Monday 23 March 2015

What LKY's death tells us about the culture of Singapore

I have resisted the urge to jump on the LKY bandwagon - but after having spoken to another Singaporean blogger today (one whom I have a lot of admiration for), I decided to speak up primarily for her. And look, this is not a criticism about Lee Kuan Yew. Believe it or not, I actually have a lot of respect for the great man for a simple reason. There was no guarantee that LKY would become the founding father of Singapore - Singapore was going through very uncertain times in the late 1950s and early 1960s, LKY fought hard to climb to the top of the pecking order in Singaporean politics and he did what he had to do to stay on top. Some say he was ruthless, others have called him a dictator - good luck to those who dare to challenge him. Having said that, I didn't always agree with his policies and certainly, I do question the future direction of Singapore - but that has far more to do with the way I feel about the current leadership given that LKY had effectively stepped back from politics in his final years. What I don't like it s the way some people think that nobody has the right to say anything vaguely negative about LKY upon his death - whilst I have deep respect for LKY, I do believe that there should still always be space for us to speak openly about his past and his legacy without any need for draconian censorship. Here's a great summary of the life of LKY on the BBC.
What has really upset me was the way blogger Jeraldine Phneah received so much abuse for writing what I thought was a very measured and reasonable piece about the legacy of LKY. She had researched her facts and had uncovered some very interesting points that I had not previously thought about - being a history buff, I like looking at the same topic from different points of views. All Singaporean students would have done plenty of Singaporean history - that was where we started with our history lessons in secondary school (and it was introduced to me via social studies classes back in primary school). Phneah raised a simple and valid point: whilst LKY provided instrumental leadership in the founding years of Singapore, he didn't build Singapore up single-handedly: instead, he did what every smart leader would do. He assembled a very capable team and sought help from the best experts in the world. He couldn't have possibly micromanaged every aspect of Singapore's development over five decades. Those were the facts - and somehow, that didn't go down particularly well with her readers who saw her as being ungrateful of LKY and being insensitive. This is censorship and intolerance - when you insist that others agree entirely with you on the correct way to mark LKY's passing.

Phneah wasn't insulting LKY, she wasn't diminishing his legacy in anyway and most of all, she wasn't saying anything untrue - her facts were indeed correct. If anyone was truly a fan of LKY, then they would know what LKY did (and did not do) over the years, what he has achieved and how he has achieved that. This leads me to a rather disturbing conclusion I'm afraid: that many Singaporeans suck when it comes to Singaporean history. We've already had too many people talk about LKY transforming Singapore from a fishing village to a world class city when really, Singapore was anything but a fishing village when LKY took charge. This is what I find puzzling: how can you be a fan of LKY if you do not understand Singaporean history? How can you admire and respect the man for what he has achieved if you have no idea what he actually did and how he achieved all that? What kind of respect is this, if you don't even know whom or what you are respecting? Is this a result of the education system or Singaporean culture?
Let me give you an analogy. One of my heroes is the great Romanian gymnast Nadia Comaneci - now the gymnastics she performed to win the 1976 Olympics may seem relatively easy compared to the skills performed by those competing in 2015, but she was highly innovative and was a pioneer in her day. She was often the first to push the boundaries, performing skills that no one else dared to even try. This is why she has so many fans today, long after she had retired from the sport. Now as a child, I have read books about Nadia Comaneci, I have seen the film about her life, I excitedly followed every step of her journey to the West in 1989. When the internet came along, I was able to read about her life in much further detail and have watched practically every video about her on Youtube. When I was in Bucharest recently, I was hunting high and low for anything with her name in the city. Now that's what you do when you are a big fan of someone you respect, you go out of your way to learn facts about the person you respect - quiz me about Nadia Comaneci's life and gymnastics and I will be able to answer any question you throw at me.
How many of these people who are attacking Phneah actually know LKY's history and long list of achievements very well? Perhaps some of them actually do, perhaps some of them have actually read LKY's autobiography. Why is there this inability to challenge Phneah intellectually if you disagree with her then? Is this a problem with the Singaporean culture of conformity - that only one kind of response is deemed socially acceptable upon LKY's death? Or is it more a problem with our education system, that students were never really taught how to challenge another person's perspective without name-calling and hurling personal insults, ie. "I believe your judgement of his legacy is based on your personal opinion rather than facts" vs "You're such an ingrate and this article is sad." In any case, Phneah has made clear that she was not gloating over LKY's passing - her original article was posted 2 days before his death. If I may quote her, "Just like you are entitled to your own views and to be grieving hysterically, I am also entitled merely "slightly sad" about it." Like Phneah, I am only 'slightly sad' about LKY's death.

Back in 2013 when Margaret Thatcher died, I wrote a piece analyzing the reaction of the British public to her death. She was at best a divisive figure - some people loved her, some people hated her but everyone had an opinion about her. I don't like her and I was free to criticize her all I wanted on social media - but as I didn't live in the UK during her period as prime minister, I was only judging her objectively. Some of my British friends who had grown up in Thatcher's Britain had far worse things to say about her and many even celebrated the fact that she finally died. There was an active debate about her legacy and the fact that Thathcer had effectively retired from politics from about 2001 (due to ill health) meant that we had plenty of time to look back upon her legacy before her death. It was somewhat naive of me to expect Singaporeans to be able to debate LKY's legacy in the same way the British were able to about Thatcher when she passed on as Singapore never had the kind of freedom of speech exercised in the UK.
Thatcher was a very divisive figure.

Here's the greatest irony: LKY was a very intelligent man, he was highly articulate and has a brilliant command of the English language. I enjoyed reading some of the choice quotes from him here.  The Singapore he created however, has a population who aren't often that articulate or even confident when it comes to expressing themselves. Singaporeans don't often know how to handle a situation where people disagree with them - they either retreat into their shells, feeling miserable but not do anything about the situation or they simply lash out with personal insults (as in the case of Phneah). Thanks to decades of draconian censorship, we simply do not have a culture where people feel free to debate each other respectfully when they do not agree with each other.  I have nothing but the deepest respect for LKY - but the people I have a problem with are ordinary Singaporeans who are inarticulate and struggle to express themselves at the best of times. I used to believe that perhaps it was a question of education - that the older generation were less articulate because they didn't have the benefit of a fine education; but sadly, the younger generation in Singapore today don't seem to perform any better on this point.

I would like to finish by quoting Phneah herself - she has been forced to censor herself in the wake of some of the really vicious attacks she has suffered on social media. She has made some valid points and I believe they deserve to be heard - if you don't like what she said that feel free to disagree with her but do not lash out and make any personal attacks please. Even if you don't agree with the points she made, she ought not be forced to censor herself like that. Is this what LKY's legacy is? A culture of censorship and intolerance, where free speech cannot flourish? This is not even the government censoring Phneah - it's fellow citizens censoring her instead of simply talking to her about the topic. So, rescued from the internet, here are the paragraphs removed from Phneah's original post on LKY's death.

Many people are somehow under the false impression that it was Lee Kuan Yew who brought Singapore from a fishing village to the first world city we have today.

They even go as far as to call him our "Founding Father". Yes, Singapore was a fishing village but that was when Sir Stamford Raffles set foot on it in 1819. However, the Singapore which PAP had to work with in 1965 was not a fishing village! Even before WW2, Singapore was already one of the world's most prominent ports due to her strategic position at the southern most point of Asia as popular blogger Alex Liang described “making it a natural place for ships to make a stop en route between East Asia (China, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines etc) and India, the Middle East, Africa, Europe and beyond”

In 1965, Singapore had a pretty established civil service (police, education, hospitals etc), public utilities (water, electricity, drainage), a thriving port, a transport network (an excellent national road network complete with a public transport system). Thus, PAP merely had to work with this existing infrastructure to help Singapore progress.


Secondly, contrary to popular misconception, Lee Kuan Yew was not the person who came up with the brilliant economic policies that brought us to success. It was Dr Albert Winsemius, the Dutch economist sent by the United Nations in 1960 to help Singapore industrialize. Singapore merely followed his economic plan for Singapore.


Furthermore, while his leadership was important to the old guard, he did not make all these contributions alone and had the assistance of a team of brilliant people. It was together with LKY, they laid the foundation which made Singapore the great city it is today. Strangely despite their key contributions, they were not featured much in our social studies textbooks, so not many young people know about them. They are Lim Kin San, Goh Keng Swee, Toh Chin Chye, S. Rajaratnam, Ong Pang Boon. It might be better if we took into consideration their work as well so that we can have a good sense of how Singapore’s success should be seen in perspective.

Lim Kin San led the development of the public housing we had today. He even did it for free for three years. S Rajaratnam built up the Foreign Service and helped to establish diplomatic links with other countries and secure international recognition of the new nation's sovereignty. Hon Sui Sen led the implementation of Singapore's industrialization strategy crafted by Albert Winsemius. Goh Keng Swee initiated the setting up of the Economic Development Board which was established in August 1961 to attract foreign multinational corporations to invest in Singapore.  He also proposed that the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) is established to invest excess reserves. The National Service policy was also his creation. 

Not saying LKY did not do anything for Singapore at all. His contributions were definitely significant. However, just like how I disagree with us blaming him for every problem, I also disagree with crediting him for everything that went well in Singapore.

OK, here's part 2: http://limpehft.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/the-herd-mentality-of-singaporeans.html

124 comments:

  1. Someone who gets all the credit should also take all the blame.

    Just saying. But I too could not give one man the credit for that country's perceived success.

    -S

    ReplyDelete
  2. A very good read.

    I will like to say that without Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore will not be here today. Instead it will be just another state of Malaysia. All those brilliant prople will not surface out as well. Many Malaysian are now in the ministry post in Sinhapore due to Lee Kuan Yew.

    Lee Kuan Yew really turn Singaporevfrom a Third World country to First World country. Yes Singapore is a city in 1965 but that part just cover from Tanjong Pagar all the way to Grylang only while the rest is still in kampung state.

    He also change the chinese culture to value cleanliness. He fight against corruptioN as well.

