If Self Help is not painful, then it is not helping at all
From the department of we-want-you-to-be-careful-of-what-you-read
Our era seems to be a time of dire needs, woes, cares and ambitions. Browse the self-help corner of any bookshops, you will find advice on dating, controlling your rage, becoming the next Bill Gates and be as rich as Donald Trump.
As a typical child of a typical middle-income family, I am too plagued with self-doubts and at the same time, of course, an ambition to change the world. I peruse numerous tomes of self-help books in my past, and recently it dawns on me that, in most cases, there are two type of self help books.
The first type is what I call change your mind techniques oriented self help - visualise your success! Stand tall and firm! Assert your power! Build a pipeline and have passive income. They are usually printed in bright colours on bold laminated papers, use big fonts when Arial 12 points will do, and feature famous stories repeated ad ad nauseum - the elephant who was trapped in the cage, the two classes of average kids and one class is told that they are Grade A students and so on and so forth. The premise is - change your mind, change your outlook and you are a winner!
One book which belongs to this genre is Feel the Fear, and Do it Anyway. The premise is to repeat to yourself again and again (of course, this is an unfair summary, but anymore said I may infringe copyright laws) “No matter what happened, I can cope with it.” While this works fine when you are deciding whether to bake your own Thanksgiving turkey or get one from the local NTU Fairprice, this advice fell flat if you are a manager or a leader responsible for the jobs, lives or maybe pension funds of thousands of people. Those who have been liberated from their own self doubts, fears just by changing their thinking and ‘visualising’ success for themselves can only lead themselves.
Those books usually propose motivation posters all over the place, listening to the tapes of successful people and keep repeating to myself “I’m good; I’m good; I’m good” and doing some visualisation. Well, if I crawl into a kennel and bark like a dog, it doesn’t turn me into an adorable Golden Retriever.
Worse still, such books, I deem, are harmful to introverts, which makes up 20% of the world’s population. Most of those books are written by…extroverts. (Sounds logical. Give me three years to do the research and I’ll present it at the next World’s Self Help Convention) . If you suspect yourself to be of an introvert disposition (a personality test helps), most of those advice sound baseless, or if you are forced through it, may even hurt or harm. Introverts are in touch with themselves; they know their flaws and strengths. They need personal space and long recharge time. Telling them to “fake it as if you are a successful man and plunge right straight into the meeting” is very likely to have very bad side effects. For introverts, I propose the book “The Introvert Advantage: How to Thrive in an Extrovert World”, by Dr. Marti Olsen Laney. Extroverts, if you have introvert friends who you care about (like your SO), you better read that too.
The other thing about self help books is that there are so many types of personality out there - competitive, logical, those who are grounded onto the earth and skeptics etc. Mind renovation techniques have different effects for them all. Some will find what the books say natural; other will balk. No wonder the self help book industry is such a thriving industry.
Now, for the other type of self help books - they don’t just suggest writing down 10 goals like those Harvard students do (havent we all know the importance of SMART goals?) or print bright comforting slogans (YOU ARE UNIQUE AND YOU ARE THE BEST) on brightly laminated pages. They demand you to learn discipline. For the heart is the wellspring of all thoughts. Your thoughts, while partly subject to chemicals, upbringing and genes, are also controllable. Those books demand you to subject yourself to a discipline of reflection, soul-searching, re-evaluating your life - asking you to become who you are supposed to be, not Donald Trump. Nope, I am not talking about the Bible, by the way - and it’s not New Age mumbo-jumbo.
What those books say is this “Changing yourself is hard. You have to go down to the root of it all - your values , habits and your beliefs. Repeating slogans only change the appearance. There are some universal principles in life that we all ought to know, to be disciplined and conditioned to follow and it is going to be difficult.”
You may not become Donald Trump this way, but at least you can find the real you, which may means a lot more to you and your friends and family.
Some examples? Try Today Matters, by John Maxwell. Then you’ll see that changing yourself is hard, life-long and a discipline. And if you need to change badly, find a therapist.
The Search For Political Leaders
extracted from http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2008/04/search-for-political-leaders.html
That was a joke, of course. Barack Obama never said such a ridiculous thing. And no sensible American would care what grades Hillary scored in high school. Hillary herself would probably have forgotten. In the quest for the best presidential candidate, there must surely be many better things to focus on.
Tragically, this joke is not a joke in Singapore. The search is on for the next Prime Minister of Singapore. And from the sound of it, A-level grades are an important criterion:
ST April 2, 2008
PM still looking for his successor
It takes about three elections to groom a leader, so there’s no time to lose, he says
By Lydia LimTHE Prime Minister faces an urgent task: Find and field those who can take over from him before he turns 70.
Already 56, Mr Lee Hsien Loong is seeking political talent in their 30s and early 40s, one of whom he hopes will emerge as his successor.
He has no time to lose as past experience indicates that it takes about three general elections to groom a leader.
