaced with the young, savvy, world informed aspirant class. The latter are much more educated and would be increasingly unhappy being discriminated against and impoverished by mendicant migrants from China. You would see Singapore authorities being increasingly draconian and paranoid in controlling this rising vocal and rebelling new Singapore borned denizens. One can see this in new laws such as describing a ‘riot’ as a party of one dissident instead of five. This would be unsustainable.
The great explosion (revolution, upheaval ala Suharto Indonesia or ala Corazon Aquino!) may take a little while before it happens but Singapore would end up ‘the sick man of Asia’. {The Chinese may co-opt it as a province since much of the ruling class would be Chinese (socialists with Chinese characteristics)} LKY knows this from history and has mentioned it in his books; that a city state does not last, particularly if its oppressive rulers are increasingly desperate to rule forever. Typically, he may have planned ahead so that his descendants have a chance to get out before it’s too late.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Meritocracy? The non-performing are still in the ivory tower walking around in their golden boots or shoes – anxiously waiting for lesser mortals to lick their footwear!
They should have left the stage in dignified shame LONG AGO instead of over-staying their publicly-disdained welcome.
Meritocracy, anyone? It comes with golden boot or golden shoe in this richly gold-laden little red dot.
I am too embarrassed to apply.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0