    He also indirectly give inspiration and help the Malaysian Chinese.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Lee Kuan Yew had a vision. He had the brains and the balls. A true born leader and hardliner who happened to also be a highly shrewd politician. He was exactly what Singapore needed post-independence. Unfortunately, his legacy and those of the old guard might be eroded by the current group of buffoons who clearly have no vision for this country other than to milk its citizens and visitors dry to for GDP growth. Feels we are just bumping along at times - over the last decade we have had to deal with a reactive rather than a proactive government and civil service. I say if you really respect Mr Lee and his team, think carefully about who you vote for in the next GE. I envision a much better Singapore - one lead by a compassionate government, led a little more by socialist ideals, rather than GDP. But I think I just might have to dream on. Ironically, the PAP was built on socialist principles but it seems it has leaned too far too the right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aha. Now this is a comment I can relate to. Linda you're right, I share many of your sentiments and that deep respect for LKY of course. LKY has stepped back from front line politics for quite a while now and has taken a backseat in his later years because of his health situation, so the mistakes of the current leaders have little to do with LKY really.

      Aaah well, there's always the option to leave Singapore if you are really unhappy.

      Delete
  4. I agree with you Limpeh . All these sycophants have obscured certain facts in order to completely whitewash history. LKY is a complex character and a strong believer in the ends justifying the means. And some of them were pretty controversial as well. ( the graduate mother scheme eg...*shudder*) But overall I do agree he did good for Singapore via a unique partnership with his initial team of Ministers, who did the actual running of the country, while he provided leadership and fought off political opponents.

    Another thing that never fails to make me chuckle, is when anti-pap commenters go about claiming that things were better off under LKY, in their criticism of the present Government. Oh the irony! Have they forgotten what the late Mr Lee did to critics in his time??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comment. I think it is important to understand the man you are idolizing or worshipping - otherwise, what kind of relationship do you have with someone you're idolizing? Why are they trying to whitewash history instead of talking about the facts? As long as someone is factually accurate and not telling lies, then why not have this discussion about it? Yes LKY was a very complex character - you don't achieve what he has done simply by being 'nice'.

      What this reminds me of are the Christians who claim to believe in their god and have faith without actually having read much of the bible, they know some famous stories and they pick and choose what they like about those stories to create this image of a god that suits their needs and purposes, one they find easy to worship in a way that suits that. Is that what Christianity is about? Or is that simply creating your own god to worship? Likewise, I am aghast at how little some Singaporeans know about LKY - yet they want to claim to be mourning at this time? How can you mourn for a man you barely know?

      Delete
  5. My thoughts exactly :) No matter how great a man he was/is, doesnt change the fact that he is human and made mistakes. A very very obvious bias and mistake he made was to be so skewed towards economic growth instead of happiness and welfare of citizens and residents in Singapore alike. And everything there is a price to pay, call it the oppotunity costS of getting us to where we are today. How talents are increasingly migrating...those are the tough questions we should be asking, and not mindless worshiping, that's a disgrace and extremely disgusting. He is a great man, he left behind a legacy for us all, but he is still human and people make mistakes, don't 'godify' him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mistake? When LKY took over, the future was nowhere certain. The first priorities would be to build infrastructure, create jobs, build houses, work through race issues, and develop an economic model that we could build a nation on.
      why the heck would you think that he would have been able to focus on happiness and welfare?
      The fact that you can sit at your keyboard, probably in an aircon room typing this .. . means that you are a recipient of a successful strategy. I very very rarely call people names.. and i wont start here. . but really, this is asinine.

      Delete
    2. Annnnnnnnnnnnnd we have an example of what limpeh said - can't have a discussion without throwing insults.

      Delete
    3. I agree with you Powell - I don't think Human Resource has made an unfair criticism, it was just her point of view and she's entitled to her opinion. And if you don't agree with her, then find a way to express yourself without being so caustic.

      Delete
    4. haha.. skewed towards economic growth and not happiness and welfare of citizens? I believe everyone is responsible for your own happiness. Maybe people should start looking inside of themselves instead of always trying to seek external explanations. If I as a fellow singaporean, is perfectly happy and grateful with all that my country had given me, why are you not? What are you lacking... is it an iPhone 6plus? Mindless worshipping..? I see it as knowing how to be grateful and appreciative. Know what's disgusting? Mindless hating, being spiteful and ungrateful, being unsatisfiable and greedy. What you think?

      Delete
    5. "Godify" --- I like that made up word. PSSG: why are you so hysterical? Are you saying that LKY made no mistakes? He made plenty of mistakes. He had also many successes. All we are saying is to be more critical and mindful of his legacy. Mindless group thought hysterical mourning and worshipping of a mere mortal is despicable, not to mention embarassing for a nation of highly literate people.

      Delete
    6. everyone is welcome to their opinions, if you don like what he said, you are welcome to challenge his ideas with structured arguments and carefully researched facts, instead of names hurling and insults like what i would do when i was six.

      Delete
    7. Hmm.. an insult would insinuate that I made a personal attack in some way. As I already mentioned in my response, I too find that deplorable.
      However, I reserve the right to have an opinion on another opinion if i disagree.
      I make no judgment call on the poster, but do call out the silliness of the point made. I welcome anyone to refute my perspective.

      Delete
  6. That being said, I can understand why he pushed for such a rigid structure in Singapore...but now that he's finally gone after spending a lifetime working on Singapore, it's time for the next generation to wake up, smell the coffee and fix whatever that's wrong. And my my, so many things are wrong. But at least he left us a system to work with, its far from perfect, but we should be appreciative that it's something. Instead of going on and on about how great he was, maybe it's time for a huge dose of realism - the founding father of modern Singapore is not here to help us anymore, we must push and strive on on our own.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The saddest thing is that people never learn and only strive to profit from another's death...its tragic and a disgrace to humanity. I will pay my respects to him one last time before he is turned to ash.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jeraldine did a great job. It was fair and well-researched. It irks me to no end when Singaporeans refuse to acknowledge the existence of facts that threaten their well-ingrained misconceptions. I can only conclude that it is the result of the education system. Conform or else ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely. After all there is no emphasis on critical thinking whatsoever up to the secondary level. Only in junior college do Singaporeans get exposure to critical thinking. And only a minority of Singaporeans receive a jc or IB education. The vast majority go to polytechnics. Not the most intellectually stimulating environment. I don't think it's a coincidence that the majority of Singaporeans who are capable of putting together some kind of proposition or idea and corroborating it have had a jc or IB education, however elitist that may sound.

      Delete
    2. The issue in this case is probably not with critical thinking. Indeed her article was factual and fairly critical. The real issue is some other intangible. The tone of the article lacks an ability to truly appreciate LKY's works and empathize with especially many older Singaporeans.

      In determining whether to direct LKY this massive amount of respect, we need to review the context. I'm Singaporean and what LKY did for Singapore was something few Singaporeans could or would do even if they could. It involves some form of sacrifice in my opinion because he could have used his talents elsewhere for his selfish benefits and need not bother if the rest of his countrymen would be stuck in a rut.

      But he chose otherwise and in our Singaporean context, I'm certainly not needing someone to die on the cross to salvage our souls before I give him my deepest respect. As one of many families who have benefited from meritocracy, my immediate family upgraded from being friggin poor to now being able to feed ourselves and more just through employment opportunities and hard work alone. I'm hence deeply indebted to this system he envisioned n crafted painstakingly. Mind you it's not even that obvious a system. Or our neighbours would have done the same wouldn't they? I see how in our context, in our region, we should otherwise probably have gone with the flow n ended up like our neighbors, or rather worse off cos we do not have natural resources, had we not had a great leader who galvanized talented pple around him to do this nice masterpiece. Think abt how we solved the water issues and how when Malaysia threatened to close the taps, our military did the "unthinkable" to go on standby and it did cause them to think twice abt sabre rattling and bullying us. We stood tall despite our size due to all these painstakingly thought out policies.

      Gen Y may know the history, may even feel they have a more balanced view of our history, but while possibly true, it is sad because they often could not appreciate the true implications. It's like watching a terrorist attack in the news where fifty died. We feel detached because it did not directly impact us and hence we cannot feel the real pain though we sort of got the idea that it's bad. I mean our brains registered the facts and goes into auto comparison mode, just like wat the author and yours possibly did. Cos after all it's less than a hundred deaths which is nothing compared to some other historically worse attacks that killed thousands. I mean darn, it's not even as bad as the Nanking Massacre, which itself is nothing compared to WW2. Or WW1. In our heads we are just looking at digits, because it does not feel personal. But if it were to directly happen to us or our loved ones, even if it's just a close friend, just ten deaths would be a damn big deal. And that's why some old folks cried. Cos they see the transformation in their own lifetimes. They see the magnitude of the stuff done which is beyond their imaginations. To them it's a mini miracle, and it might even actually be. Most importantly, this "miracle" affected them directly. They can't help showing "blind" gratitude for they are being human.

      Delete
    3. And we shouldn't really say our history textbooks are brainwashing students. Cos well, then technically, every article that tries to sway us is kinda an attempt at "brainwashing", including the said articles. Minus opinions which are in themselves subjective, did we factually go from Third to First World in a couple of decades? Have any other city state ever done the same? Was it really imperative that we will end up First World in this time span regardless of who "ruled"? If you were to live in a slum now in a Third World country will you reasonably believe that it will become a metropolis in your lifetime? If the answer is yes, you've been misled by our success that the task is reasonably easy. You only need ask citizens of these countries to understand the political and human struggles that can easily cause multiple setbacks. What we have achieved is not obvious. It's really a mini miracle.


      But who truly was responsible for this mini miracle? With our small population, surely we cannot be having the lion's share of talents that can rebuild Singapore. Statistically there should be similar proportion of talents elsewhere as well. That's why LKY is a big deal. There are talents but they cannot do their job without a visionary great leader paving the path for them to do their work unhindered. If great leaders are a given, why did Singapore sell off Christmas Island in the past? Incompetent leaders like our Great Singapore Sales Lim Yew Hock do exist unfortunately. Especially in small population Singapore with its limited talent pool. And does it make this less of a miracle if we did not exactly start off as a fishing village to become First World now? Using an arbitrary example from the movie Exodus, the parting of the sea is a miracle no doubt. But it the parting of water not been the Dead Sea but rather a huge lake, does that make it less of a miracle? Anyway personally, I've never visualized the start point to be a fishing village but yet in my mind I knew it was no small feat to move on from after WW2 till now. Ask your grandparents. Death was real. As is hunger, disease and many other forms of suffering. We could not meet even those basic needs in Maslow's hierarchy. And that is really a big deal. Not like now when we find a lower paying job a big cause of dissatisfaction. That a roof over our heads is not enough cos it's too small and overpriced. It's definitely a problem, it affects me too, but it's a First World problem.