This means those who contest the next polls, due by 2011, might be ready to lead only two elections after that.
By then, Mr Lee will be 69 years old.
‘That is very late. So there’s no time to be lost,’ he said in an interview with The Straits Times and Chinese daily Lianhe Zaobao at the Istana yesterday.
…… Of concern to him is the outflow of top talent abroad.
He looked at recent data on the 600-odd students who score four As in their A levels each year.
About two-thirds pursue university degrees here, and one-third go overseas.
Of those who go overseas, at least 100 are not on scholarships. About half of these non-scholarship holders do not return but work abroad after they graduate.
In addition, another 100 of those who get their degrees here go overseas to work. They may come back one day but there is no guarantee.
‘This flow is going to continue,’ Mr Lee said.
‘So it’s a big challenge to find successors, particularly for politics.’
We learn that PM Lee Hsien Loong wants to groom his potential successor over a 15-year period. Possible candidates should now be in their 30s or early 40s - let’s say they are about 37 years old, on average. The actual successor would take office as PM around the year 2023.
Thus we may say that whether you become the Prime Minister of Singapore at the age of 51 depends on how well you scored in your A-levels, at the age of 17.
Farsightedness is a virtue. A neurotic obsession with academic grades is not.
In 2008, it would be somewhat insane to scrutinise Hillary Clinton’s or Barack Obama’s high school grades, as a basis for selecting the next presidential candidate.
And in my opinion, it would be just as insane to choose to groom a Prime Minister to take office in 2023, on the basis of the A-level grades he scored as a teenager, 34 years earlier, in 1989.
Now of course, PM Lee Hsien Loong will not use A-level grades as his sole selection criterion. But the fact that he uses A-level grades as a selection criterion at all is quite shocking.
In my opinion, A-level grades are just simply quite irrelevant. Even if you were the best A-level student in the whole of Singapore, this demonstrates nothing about your ability to lead a nation. And conversely, even if you flunked your Chemistry paper, this doesn’t mean that you can’t lead a nation.
Also one of the greatest leaders in the history of Europe.
Mr Ngiam Tong Dow’s book - good read for concerned singaporeans
The book is available in the Regional Libraries and also http://www.selectbooks.com.sg/getTitle.cfm?SBNum=38840
Interview with Mr Ngiam Tong Dow
A nice read……
http://philochristus.blogspot.com/2006/05/interview-with-mr-ngiam-tong-dow.html
ask yourself…..while there be a singapore in 50 years time ?
Happened to come across this interview… what a wonderful breathe of fresh air…honest words from a civil servant. If I am not mistaken, Mr Ngiam is a Christian…and if this interview is anything to go by - an excellent Christian is he.
—————
Subject: Singapore ‘bigger than PAP’By Susan Long.
Time to get off the autopilot, says a former civil servant.
“SINCE Mr Ngiam Tong Dow retired from the civil service in 1999, affairs of state have weighed heavily on his mind. The highly respected former Permanent Secretary worries about Singapore’s long-term survival and the kind of society the next generation will inherit. At 66, the HDB Corp chairman insists he is ‘no radical’, just a concerned Singaporean with three grandchildren, who wonders ‘whether there will be a Singapore for them in 50 years’ time’. In Tea with Think, a weekly interview series, he gives a candid appraisal of the civil service, and his prognosis of what the lack of an alternative political leadership means for Singapore. The interview will be continued next week.
Ngiam Tong Dow Speaks Out
Excerpts from http://www.littlespeck.com/content/politics/CTrendsPolitics-031003.htm
One of a handful of men who helped Lee Kuan Yew build today’s Singapore, the retired bureaucrat feels perturbed enough to speak his mind publicly. By Seah Chiang Nee
Oct 3, 2003
It was an unprecedented, frank interview (with The Sunday Times) that shook up many Singaporeans.
The interviewee was Ngiam Tong Dow one of Singapore’s most accomplished civil servants (for 40 years) - and the subjects covered included (excerpts):
Politics
Singapore will survive SM Lee (Kuan Yew) but provided he leaves the right legacy.
What sort of legacy he wants to leave is for him to say, but I, a blooming upstart, dare to suggest to him that we should open up politically and allow talent to be spread throughout our society so that an alternative leadership can emerge.
So far, the People’s Action Party’s tactic is to put all the scholars into the civil service because it believes the way to retain political power forever is to have a monopoly on talent. But in my view, that’s a very short-term view.
It is the law of nature that all things must atrophy. Unless SM allows serious political challenges to emerge from the alternative elite out there, the incumbent elite will just coast along.
At the first sign of a grassroots revolt, they will probably collapse just like the incumbent Progressive Party to the left-wing PAP onslaught in the late 1950s.
I think our leaders have to accept that Singapore is larger than the PAP.
Government scholars
For Singapore to survive, we should release half our talent - our President and Overseas Merit scholars - to the private sector.
