Jeremy Chen: SDP's Deceitful Claims About My Departure

955

Writing to The Real Singapore in his capacity as SDP Assistant Secretary General, Christopher Ang, made claims that my departure from the party was due to poor conduct on social media:

http://therealsingapore.com/content/sdp-assistant-secretary-general-clarifies-why-jeremy-chen-had-leave-party

Those claims are deceitful and a poor attempt to deflect.

Briefly, this is why:

  1. My resignation letter stated that I was offended by SDP Secretary General Chee Soon Juan lying about a CEC decision on 29 Jul 2014, but almost all the examples (the screenshots) were of items after that date. (Yes, Assistant Secretary General Ang is suggesting that macro-scale time travel has been achieved. Olso awaits.)
  2. I had essentially left the party after that date. My communications with the party were typically met with radio silence. (Such as sending them the strategy brief I prepared way before that meeting.)
  3. The statement failed to address the charge of lying, which I would not have known about without some CEC members notifying me.

Assistant Secretary General Ang will continue to have access to my Facebook feed (for a while at least). He is invited to continue looking for “objectionable content” from BEFORE that date. (Chris: If it was not you who authored the piece then assume this is directed at him/her.)

My account of my departure is available here.

http://jeremy-chen.org/blog/201501/leaving-singapore-democratic-party

or, for those who prefer Facebook,

https://www.facebook.com/notes/jeremy-chen/on-leaving-the-singapore-democratic-party/10155075697340034

although the text my resignation letter is only linked to

http://jeremy-chen.org/sites/default/files/files/convexset/2015_01/resignation_sdp.pdf

in the Facebook note.

I will address the two examples which are actually date BEFORE the key date in question later. However, it should be noted that neither of those were ever brought to my attention. On the other hand, this is a sampling of the kind of content that Secretary General Chee had talked to me about:

Secretary General Chee’s reason for flagging a selection of content like the above was votes. His admonition to me to not “upset the party base” (re: the second and third article) was strong and fairly direct evidence of this.

Before touching on the two examples of “objectionable content” from BEFORE the meeting date, I would like to remind any reader that the official statement failed to address the actually significant charge of lying on the part of Secretary General Chee.

Now on to a frivolous matter and a serious matter:

On the first piece of “objectionable content”, I accept responsibility in my Plants v.s. Zombies comparison (http://i.imgur.com/BlD5efT.png), I still find it amusing, and unlike most of the rest of the examples, it was posted on 23 Apr 2014 before the fateful meeting (29 Jul 2014). Also, CEC members of the SDP have been known to say substantially more “objectionable” about PAP leaders. When have they every been “called to account”? Much less for something tongue in cheek like that.

On the issue of teaching standards (offending Tweet dated 12 Feb 2014;http://i.imgur.com/oPWzu65.png), this is a little more serious and has broader implications. I have very strong beliefs about maintaining high standards. Without high standards, wages will be depressed for graduating students due to employer uncertainty about the quality of new hires. I was outraged by a third party account of an SMU instructor who was reported to have said that good teaching evaluations could be had through easy mid-terms. I do not know the identity of that instructor or what course he/she taught, but I had no reason to disbelieve the account. Let us not be so naive to believe that no educators game evaluation systems. We need mechanisms that incentivize good behaviour, especially when the outcomes are of significant import.

The official SDP response is unfortunate and smells of deceit. There is nothing more to it.

Afternote: It really hurts that I had worked hard and earnestly for an agenda (policy work => well-being of Singaporeans) and a party which I thought was a good one, only to have my integrity questioned on leaving because of real problems with the party leadership. Admittedly, it was a decision made in anger and indignation (even after a few weeks). The most appropriate reply to those “mole” charges: #notamole #otherwisewheresmymolemoney #ompm #srslywhereismymolemoney #complainmom

From Jeremy Chen