      Delete

    4. There's nothing wrong with having aspirations. I have similar dreams as with most others. But I have the privilege of straddling the post war old folks and the newly peaked Gen Y to see the disconnect. At the end of the day, it is understandably difficult for Gen Y to see why LKY is a pretty big deal at that time. And why he is treated like the Founding Father despite many others who aided him along the way. For it's the general that leads who gets the lions share of the credit is it not? For good reason too because not everyone can lead. I mean really really lead with a clear believable vision. One can have a whole bunch of great soccer players but without a great leader, they may be beat by a lesser team that is better focused.

      Not that many people nowadays walk the path to build something huge and socially meaningful from scratch. Well at least not something more altruistic that benefits others immensely anyways (business entities whose main purpose is to enrich oneself doesn't really count here). And that's why many Gen Y may not understand the sacrifice required. Until one tries to build something massive for the common good, yet face huge odds which makes him wonder why he should proceed with this mainly selfless endeavour, it would be difficult to appreciate LKY. The fact is he made sacrifices beyond what he needed to, just because it's the right thing to do for the sake of his fellow countrymen. He could have used his abilities elsewhere to carve out a better career or business to enrich his own pockets alone but he did not. And dun even start about his current big payroll. He could have gotten an even more massive payroll with his skills. And if anyone can stand up to do the kind of work he did for Singapore, I'm willing to vote him in with even double the payroll.

      To conclude, the discrediting of LKY in her article was unfortunate. I would deem separate articles that equally credit the rest of his team to be a more measured move. Unless the discrediting came from someone who has at least ATTEMPTED to do something similarly great, it is hard for me to appreciate this alternative view that much, though I recognize that it is inevitable, just like how I no longer feel anything when there are massive car accidents leading to multiple deaths on the highways. Everyone else, everything else, not directly concerning us will inevitably become yet another digit.

      Delete
    5. Hi Ivan Sum, appreciate your clarifications and I certainly think that your presentation of your perspective as one who lived through the peri-independence period and experienced first hand the transformation that LKY and team brought about.

      However, the point I just like to make is that as a Gen X person, I am probably the sandwich between the baby boomers and the Gen Y. LKY has been a big part of our lives and history books. My school always taught us to always read beyond, think deep, look at things from another angle, don't expect that there is only one version of truth. I personally do not think Jeraldine's blog was in anyway discrediting LKY. Yes, it didn't carry a deferential tone or hero worshipping accolades, just factual and accurate. No emotional from the heart eulogies. I understand that Gen X and Y probably are not as starry eyed over LKY as say our parent's generation. Even though we can appreciate on an intellectual level his leadership and his great sacrifice, it may not touch us as emotionally as those who actually lived through the turbulent times. The perspective is thus going to be very different.

      As people handle grief differently, I think it is acceptable that some will be hit hard emotionally while others just feel a little sadness. Jeraldine's blog was also written two days before LKY's demise, so unless she is a true clairvoyant, I do not think she intended it to be an insult to LKY's memory. It simply is a very matter of fact alternative view of the great man.

      Delete
  9. Hi Alex, actually I am still a bit confuse why there were so many haters against what Jeraldine wrote. But then seeing the sort of nasty comments and personal attacks raised on TRS, I am beginning to get the drift. The comments were not just directed at the authors. I posted some comments clarifying and discussing about things from another angle and some of those haters came flaming in as well. Essentially, anything that sounds even slightly critical is being perceived as disrespectful.

    Some examples:
    http://therealsingapore.com/content/sex-blogger-alvin-tan-sporeans-should-not-blindly-worship-lee-kuan-yew
    http://therealsingapore.com/content/tan-wah-piow-lee-kuan-yews-death-will-set-people-free?fb_comment_id=fbc_825470400860940_825490330858947_825490330858947#f1a295d27c

    One thing in common is there were little attempts at debate, little discussion on context and validity. It was pure reactive vitriol and personal attacks and name calling. In fact, things would be perfectly cromulent if we consider the relation between LKY and these people as that of a rock star and the legion of adoring fans. It really resembled how the fans of one rock star will react against anyone who didn't like their star or who said anything that sounded short of idolatry. I have long concluded that most Singaporeans, due to the education system, are not able to handle ambiguity and anything that have more than two shades of grey. People here have became so used to model answers and right answers that they no longer know how to contextualise, analyse and see things from multiple angles. There is also little attempts to delve deep and understand principles and just stick to the form, not the substance.

    It is not just in the sociopolitical arena but also in our own life. Sad to say, my parents simply keep telling me that I will never understand how tough it was in those days pre-LKY and yet expect that I must accept and respect their "authority" on these. Even if found wanting, father never ever once backed off or apologise. My sister and I had a hard time when we were younger coping with this when we were growing up. I may have mentioned this before but in an earlier job, my (ex) boss was exactly the same sort (I got shouted at when I dared to raise something in clarification after getting ground feedback). Challenge, question and you raise a point they don't like to hear, good luck.

    I am starting to think that a lot of all these stem from the lack of exposure and that Singaporeans simply just are not used to having to explore shades of grey and present different viewpoints and too fixated that there is a "right" answer. Just read those comments made by those against Alvin Tan in TRS - see how many actually bother to discuss the validity of his points? While it can come across as insensitive in this moment of mourning, all comments were simply thinly veiled insults and invectives with nothing much by way of questioning if the points raised were valid or not.

    It can get disappointing but some many of those antiPAP comments were equally vapid and just plain name callings rather than attempts to educate and clarify. Pity. So easy to cast the votes against the party you dislike, but how do you deal with the whole mass of unsophisticated, uncritical, unthinking folks? No wonder LKY himself said Singaporeans were daft. It is a culture that is quite beyond me, thank goodness I only have a few more years to go before I uproot and move off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are articulate & you write well. I have read Alvin Tan's post & reread it because you said he made valid points.
      1) It was no big deal in running punysized SG which a population of 3m compared to NY 10 m. Moreover the British left everything in place in this top entrepot city.
      SG's GDP per capita was $500 and it depended on foreign aid. Britain was letting go of her colonies. Jamaica, Guyana & Cyprus became independent in the 60s. India, Sri Lanka, S Africa much earlier. But where are they now? Corruption, war & Squandered economies.

      2. Its not about the man, what about his esteemed colleagues like Dr Goh Keng Swee, S Rajaratnam,...?
      Let say for a moment LKY wasnt into politics, how many of the Old Guards would actually get into politics? Do your research. LKY was instrumental in roping key founders in.
      If LKY wasnt into politics, how do you think SG will turn out? Just imagine SG under Lim Chin Siong or Lim Yew Hock or.... Or under Francis Seow or Tan Wah Peow in the later years? It is going to be hard.

      3. So, AlvinTan, the seer, proclaims SG will be fine w/o LKY looking at how SKorea, Japan, Germany, France have moved along. What about the failed (relatively speaking) economies mentioned in pt 1) above? So he admires Dr MM for his benign rule. Yet dont forget AlvinTan is a fugitive of his country. You can say Stalin COMMITTed HUMAN RIGHTS ATROCITIES but if you must insist, LKY pales in comparison!

      So while it seems that you are a erudite writer, there is little in your brain when you label the rest of Singaporean a mass of unsophisticated, uncritical, unthinking folks.

      Why wait for a few years before you uproot & move off? Why dont you go now.

      Delete
    2. Hi Shane, thanks for your post. I agree with what you said and that is why I had to stand up for Jeraldine. She isn't as thick skinned as me even if she is incredibly smart,

      As for Auspicium Melioris Aevi, I am merely saying that we can have a discussion about LKY's legacy now - if you can't talk about it now, when do we talk about it? I welcome your discussion about LKY's legacy.

      As for leaving Singapore, NB. I left the moment I finished NS, within days of my ORD - so why wait? As we say in Hokkien, 'mai tu liao'.

      Delete
    3. Actually, I am saying that few of the comments actually bothered to address if his points were valid, not that I think all his points were valid. There is a very big difference. My issue was not on whether Alvin was spot on but just that people were attacking and throwing personal insults instead of debating or offering different perspectives. Like you appear to be doing here as I suppose my response triggered a very unhappy emotional reaction rather than a nuanced response.

      I could have explained a little clearer as I was also reading the sort of hate responses that were posted in response to Jeraldine Phneah's blog which I personally felt was not critical of LKY. She just was not using an uber admiring tone which appears to irk a lot of people, perhaps the older Singaporeans as described by Ivan Sum. Similar to what Alvin Tan expressed, she also gave equal credits to LKY's team of old guards during the early years. It certainly does not mean we are disrespectful to LKY just because we credit others equally and not just to one person.

      There are different ways of expressing different opinions but there is no need to be personally insulting just because some people chose not to express sentiments by being sentimental (aka for the whole world to see and hear).

      As for why I am still here, there is such a thing as serving out the minimum requirements before I can get a posting and position elsewhere. By the way, you could also do better with your latin spelling. The correct term is auspicium melioris aevi. I know and remember because it is an anthem I sang for years.

      Delete
  10. Agree. The team effort made Singapore. However without the leader, there may not last the team.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Without creative and critical thinking skills Singapore's economy will be doomed. Imagine these scenarios in the next 30-40 years. What if Malaysia blast a canal through the Peninsular and polar ice cap melts at the North Pole and allow ships sailing from Europe to China to bypass Singapore. Singapore's shipping industry will be doomed. What if oil runs out in the next 40 years and Jurong Island becomes ghost town. What if the gulf airlines form an alliance with other South East Asian airlines and travellers bypass Changi Airport altogether and Changi Airport decline. What if China improve on their infrastructure and intellectual property rights and MNCs relocate there due to their bigger domestic market and bigger supply of skilled labour. What if US becomes bankrupt and CNY becomes the new international currency and all financial activities relocate from Singapore to Shanghai? How will Singaporeans make a living?

    Why is Switzerland able to give her citizen the world's best standard of living without depending so much on foreign investment. It does not have a deep natural harbour or a good strategic location like Singapore but it has plenty of world class companies like Nestle, ABB, Norvatis, Roche, Rolex, Swatch, Adecco, Credit Suisse, BS, etc. And Singapore. Can you really depend on Hyflux filtration, Creative soundblasters and Osim massage chairs to make a living. Without critical thinking skills, creativity and entrepreneurship, Singapore's long term future is doomed. We may not get to see SG100.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lee Kuan Yew has cited our small population as a problem for creativity and entrepreneurship. We simply do not have enough creative, talented people like the US. He foresees that to survive, we have to continue catching a wind, a surf, a trend, and riding on it. He is pessimistic that we will one day create our own Apple or Nestle...