When ten scholars come home, five should turn to the right and join the public sector or the civil service; the other five should turn to the left and join the private sector.
These scholars should serve their bond to Singapore - not to the Government - by working in or for Singapore overseas. As matters stand, those who wish to strike out have to break their bonds, pay a financial penalty and worse, be condemned as quitters.
Economics
Take our industrial policy. At the beginning, it was the right thing for us to attract multinationals to Singapore.
For some years now, I’ve been trying to tell everybody: ‘Look, for God’s sake, grow our own timber.’ If we really want knowledge to be rooted in Singaporeans and based in Singapore, we have to support our SMEs.
I’m not a supporter of SMEs just for the sake of more SMEs but we must grow our own roots. Creative Technology’s Sim Wong Hoo is one and Hyflux’s Olivia Lum is another but that’s too few.
We have been flying on auto-pilot for too long. The MNCs have contributed a lot to Singapore but they are totally unsentimental people. The moment you’re uncompetitive, they just relocate.
Q. Why has this come about?
A. I suspect we have started to believe our own propaganda.
Civil Servants
There is also a particular brand of Singapore elite arrogance creeping in. Some civil servants behave like they have a mandate from the emperor. We think we are little Lee Kuan Yews.
SM Lee has earned his spurs, with his fine intellect and international standing. But even Lee Kuan Yew sometimes doesn’t behave like Lee Kuan Yew.
Littlespeck comment:-
Mr. Ngiam Tong Dow, 66, who retired from the civil service in 1999, is among a handful of permanent secretaries who had helped Mr. Lee shape today’s Singapore.
The others include JYM Pillai, Sim Kee Boon, Howe Yoon Chong and Philip Yeo.
His frank, straight-talk interview with The Sunday Times came as a surprise to most Singaporeans, young and old. It caused a ripple among readers who read it.
Apparently many had missed it, skipping it as just another establishment figure talking of his past life and former colleagues in passive, polite tones.
A lawyer and a former journalist now in public relations totally missed it and are now frantically seeking a copy of the report on Sept 28.
Currently chairman of HDB Corp, a privatised company, Chiam had been known to people in the civil service and old journalists as a quiet doer, rather than a high-profile public articulator of policies.
That was, of course, when he was in the civil service from 1959. In 1970 he came Singapore’s youngest permanent secretary.
Ngiam had shown his brilliance to people who worked with him - and of course to his political bosses. In public he had always maintained a silent profile.
That he has spoken out in this manner points to of several things.
Firstly, he must be perturbed enough by what is happening in Singapore, especially in the civil service, that he felt compelled to speak out.
Secondly, what he said confirms a freer political atmosphere in Singapore in which the authorities are encouraging people to speak out, even critically, as long as it is in Singapore’s interests.
A third point is his frank reference to Mr. Lee Kuan Yew as still the overriding authority in Singapore. All his suggestions are addressed to him, not Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong.
Few Singaporeans possess his countrywide, historical perception of Singapore straggling three generations now mired in one of its worse economic crises.
It set off some discussions in the Internet chat-sites with some people wondering whether the government will take action against him.
Asked why was Singapore on auto-pilot for so long, Ngiam replied: “I suspect we have started to believe our own propaganda.”
What he said about government scholars, a freer political environment and allow some of the brightest to be used outside the government - and if necessary, serve as an alternative elite leadership was a total surprise.
Ngiam’s call to cut (by half) the number of scholars in the bureaucratic or political leadership, elitism in government and intellectual arrogance reflect what some critics have privately said.
But Ngiam, being an insider with longtime access to the policy-making process, is the first to have articulated his thoughts clearly.
As a lifelong civil servant, he is not allowed by law to join the ruling People’s Action Party, all these years the line separating them is hardly visible.
His most telling suggestion is for Lee to leave behind a “free politics” legacy by allowing talent to be spread throughout Singapore so that an alternative leadership can emerge.
Singapore is in the midst of a “remaking” exercise that will include restructuring its economy and loosening its political and social environment.
For a whole generation, thousands of parents are pushing their children towards scoring “A’s” in their O- and A-level exams to win a prestigious government scholarship.
(Some 1,400 “A” level students score distinctions in all four subjects, so commonplace a phenomenon that “A’s” in the tougher Special Papers are needed to qualify for overseas scholarships.)
This virtually guarantees them a top-level, high-paying bureaucratic job. The road is long, tense and arduous. Some parents dedicate their lives to help their children achieve it.
I know of someone whose son is in the gifted programme. The father, with a Master degree in Mathematics, takes leave from work whenever his son, in his lower primary classes, faces a year-end exam.
Asked why, he said he wanted him to gain a top political or civil service post through the scholarship trail. For him and his wife, it is a 20-year plan for the 7-year-old.
It is one in which many take but few succeed. Once there, there is no fear of being retrenched unlike thousands of other mortals when profits plunge.
By Seah Chiang Nee
Sponsors