      But I do agree that Lee Kuan Yew has done a great job getting us to where we are today. It's how we are going to build upon the foundation that may be the problem.

      Our track record of entrepeneurship is truly worrying. We can blame it on our education system which has only trained us to work for MNCs, but honestly, what other choices do we have then?

      However, that does not mean we should stop trying. I think Singaporeans now have to take the economy to the next level and entrepreneurship might just be the answer.

      How does Israel do it?

      Delete
    2. There have already been talk about this "peninsular blast" thing you mentioned but NOT through Malaysia BUT through Thailand via the Kra Isthmus Canal near its southern Muslim-Majority Provinces. Attempts were made as early as 1897, BUT was trashed by the British Colonialists AND the Thai Kingdom for the sake of PROTECTING Singapore's status as a dominant harbour (which in turn was "protected" as a result of the Suez Canal, something school textbooks WOULD HAVE taught you!). And for the LKY-worshippers, if such a canal is finally built (with PAP-loving PRC money as part of its "naval silk route" strategy), the "prosperous" harbour that Singapore has been enjoying for the past 200 years will be FINISHED, and even Lee Kwan Yew would be LITERALLY POWERLESS to do anything about it even if he remains alive, because they can now use the Kra route to BYPASS the entire Malacca Strait, totally skipping Harbour Singapore and saving 600 tonnes of crude oil in the process, the economics of savings can be done at your own convenience. Even if Kra Canal fails, there's a Plan B - to use the rail links of 4 countries: Myanmar, Thailand, Laos and Vietnam to link-up coastal ports in Myanmar and Vietnam, AGAIN reportedly using PRC money, and this time not only oil shipping costs for Singapore lost, BUT ALSO goods shipping as well!

      Delete
  12. Hi Alex. Just wanted to say a big thank you for writing this post to speak up for me. Still puzzled as to why people will get so offended over a post that does not insult or point out any of LKY mistakes and flaws but merely explains it was not a one man show. I am really grateful and appreciate it much. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No worries darling. I know we are getting a lot of heat for what we have said, but my point is simple: in a small way, I think it is important to say that we can indeed form our own opinions, come up with a personal response to the event and not be afraid to express that opinion - that it isn't necessary to conform to what everyone else is saying or doing and that there is a great value in making the effort to think, "what is my response? What do I think? What do I feel?" One of the problems I have with Singapore is this culture of conformity - it drives me nuts the way people just expect you to conform and not be different and you were shot down for daring to be just that little bit different.

      I don't even think that's fighting for the freedom of speech - I am just standing up for a good friend who was treated badly.

      Delete
  13. Hey does that mean Hitler did not actually kill anyone, Alan Turing didn't solely break the Enigma code, Mark Zuckerberg isn't the founder of Facebook,  James Watson and Francis Crick shouldn't be credited for discovering DNA and bosses shouldn't be taking credit for the team and my work?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey, my teacher told us that Watson and Crick just took other people's research results and didn't even conduct experiments by themselves. In fact, their "discovery" which led to the nobel prize is based on a photo by a woman researcher Rosalind Franklin, because they saw it without her knowledge/permission.

      Delete
    2. Just correcting your knowledge: Facebook officially has FIVE CO-FOUNDERS, FOUR OTHER PEOPLE were officially acknowledged for this other than Zuckerberg: Eduardo Saverin, Andrew McCollum, Dustin Moskovitz and Chris Hughes.

      Delete
    3. Thanks for correcting twocents on the issue of the Facebook founders. I spotted that but was too busy working to correct him/her!

      Delete
  14. Phneah's facts are fine. It's the writing style that irks me. Your mileage may vary.

    I agree that all this intolerance to divergent views is disturbing. No matter how much of an airhead Phneah may come across as, it's her divne right to air those views.

    I don't agree with her taking down the post at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree Roger. I wouldn't say airhead, but her voice was rather weak and apologetic. In fact, I commented on that on her blog. I hope with more life experience, she would come across stronger. She is to be commended on being able to think critically. I was disappointed that she felt pressured to censor herself.

      Delete
    2. I agree. I was very disappointed that she caved in to self-censorship and that is why I wrote this post.

      Delete
  15. At first, I was impressed by how intellectual you sounded, and how intellectual you wanted this post to be. I was prepared to be awed by your intellect, until I saw this: "popular blogger Alex Liang described “making it a natural place for ships to make a stop en route between East Asia (China, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines etc) and India, the Middle East, Africa, Europe and beyond”". There is a Latin saying which is most apt for such occasion - res ipsa loquitur.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think we need to clarify on the meaning of free speech, both Phneah and yourself have every rights to express your own opinion, and I think everyone else has their rights to express theirs. Even within a small team of people there is bound to be differences in opinions, and they may even vary in maturity. If a writer is not able to accept opinions of others, then it should be a report without individual opinions.

    Yes, his policies are debatable, but he did what is best for the country, that is the job of a leader, not a negotiator, not a mediator. Crediting him for everything is probably just just a street talk, going a bit deeper, he did have a lot of help. I think he is a great leader, the tributes he gets from global leaders have shown the respect he got on the global stage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tommy, my point was that Phneah was the victim of a nasty cyber-lynch mob attack. Nobody was interested in talking to her about her piece, they just wanted to intimidate her into censoring herself which they succeeded in. That is why I posted on my blog the part that she took down, because I am older and have a much thicker skin and no amount of name-calling is going to intimidate me into censoring myself. This is why I am responding to you in this manner, I welcome your attempts to chat to me about this issue and am very happy to talk to you about it. At least you offered me your personal response on the issue and I am acknowledging your point of view (and airing it via my blog's comment section as well) - that is a very civilized way to approach the subject.

      Delete
  17. I'll be honest with you i stopped reading your blog after awhile because you were getting a bit narcissistic, but i came across your post in the famous EDMW forum and remembered why i started reading your blog in the first place - in between all the narcissistic and whinging posts, sometimes your posts bravely articulate the dissenting voice of reason against the herd mentality and this is one very good example. Keep going LimpehFT and stay true to yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I don't take any issue with the content of the post. I just took issue with the title. It seems like clickbait to me and it seemed as though she was taking advantage of the situation to generate hits for her blog. This, to me, is not right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you felt that it was clickbait, then you should not have clicked on it. You could have chosen not to click through. Such is the nature of surfing the internet - I trust you're not new to it?

      Delete
    2. Indeed, I did not click on it at all and promptly unliked her page --- most of her other posts are clickbait anyway, but this one pushed me over the edge. It's only after reading your post that I sorta found out what she was talking about.

      Delete
  19. There is a time n place for everything. Just like u, I dont think LKY is behind every good thing in Sg. But he has done A LOT in really difficult situations. Now ppl are in mourning. Its not the time for ur analysis. Respect that many many ppl respect n love him. Respect their grief n gratitude even if u dont share it. If u dont have this sensitivity, then u lack sm basic sense of humanity, no matter how clever your fact-finding or intellectual analysis. Dont be surprised by anger when you go to a funeral with your 'balanced viewpoints', read arrogance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow. This is exactly what limpeh was talking about. I'm sorry when someone dies, especially a public figure, we talk about their legacy. What he did, what he said. Whether it was good or bad. If now is not the time then when is? And what makes you think you can be the arbiter of when the right time is?

      'Respect that many people respect him'? LOL. Listen to yourself. Who cares what other people do. If a large number of people respect a tyrant, for instance Stalin or mao, I am supposed to as well? Sorry, I don't know about you, but I have a mind of my own. You also might want to look up the informal fallacy of appealing to the masses. I'm also quite certain that 'read arrogance ', whatever that means, was a pathetic attempt at ad hominem, another fallacy you should read up on.

      Delete
    2. I agree with you Ivanovich - whilst I do have deep respect for LKY, I have major issues with Madseesaw trying to dictate to me what I can say, when I can say it and how I can say it. I say to Madseesaw, what gives you the divine right to dictate to me, to Ivanovich, to Jeraldine Phneah or anyone else when we should speak and what is acceptable?

      Just because people are grieving doesn't mean that they have to be totally rational and downright ridiculous or stupid - I have been through the grieving process quite a few times myself and I have lost loved ones before over the years. I don't suddenly become this irrational, unreasonable and bloody stupid idiot who screams and kicks up a big fuss the moment someone says anything I don't like about the person I am grieving for. Just because I am grieving doesn't give me the right to tell people what they can do - and it is not about respect, it is not about sensitivity - it is about being reasonable, rational and recognizing that others are free to react the way they like to LKY's death. You are entitled to your personal response as much as I am entitled to yours and you simply do not have the right to tell others what they should or should not do.

      If you do not like Phneah's original message, feel free to talk about it with her - that's what us bloggers are here for, we love to hear from our readers. But accusing her of a lack of sensitivity is crossing the line because she never told you that you can't grieve for LKY or you can't show your respect for him - she's just telling you exactly what her personal response is which is different from yours. And likewise, my response is very similar to Phneah's and if you can't deal with that, well I have two words for you: GROW UP. I am not going to do what you want me to do just because you claim to be grieving because it is my right to respond the way I want and the way I like to LKY's death - you don't get to tell me what is acceptable or right. You do what is right for you and I will jolly well do what is right for me.

      You know what the biggest irony is? I have so much respect for LKY. But I have no respect for people like Madseesaw who are being idiotic in their demands. Big difference.

      Delete
    3. I can’t help but to leave a little comment here. Alex, your article & response is spot on. Singaporean have long lost their sense of humor & ability to think / respond reasonably. Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, it’s their prerogative! One doesn't display their grief / sensitivity publicly, doesn't mean one is less sensitive or have lesser respect for Mr. Lee. Do we have to bawl our eyes out to show our grief or respect? That’s bullshit. I am a Singaporean, I don’t cry my eyes out , I don’t Q’ for hours to pay my respect for him at the Parliament house. But, I have a lot of respect for that great man. For his brilliant foresight & guts. His legacy is certainly assured.

      So Erm ..question for the See-Saw .. Pardon my ignorance , please do tell what exactly is the basic sense of humanity ?

      Delete
    4. I can’t help but to leave a little comment here. Alex, your article & response is spot on. Singaporean have long lost their sense of humor & ability to think / respond reasonably. Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, it’s their prerogative! One doesn't display their grief / sensitivity publicly, doesn't mean one is less sensitive or have lesser respect for Mr. Lee. Do we have to bawl our eyes out to show our grief or respect? That’s bullshit. I am a Singaporean, I don’t cry my eyes out , I don’t Q’ for hours to pay my respect for him at the Parliament house. But, I have a lot of respect for that great man. For his brilliant foresight & guts. His legacy is certainly assured.

      So Erm ..question for the See-Saw .. Pardon my ignorance , please do tell what exactly is the basic sense of humanity ?

      Delete
    5. Hi Ivanovich & LIFT (apologies i'm not sure of your real name - i chanced upon this article from a FB newsfeed.
      To begin, I have never ever responded / commented on any blogs. I'm not that brave or have that strong a heart to face the criticism my opinions may bring.. but I felt compelled to respond to this because I do agree with many points made by Ivan Sum in his response and I can understand why readers like Madseesaw and others have lashed out at the post made by your friend or those of Alvin on TRS etc…

      Yes, you are absolutely right. Who are we (they) to dictate when’s the right or wrong time to make analysis (positive or negative) or to dictate anyone's choice of words when sharing their thoughts or opinions. We all have freedom of opinions (maybe not speech in some parts of the world) and in the world we live in today, we can easily voice these thoughts in silo, seated behind a screen typing away, and that makes it a safe haven versus outright saying it out loud to people around us (i.e. at a wake or in the presence of the deceased family in this case)

      However, it is also understandable that readers like madseesaw responded the way they did..i dont think it’s a ‘demand from her’ but more like a comment, ask or perhaps reminder…
      These are readers who feel deeply for the late LKY and to be frank, it could be any deceased for that matter.
      It’s an emotional time for them and when emotions run high, we know well that it tends to lead to strong words being used, perhaps even to the (bad) extent of name lashing.. I’m not condoning it or saying its right to lash out, but imagine if it was a loved one who passed on, someone you were close to and though he / she may have been a villain in his hay days, but for that period of mourning, it’s natural for you to wish that others around you give the deceased a break from all the negativity, even if everything said were facts and truths.

      One may even say casually “she’s already dead…can’t you cut her some slag and show some sensitivity? Now’s not the time...” Especially if this conversation wasn’t a virtual one but someone literally saying it aloud at the wake of your loved one.. It’s hard to imagine anyone being able to act calmly, and start analyzing the truth in statements passed and remark “yes, i do agree you make valid points etc etc…”.

      Yes, you may also argue that this is the internet world, we get to read / preview / think before we hit the ‘publish’ button. but, emotions run high in periods like these.. no one likes to hear (or read) about how bad and evil their love one was especially when they are grieving.. and any analysis factual, or not, is easily seen as a criticism.

      Yes they can choose their words more appropriately and be more diplomatic in requesting for sensitivity and they probably should not say anyone lacks moral decency.. but emotions, while hiding behind a keyboard, makes us less careful with our choice of words…and it works both ways.. I strongly believe if all of us were in a room together now having this live discussion, everyone would be more careful of what’s being said, taking cues from the emotions and reactions running across each person’s face, taking into consideration the relationships some may have with the deceased instead of just shooting out every thought that comes to our mind… fact or myth.
      (to be con't..)

      Delete
    6. Well @-e-line, I welcome your first comment. Please note that being in the grieving process doesn't give you the divine right to censor anyone - I have been through the grieving process quite a few times and I have never ever demanding the divine right to tell anyone to shut up just because I was very sad. My grief was private, not public - it was about my relationship with the person who has passed, it was certainly not about beating my chest in public and showing everyone just how sad I was by wailing hysterically. I believe in a certain dignity in that kind of composure - it's only in North Korea where they believe in mourning the death of Kim Jong Il like that and I'm certainly not North Korean.

      In any case, being a history buff, I probably know a lot more about the life of LKY than the vast majority of Singaporeans who have shown an alarming lack of awareness of Singapore's history. Heck, I have even met LKY in 1993 and talked to him when I was invited to the Istana - how many of these people who claim to be mourning never ever got close to LKY or know the details of his early life or the detailed history of Singapore in the period from 1950 to 1980? That fact is, I probably know a helluva lot more than most of you but i don't think that gives me the right to tell everyone else what to think or do upon LKY's death. That's because we'e all entitled to making our own personal response to the situation and that's the nature of grief - it is a very personal thing.

      Delete
    7. Well said, you spoke my mind.

      I think it is assumptious to conclude that Sporean are not capable of rational arguments during this mourning period. LKY is someone close to many people's heart no matter how we view his deeds, now is not a wise time to prick them with a needle when we knew they are sensitive to pain.

      Anyway, Mr Lee himself has often said that all cannot be done by himself, its impossible. He gave due credit to all those deputies who built Singapore in those early independence days.

      Delete
  20. Guys, thanks for your comments and for reading and sharing this article. I am shocked at how this piece has gone viral in a big way, like I have not expected this at all. I have been up in Manchester very busy working - I have seen the comments and have been approving them via my phone, but I had no idea just how popular this post has been and it is currently my 2nd most popular post of all time. Only Alvin Tan (of Alvivi fame) is somewhat more popular than LKY on my blog but at this rate, who knows?
    Listen, I will respond to some of the comments above in due course (I am exhausted after this work trip) and also, I will write a part 2 follow up as I have had so many thoughts about this issue whilst in Manchester - I'm not sure if you realize but whilst the two cities are both in England, Manchester has a very different character and unique identity and Mancunians are proud of their Northern identity which sets them apart from Southerners (like me, as I am considered a Londoner to them).

    Once again, thanks for popping by and reading.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I just realized that I had nearly a month's worth of hits within 24 hours. Crikey. Don't just read it and talk about it elsewhere people - Limpeh is back from Manchester, come and let me know your thoughts, kum siah.

      Delete
  21. I clearly remember Goh Keng Swee, Albert Winseimus and S Rajaratnam being mentioned in our SS textbooks. I don't know why so many posts (like this one) claim that they were left out of the narrative.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Daniel, no one is saying that they were totally censored or whitewashed from history - yes they have appeared in social studies and history textbooks, but the fact is most Singaporeans wouldn't even be able to spell Winseimus even if they have heard of him. What I bemoan is the lack of awareness of history amongst the vast majority of Singaporeans. It's not that the information isn't there - the history textbook has always been on the shelf, it is just the way Singaporeans are happy to ignore it and simply pick and choose a few choice bits from it.

      Delete
  22. I find it's funny that for a person who believe in the freedom of speech finds it hard to accept others freedom of speech / criticisms / verbal abuses. Yes it is disgusting that netizen to use adusive words. But not only Singapore have such issues, it is a global issue. It tells us of the culture of human behavior and not just Singaporeans. We as a person should accept that when you want to express your freedom of speech, be ready for other people's freedom of criticism of that speech. If you are not mentally really for it, then it will be better to reframe from expressing that right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jq, like I have mentioned many times before, in the UK, I lived through the death of Margaret Thatcher. She was a former prime minister and when she passed on, there was a wide range of responses. Some loved her, some hated her but everyone got to express their opinions and nobody was censored for expressing disdain for her. There was a huge debate about her legacy and we all knew that was going to come the day Thatcher died. It was inevitable.

      What I would have liked to have seen were more Singaporeans choosing to debate Jeraldine Phneah and engage her in a more civilized way - instead, their response was extremely childish and immature, they chose to engage in a cyber-mob lynching and forced her to censor herself. This didn't happen in the UK when Thatcher died and like so many others, I wrote a piece on why I didn't like Thatcher at all and nobody felt the need to censor me: I was left alone in peace, allowed to express my opinion. So you are wrong in claiming that this is not just a Singaporean problem: it may happen elsewhere, but the problem is particularly bad in Singapore when you have a combination of a lack of freedom of speech and this herd mentality. Phneah was attacked for refusing to conform - that would have never happened in the UK.

      Delete
    2. First, using MT vs LKY as your point of comparison does not convince me that UK and Singapore people behave differently when such scenario happens. Becos the sentiments are different for these two leaders.

      First is their Exit from leadership. When MT left, or force to leave, she did not left well. There were higher unemployment and social unrest. She was unpopular. Majority dislike her.
      When LKY left, he handed over a better country to his successor. He left popular. Majority love him.
      And whenever there's a majority of one preference, you get less objection and criticism. You might even get praises & likes easier.

      Second, LKY is considered as one of Singapore's founding fathers and First Prime minister while MT is just another prime minister. Therefore, Because of my first two points, emotions from Singaporeans are expected to be higher than those in UK.

      Third, I think her writing tones might appear too harsh at this moment of lost. And causes more emotional stir on reader mourning for their hero.

      Lastly, I do not know how popular your blog was when you wrote about MT and how many readers or followers you had in UK, and what are their demographics And therefore it's not possible for me to judge on this, that if your blog is as popular as Phneah's and if your readers are of certain groups that are indifferent. No offense.

      The most controversial about freedom of speech is gay rights. When people expresses their disapproval of gay marriage, they get shot down, threaten, force to do public apologies and even lost of jobs. And these are happening globally and not just in Singapore. So does these people have the freedom of speech to speak their mind? (Before I get shot, I'm pro-gay.)

      I too wish that more will dedate than bully. But Phneah should not remove it and let the bullies get what they want. I too believe in the freedom of speech but I also believe is exercising it wisely, but once you exercise it be prepare for the onslaught.

      Delete
    3. Well Jq, Thatcher was indeed a controversial figure but at the end of the day, she would not have won a total of 3 general elections (1979, 1983 and 1987) if there wasn't enough popular support for her and her party. Such is the way politics works - her becoming prime minister and then holding on to power through 2 more general elections ... that was never a forgone conclusion. She fought hard to hold on to power and made many enemies along the way, of course and you're wrong to say that there was higher unemployment and social unrest when she left office. It was quite the opposite. Allow me to put on my history teacher hat.

      The main reason why Thatcher rose to power in the 1979 elections was because the previous government had made such a total mess of the country - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_Discontent the 1978-79 winter was memorable for the amount of hardship suffered by the people and the number of riots because the people were just so angry and frustrated with a Labour government which had been totally useless. Thus the Labour government created such a situation whereby it was hard for Thatcher's Tory party not to lose the election because they had messed up so badly that the electorate was desperate to get rid of them. And yes under Thathcer, the economy did improve and sure there were always pockets of discontent somewhere in the UK because there were always winners and losers when it comes to an evolving economy. Given the extremely grand funeral that she was given as an ex-PM, Thatcher was still very dear to many British people.

      As for Phneah's writing style - feel free to dislike her writing and boycott her blog if you really don't like what she wrote, but should she be censored? I don't think so. And as for my critic of Thatcher, what made my blog somewhat unspectacular was the fact that others were far more vocal in their criticism in Thatcher whilst I was somewhat reserved and treated it like a sociological exercise to examine her legacy.

      I will write more about this soon. I was intending to blog today but spent most of my free time responding to comments here instead of writing.

      Delete
  23. I agree with you, limpehft. Lee Kuan Yew was overly praised in Singapore history. I agree that he wasn't the founding father of Singapore. I knew it from the start. It was Raffles who did, and Raffles transformed Singapore to a strategic entreport location in Asia. Also, I agree that the dutch economic expert, Dr albert was also responsible in transforming Singapore economy rather than Lee Kuan Yew, which the latter admitted that he thanked Dr Albert in helping Singapore economy.

    I was being misunderstood like pheah was. I highlighted Lee's failure to address the falling birthrate. Some critics said that was a small issue just to discredit him. I wasn't trying to discredit him. Even lee himself admitted he had given up on this issue. He knew that had he not welcomed foreigners during his time, Singapore population growth would be negative like Japan. And also, perhaps the over emphasis on the Singapore economy, many younger generation Singaporeans are not easily satisfied with what they have.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello 531441, Thanks for your comment. Sigh, I know what you mean about this ridiculous allegation of you trying to 'discredit' LKY. So what, are we supposed to ignore all the mistakes he has made along the way? Isn't this no better than whitewashing history? Singaporeans kick up a big fuss when the Japanese whitewash their history textbooks about the role Japan played during WW2, but now they are doing exactly the same thing in whitewashing the facts of what happened within living memory for many Singaporeans.

      What disgusts me is the way many Singaporeans think they can get away with the most unreasonable and ridiculous arguments in the name of "I'm grieving, therefore I am going to get away with making ridiculous demands." Yeah right. Grief is a personal process - it does not entitle you to censor others.

      Delete
    2. Very true, just because of grieving, people think they just say good things about the late leader of Singapore. Sorry to say perhaps some of them are hypocrites. They may grieve Lee Kuan Yew's death now, what happens after 1,5,10 years from now? Who knows they may critise him just because there is no more grieving period?

      Lky failure in.addressing falling birthrate will not be a small issue in the long term.if that.keeps happening. Now with the influx of foreigners, the percentage of foreigners in Singapore is almost 30% of the population, with the growth of new residents slowing down over the years. One may say that's common among developed countries but Singapore fertility is among the lowest in the world. That's why I was wondering why some Singaporeans fail to understand this...

      Perhaps you are right. Singapore education was controlled tightly by the ruling party. As many said, history is written by victors, so the so.called losers' good achievements are discredited. We shall see what happens if PAP loses election in future. Will the new ruling party expose mistakes made by lee Kuan yew and his team?

      Delete
  24. What makes a leader a successful leader is when he is a leader of leaders.
    Who has willingly given the best years of his life to become vulnerable not for himself, but for a land of millions of people? Let him be the first one to cast a stone at LKY.

    Who has never made a decision before and on hindsight realise there were some negative consequences you had never expected or prepared for? Let him be the first one to judge the politicians and their policies

    This land was built out of actions, love and getting hands dirty. Maybe we should all reflect, for our sakes, what we are doing as young builders...what are we doing for our world? Lest we become a generation that produces only after our kind...young people who have opinions but no action is a young people with so much more potential that we have yet to turn into power to change lives...

    ReplyDelete
  25. This article is also jumping on the LKY bandwagon, isn't it? It's all about timing, can't the writer wait until the mourning period is over before he starts mourning about all the negativity? Let Singaporeans who thinks that they should pay their final respect to LKY do that this week and he can do whatever he wants from Monday onwards, what's the hurry? Even factually LKY did not really brought Singapore form fishing village to what it is today, he still did a lot of good for Singapore, we should stop picking on the details and many many mistakes that he did. My parents were "victims" of some of his policies, but I don't hold it against him as I grew up in a poor Malay village and I have a very comfortable life today. We have come a long way, just pay our respect this week, other things will be in bad taste.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shiyiguang, I know Jeraldine - she is my friend and I am standing up for her. I had no idea this post was going to be so popular, but I am not the kind of person who can stand by and see a friend get bullied without doing anything. Would you stand by and ignore your friend if she was being bullied? I didn't care if this post got 100 views or 100,000 views, I just had to stand up and say something in defence of my dear friend Jeraldine. If you do have something to say as well, then please - I invite you to blog about it or express your views online; but don't you dare try to tell me or Jeraldine when I should or should not speak and what I can or cannot say. You have absolutely no right to do so - feel free to grieve and mourn all you want, but this process of grieving is a personal journey you have to take: it is about you and the person who has died. It has nothing to do with me and the only reason why you are choosing to make it about me is because there simply isn't enough relationship between you and LKY.

      No one is stopping you from paying your respects or doing what you want - but what gives you the right to tell me what I can or cannot do? That's why I am defying you by doing the precise opposite. It's not about bad taste, it's about you realizing that you have no right to tell me what my response ought to be. You can demand that I conform but I am going to frustrate and disappoint you by saying that I have absolutely no desire to conform and I am going to do and say what I jolly well want to. I'm not being negative about LKY - I actually have deep respect for him. It is people like you I have a problem with: so let me spell it out to you clearly. You have no right to tell others what they can say or how they should respond to LKY's passing. Get that into your head.

      Delete
  26. Jeraldine's research was well-done and well-balanced. Not to say, polite as well. I don't see anything insensitive about her article. In fact, many around me share her views as well, and what impressed me most was that she wrote that article so articulately without droning/ranting, as so many bloggers tend to do.

    There'll always be haters, and I'm mildly disappointed that she self-censored herself due to haters. There were many supporters as well, even commenters who helped shoot down those haters, but unfortunately she chose to cave in to those that are irrational, rude and illogical.

    She's not an airhead, she's just quite nice a person without the utlra-thick skin most bloggers have developed over the years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you so much Sharaine =D <3

      Delete
    2. Thanks for your post. I agree with you - and that is why I am Jeraldine's friend :)

      Delete
  27. I feel you're giving the British way too much credit for what they did not do in Singapore.

    I refer to your paragraph "In 1965, Singapore had a pretty established civil service.....public utilities.....a transport network (an excellent national road network complete with a public transport system). Thus, PAP merely had to work with this existing infrastructure to help Singapore progress"

    Housing - The british only recognised the problem in the 1920s and the subsequently set up SIT did not do much to solve the issue until self governance in 1959 under the PAP (under LKY) where the HDB came into play and did way more in a few years than the brits and their SIT in over 30 years.

    Transport - Go around and ask the senior folks who lived in the island in the post war period. Ask them how long it would've taken them to get from areas like Jurong, Punggol or Changi to the city centre back then.

    While what you said is true (singapore was not a fishing village in 1965, but the "established infrastucture" you mentioned was nothing more than a less than basic platform which was definitely not enough to propel Singapore from what it was to what it is now without the changes after coming under PAP self governance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please lah. Limpeh is already ten steps ahead of you. Don't come and lecture Limpeh about Singapore's history okay? You think you cleverer than Limpeh izzit? Think again.

      Have a read on this piece here: http://limpehft.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/was-singapore-fishing-village-in-1965.html

      Delete
  28. And remember ... Ong Teng Cheong is the one who proposes building of the MRT. NOT LKY. Tony Tan even doubted the viability of the MRT.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I'm not here to side with anyone nor to criticise and argue and say who's right or who's wrong. Just like to give my own views and if it offends anyone, I apologise to you upfront.

    Like what was previously mentioned, there's a time and place for everything. I respect the need for what you said. And it is true that some people think that nobody has the right to say anything vaguely negative about Mr Lee upon his death. But that is because we didnt know what Mr Lee's passing have an impact on them. It's just like we never know how the person you loved has made an impact on your life. Because that is your life. And not ours.

    I respect and like having a freedom of speech. Even though there is limited of such freedom in Singapore. But living here, I understand the importance and how crucial it is to have limited freedom in such a small country. And that contributes largely to how and why we have managed to maintain racial harmony in Singapore, such a small country that one big riot might cause a very big impact on everything we build on.

    You may think that yes, people should have the freedom to speak what they want. But I feel that as a blog writer. You have to understand something . There are and will always be people who are irrational or they simply cannot accept the fact of something else. We are all humans. We have our own Point of View because we have different mindset and we make our own mistakes, and we feel different things. If not, this would be a boring world to live in. And whatever writers or journalist or bloggers publish and post, since this is the internet age, there are and will always be keyboard warriors. And there will always be disagreements, that is one downside to being a writer.

    Coming back to your friend's article, I don't mean to say that your friend's article is mean, etc, etc, but I do feel that the current period, it shouldn't be a suitable time to put up such an article. Yes, she was just analysing it. But put it in such a situation and imagine this. Your most respected and beloved father or grandfather or someone you deeply admire and respect has just passed away and you are very upset. And at the funeral, you see someone at the funeral itself speaking to a crowd and analysing where the person who died went wrong, and what mistakes he did, and why and etc. etc and why he shouldn't have so and so achievements. How would that feel for you? Would you go. "Hmmm, I think you're right, and join that person in analysing in front of your respected person's death bed?" Or would you be thinking "Why is that person doing that in a funeral?!" No matter what you would choose to do. You have to respect and understand that most people wouldn't have a very analytical mind at that point of time to sit down and analyse the rights and the wrongs. People's reaction would be the 2nd one. "What is that person doing? And the emotional side, anger and etc will emerge." Which is what is happening in your friend's case I believe.

    I repeat that I am not here to say who's right and who's wrong, and if I do offend anyone, I apologise. But this is just a point of view.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Sy, thanks for your comment.

      I appreciate your effort in trying to express your point of view in such a respectful and civilized manner and I only hope that other Singaporeans will be as reasonable as you have been (sadly, that has not been the case). I don't think Phneah was attacking or discrediting LKY in any way, she was merely raising some of the facts about the early years of Singapore's modern history from the period that LKY had first come into power - what I suspect is that the vast majority of Singaporeans totally suck at history and know virtually nothing about Singapore's history from the 1950s and 1960s, hence when confronted with this information (that should really have been covered in their history lessons), they are taken aback to learn about this only at this time. Should Phneah be blamed for their ignorance or the failings of the MOE to properly teach Singaporean history to students in Singapore's schools? No, that is not fair to heap the blame on her.

      In any case, LKY was a politician, he has put himself out there and people are free to form an opinion about him. This is quite different from a person who has valued his privacy and doesn't welcome any unwanted attention. We're talking about the one person who is the most famous Singaporean of all time - would it come as any surprise to his friends and relatives that everyone in Singapore has his/her own opinion about LKY?

      In any case, Phneah wasn't saying anything at LKY's funeral - she said it on her blog, the same way I am saying in on my blog. I'm not forcing you to read my blog. If you wanna come to my blog and have a read, then please go ahead. But otherwise, it's like you coming into my living room and trying to tell me what I can or cannot say in the privacy of my own living room: excuse me but WTF? What are you gonna do next, start censoring the thoughts of private citizens of what they can or cannot think and start censoring thoughts which you deem inappropriate?

      You've crossed the line without even realizing it.

      Delete
  30. Amazing...why are the comments beings censored by someone who fights so hard for freedom of speech.
    HILAROUS :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Firstly Damn Pissed, I'm not fighting so hard for freedom of speech. If you're talking about the person 'Puppet' who kept attacking me on my blog, I've no time for haters like that. This is my blog and I get to decide whose comments I publish and whom I want to engage with. Believe you me, if I really cared that much about the freedom of speech in Singapore, I would have stayed and fought for a better Singapore. Instead what did I do? I left the moment I finished my ORD - like literally, within days, I was at Changi airport on a flight to France. So if you're looking for someone who fights so hard for the freedom of speech - it certainly isn't me: you are so totally barking up the wrong tree.

      I am a blogger. I blog, I talk about what I like and what takes my fancy. That's not the same as someone who fights tirelessly for the freedom of speech. You have mistaken me for Aung Sung Suu Kyii. Your confusion is hilarious indeed.

      Delete
  31. " It was Dr Albert Winsemius, the Dutch economist sent by the United Nations in 1960 to help Singapore industrialize. Singapore merely followed his economic plan for Singapore."
    While I respect your opinion and you have rightly pointed out some facts, I think that it is superficial to say "merely" followed his economic plan. As you have correctly stated that Albert Winsemius was an economist. He was someone who had undertaken urban projects in Netherlands. An economist, after all, is an consultant who is paid according to their man-hours committed in projects. He has no stake in Singapore other than a listing on his CV or marketing portfolio. City development and planning is hardly a SIMS city computer game whereby you can just click on mouse or press hotkeys. There are myriad of critical success factors such as ensuring a stable political environment, motivating the workforce, working with different stakeholders, financing, marketing, execution, etc etc. And he delivered all these. I do not think it is simply just he "merely following the plans". A project such as developing a house is already challenging enough and much more of a city and a country. The ideas are just small part. Like any project, the project manager takes full responsibility for it, in this case is Mr Lee. If it fails, he fails not the economist. The economist would have still taken his fat paycheck and left, maybe just a black mark in his CV whether the leader had to face the stakeholders which are the people. Hence, it is absolutely fair that he takes full credit for it.

    Maybe you have never been in a leadership position before and cannot empathize the difficulties and challenges with a leader.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ZT Kwan, No one is discrediting LKY in anyway by mentioning the fact at Dr Winsemius did play a role. Feel free to make the point that the role isn't as major as some have made it out to be and feel free to credit LKY as much as you like - but I don't see any harm done in merely talking about what has happened in Singapore's history. So many Singaporeans are upset that we are even having this discussion - which I find ludicrous. My guess is that they feel unable to partake in it not because they are grieving but because we have exposed the fact that they actually know so little of what LKY actually did.

      Delete
    2. Not that I like to be too personal but it appears to me from your post and reply to me that you seem more emotional about the fact that "many" Singaporean are upset and what you perceived of their lack of knowledge of LKY than you want to discuss about his contributions.

      What is your "many", one hundred thousand? one million?
      Well.. the number of singaporeans (40-50) which I interacted with know a lot of the history. Most have read the Memoirs like me.

      Of course Singapore is not a fishing village. It was thriving entreport which provided the economic benefit to the British. At the same time, there were slums, rampant corruption, unemployment and added to it, the British were leaving which left a big problem for more unemployment and a security threat. Like any good leader, he took charge and provide the leadership. He organised i.e. brought in people who knew how to do it like Albert Winsemius for economic planning, Israeli for the army. He executed and delivered. I think he deserved full credit. I honestly cannot see how you can justify it as just "merely" following the plan. Maybe you can enlighten me? Or you do not know the meaning of "merely"?

      Delete
    3. ZT Kwan,

      1. There are plenty of nasty comments on social media attacking anyone who dares to raise anything vaguely negative about LKY at the moment, such as the fall our from WP leader Mr Low's speech - people had attacked him for daring to mention that LKY was at times controversial.Your definition of 'many' is but a red herring - there is undoubtedly a large number of Singaporeans who are extremely intolerant of anyone who does not conform to the default response of worshiping LKY as if he was some kind of blameless saint and will not tolerate any kind of discourse on his legacy.

      2. Why are they so intolerant or afraid of any kind of discourse? Is it because they are not equipped with the intellectual tools of debate - hence that's a poor reflection of the Singaporean education system, where students are force fed loads of materials to memorize for exams but rarely expected to stand their ground and present a cogent argument? Or is it because they simply do not understand the history of Singapore well enough to talk about it intelligently, that's why they resort to personal insults and censorship in order to avoid having their ignorance exposed? Either way, it reflects very poorly on both the education system in Singapore as well as the culture in general.

      3. Good for you for having read his memoirs. Well done. So many people don't read these days - it's just a book, like how many hours does it take to read a book? I despair when dealing with a generation who have only the patience to read a Tweet or watch a 6 second video on Vine.

      4. On the issue of reading, you've misread the piece. It was Jeraldine Phneah who used the word 'merely' and I was merely quoting the part of her post which she has taken off her blog. Please scroll up and re-read the post and you can clearly see where my post ends and where the quote starts (the change of font after the picture entitled 'censorship in Singapore'). Tsk tsk, reading comprehension my dear. So if you wish to take issue with Jeraldine's opinion or choice of words, then please go to her blog and challenge her there. You're being extremely confused in asking me to justify her choice of words. You can find her at http://www.jeraldinephneah.me/

      Delete
  32. After reading most of the articles online, I found your article to be very objective and measured in your reasoning. Good job!

    Many people might not know this but Mr LKY had never taken all the credits for the success of this nation. In fact, in his memoirs and his speech - especially those made during his PM years, he always credited the pioneers for working together with him to build this Lion City. While it is time to mourn and to reflect, it is also important for readers to gather the facts before making any commentary. What displays here somehow reflects how most of us are not emotionally matured and rational enough to even engage in a polite and civilised political discussions.

    ReplyDelete
  33. It is not about denying you the right to say negative things about LKY, but simply about having respect for a man who had done so much for the country and the people - to let people grieve and sing praises of him as much as they wish to, and keep angry negative comments to yourself just for a week. One does not enter a funeral and tell a grieving son how his dad did not deserve all these respect and praises people are giving him - be it facts or not. One simply does not do that. It is not about worshipping or idolising, it is only asking you to be human.

    Also, we are not fans of LKY. We respect the man, and we are grateful. We are his people. We do not have to be obsessed with every single thing he had done, just to feel respectful towards him.

    Yes, people should always get their facts right before making any judgements. It would be good if every Singaporean knew the history of SG. But I believe LKY deserves respect and gratitude from any Singaporean for the simple fact that he did transform SG from a third world country to a first, even if its not literally from a fishing village. Prominent port or not, no one believed did SG could make it alone then. SG was abandoned. When people needed hope and needed a leader, he stood up, he fought and he never gave up on us. He was a selfless leader who fought for wonderful things and for all his people - different races, men and women. How many leaders could promise that, and nevermind deliver them? In difficult situations, he made some harsh choices. Wrong or right decisions, who is to judge? We don't know the story. Sometimes a leader has to fight dirty fights so that his people do not have to. Yet, I believe everyone can see with their own eyes the transformation of SG, and how pretty damn lucky we are. Can people ever credit or thank him enough just for that?

    Of course he did not do everything single handedly, and even though people would like to give him full credit, he never once took credit for that. But I don't know which is more perplexing to me: to eagerly point out the obvious that LKY had immense help and support from his team and people or to insist that he single-handedly did it.

    Although you claimed to have great respect for this man, and you have also accurately pointed out certain facts, you have also taken the facts superficially. To put it simply in another context, what i've been seeing from this post is:

    "The boy is dead doesn't mean I can't say anything I want"
    "The boy is not as smart as you said, he did not score 100 for his test, he merely scored 95!"
    "And he didn't even came up with the answers all by himself, he learnt it from the text books! *gasp*"
    "OH, and he even got home tutors and friends to study with him"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yanjie, I have to make a few points in response please.

      1. You're going down a slippery slope here - if we can't speak now, then when can we speak? In a few days? In a week? Or when you are happy for us to speak? Why are you trying to make up the rules for others as to when they are allowed to say what is on their minds? What gives you the right to censor others and make the rules for others - who gave you the right to do so?

      2. I am certainly not doing anything at a funeral - your analogy is downright ridiculous. I am saying what I am saying on my blog and sometimes in private conversations amongst friends in person and sometimes via social media or the phone. If you don't like what I write? Fine, don't come to my blog - boycott my blog by all means please, but please don't come here and demand that I censor myself because nobody tells me what to say or do here. What do you wanna do next - start censoring what I say to my friends and family in the privacy of my living room? What gives you the right to say so?

      What irks me the most is your expectation for me to conform and let me tell you point blank: there are people like me who will refuse to conform on the point of principle. I have great respect for LKY but I have a real issue with people like you who insist that I must do what you do - please do not try to do that because I know I am intelligent enough to think for myself and decide for myself what my reaction and response ought to be. I do not need you to tell me what to do so kindly refrain from doing so.

      Delete
    2. Hi,

      1. I did mention in my previous comment, but i will say again here. I hope to see respect for this week, at least. Why? Because it's the national mourning week. And seriously... stop putting words in my mouth. Since when did i make up rules for people or try to censor what people say? I am simply pointing out what I do not agree in your post and making an argument here. Also, there are social rules in the society, not because people are afraid to break the rules; they exist for good reasons because people care for each other and we respect each other.

      2. Yes, i agree the funeral analogy is not the best. But guess what else is "downright ridiculous"? Your logic. As a blogger, you are saying that what appears on your blog and on the internet is in any way similar to what you say in private conversations or writing in your diary? Trust me, I would not care at all if that was so. Using your way of argument, if you can post anything on your blog and ask people to simply not look, one can also wear anything inappropriate on the road and not be inconsiderate? Put out anything disrespectful and rude outside your doorstep because it's your house?

      3. This part is my favourite. I irk you? You irk me too. I'm sorry, I have no expectation for you to conform. In fact, I have no expectation for you at all. Because yes, there will always be people who disagree- for the sake of disagreeing, even at inappropriate timings. *sigh* What I am doing is not because i wish to conform you, but because i do not want people like you to think you can get away with anything you say, even if it does not make sense, even if it hurts people, even if its disrespectful, just because you think you are entitled with the freedom to do so. Always remember that the freedom of speech goes two ways. While you say what you think, i will continue to fight for what i believe is right. And let me tell you something, being different does not mean you have a mind or that you are intelligent. Don't make me laugh hahaha... If many people think something is right, that means they are conforming and they do not think? Have you considered the possibility that it's simply because that's the sound thing to do? Most importantly, it's I am not like you: so afraid to be the same. I don't need to be different to show that I am "intelligent enough to think for myself".

      4. Let me make an additional point. If you are as intelligent as you believed yourself to be, then you should know while some words can appear to be neutral, they may in fact be not. It was not the what you typed in your posts, but the way you chose to present it, the tone in your words, and most importantly... your intention behind the post. If you have enough respect for this man like you insisted in your post and your comment once again, why would you think he do not deserve the respect people are giving him, conformity or not? At least they are not being ungrateful and spiteful. Let me correct my funeral analogy. You did not attend any funeral. You simply said you respect a man, then post up a long blog post right after his death why he may not be deserving for all the respect he was getting.

      Lastly, if you never bothered with trying to persuade people or conform them, you wouldn't have been a blogger. You would have kept a diary. In every blog post you are trying to put out there your thoughts, and trying to gain support. You are not all that different... oh, don't worry, it's okay. It's okay not to be different at times...

      Delete
    3. Yanjie, thanks for your latest comment and allow me to respond.

      1. I believe I have adequately covered the issue of timing in my post here: http://limpehft.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/the-herd-mentality-of-singaporeans.html I know you're not going to agree with me, but that's my opinion. And needless to say, no I don't agree with you but I am not going to repeat the points I've made in my blog post, so please if I may direct you to it. Thanks.

      2. You would have to choose to deliberately go to limpehft.blogspot.com and look for Limpeh's blog in order to find my writing. Even if your friends did share my article on say Facebook or Twitter, then you still have to choose to click through, follow the link to my blog and read it. There is always a conscious choice on your part whether or not you wish to read my blog. Heck, many people come here and realize how long the post it and decide, nah I don't have the patience to read it all - TLDR, and then they click away to look at some funny video of cats doing silly things on Youtube. Your analogy of wearing something inappropriate in public is totally salah by that token because strangers who didn't choose to look at your attire may accidentally see something they don't like or may find offensive if they run into you on the bus, on the MRT or just walking down the street. Nobody can 'accidentally' read my blog unless they deliberately choose to follow a number of steps as follows:

      1. Either load the URL or follow a link supplied by someone else.
      2. Spend 10 minutes or so reading the very long article

      This can hardly be compared to say, me running into a PRC woman shitting in public... http://limpehft.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/interview-obnoxious-prcs-who-urinate.html

      3. Well, you're descending into personal insults and I won't indulge you. Your points are not well put across and your previous analogy was totally salah. In any case, I'm the one with the blog getting so much attention and traffic at the moment - Singaporeans are busy reading my blog. If you have something to say Yanjie, why don't you write your own blog and let's see how much traffic you can get. Limpeh's blog has well and truly gone viral with this article (well, it's not the first time my blog has been extremely popular) - let's see you write something and if Singaporeans will be interested in what you have to say.

      4. This is not even about LKY anymore - I'm talking about the need to create an environment where people should have the freedom to express a point of view and not be cyber-lynched for it. I quoted Jeraldine Phneah's article because she was bullied into censoring herself. What was written about LKY not deserving all the respect he is getting was Ms Phneah's opinion, not mine. You are seriously failing in your reading comprehension - you are not distinguishing Ms Phneah's opinion from mine. I quoted her because I don't believe anyone should be censored; everyone (including Amos Yee) should be allowed to say what they want to say and others have the right to respond in the name of freedom of speech.

      Please note that I have actually said very, very little about LKY himself. Like I said, I don't have a problem with LKY - I do have a problem with close-minded Singaporeans like you who expect everyone else to conform. You're making a very flawed argument by claiming that I am not respecting LKY enough and you're still hiding behind LKY - let me make it explicitly clear to you Yanjie: this is not and was never about LKY, this was about me disrespecting YOU Yanjie and me disliking YOU and me having a problem with your screwed-up attitude.

      So stop being a coward and hiding behind LKY. It is pathetic.

      Delete
  34. OK people, some important instructions. As we have exceeded 50 comments on this post, in order to see your latest comments - you must scroll down to the very bottom of the page and click on the words (in blue) 'Load more' before the latest comments will be revealed. I know it's a pain but that's blogger's template and I have no control over this function. I am not censoring anyone who has come here to make a point - unless you start getting abusing but thankfully, only one person has sailed close to that line so far.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Recently on Facebook, I posted a comment on SGAG's page (https://www.facebook.com/sgag.sg/posts/1133991939949126?comment_id=1134103493271304&ref=notif&notif_t=share_reply) with comments similar to yours, and the amount of vitriol I received was remarkable. At no point did I insulted LKY but I guess with emotions running wild it is difficult to remain logical and level headed

    I do believe that I was the only one who pointed out the myth behind a remarkable man. Like many other Singaporeans, I do not hate LKY and I do respect and admire his accomplishments. I do however feel there is a need to separate the myth from the man for it is no good to put a mortal man on a pedestal and worship everything about him. The Singapore education system has tried very hard to paint a picture that without LKY we will be nothing but yet simple common sense will dictate that nation building is a long arduous process with many inputs from many capable men and women. The Singapore success story is a story of us all, including your parents and your parents parents.

    I think that the average Singaporean has degenerated into a mess of unthinking cesspool, we produce scholars who can rote learn and pass exams and have a veneer of intelligence but there is nothing between the ears.

    ReplyDelete
  36. And may I present this brilliant article (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/08/margaret-thatcher-death-etiquette)

    "...this demand for respectful silence in the wake of a public figure's death is not just misguided but dangerous. That one should not speak ill of the dead is arguably appropriate when a private person dies, but it is wildly inappropriate for the death of a controversial public figure, particularly one who wielded significant influence and political power..."

    ReplyDelete
  37. I know what you mean, and I fully agree that he has flaws, and that his way of going forward undermined our freedom of speech, creative thinking, etc etc etc. No one denies that. It’s not that we don’t know he’s done things that he probably shouldn’t have done. It’s not that we don’t know that he’s chosen to sacrifice certain things in the pursuit of others. It’s not that we don’t know that he’s been wrong at times. He was human, after all, no different from any of us all. He wasn’t perfect, and no one thinks he is a god, We know that.

    But in that context, in that moment, I believe that he was the best person we could ever have gotten, and we are perhaps the luckiest people in the world for it. And in that context, in that moment, there was, quite simply, no other way to achieve the same progress through any other way. “Does it work? If it works, let’s try it. If it’s fine, let’s continue it. If it doesn’t work, toss it out, try another one.” He was always, always always, open to choice - too many people forget that. And until you can find someone who was in that exact same position, and could do it better, I don’t think it is right that you discredit everyone who displays the slightest amount of gratitude and respect to his memory and neglects to explicitly acknowledge his shortcomings.

    We respect him not because he was a flawless, perfect politician. We respect him because he is a flawed man who, placed in a position that is a leader’s worst nightmare, did the best he could for his country, and did it perhaps not perfectly, but better than any other person ever has and anyone could have ever dreamed.

    ReplyDelete
  38. All things being equal, small homes are easier to clean and upkeep. A helper upkeeping a 1 room flat immaculately doesn't necessarily make her a better help than one tasked with upkeeping a 100 room bed and breakfast. While credit still goes to both for even taking up the respective jobs and doing them well, let's not get carried away with all the praises, songs, dances and eternal worships of this helper of the 1 room flat. Let's take a reality check on this whole euphoria, lest we get blinded by over zealous herd mentality drivers cooking up a furore; who will not even tolerate any straight talker pointing out certain flaws with the cleaner's working style.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Everything you've mentioned is fair and valid.

    Several things that stood out to me in this article.

    Like many other critical pieces on Singapore and our foundations, there is an abundance of factual information, but it generally presents itself in a way that lacks understanding and empathy for others. The danger of being well-educated and a good critical thinker is that you can forget that humans are driven by emotion, not logic, because it is easier for the more intelligent to convince themselves over things they believe in by logically piecing together selective facts in their head.

    Your claim to respect Lee Kuan Yew comes across as a shallow point. It's very hard for others to believe that about you when the only positive thing you had to say about him was a passing statement about how he worked hard for us. It also doesn't help build a better impression when you've declared that you've given up your Singapore citizenship in your profile, that his passing has hardly affected you, and that you have basically put yourself on a pedestal by stating "Singaporeans don't often know how to handle a situation where people disagree with them".

    This builds huge amounts of negativity towards the rest of what you have to say, regardless of the accuracy and truth of the information you've provided. And though I was unable to read Jeraldine's original post, reading your excerpt makes me believe that she presented herself in a similar manner. There's a fine line between censorship, and offending others who don't share the same views. So to be realistic about Jeraldine's situation, she needed to thoroughly understand the potential perceptions people would get when she posted her article.

    It becomes very much harder for people to appreciate the research that both of you have done because you've attacked their identity. It would be akin to judgments made on your adventurous, wanderlust spirit -- you've worked in places around the world that have given you insights that others may never get to experience in their lifetime, but no matter how logical of an argument someone offers, you will never react positively to them if you don't respect their opinions and you have no common ground with them.

    Your intentions for writing this is to challenge others to think differently and look at the story from another perspective.
    So while this article is excellent on shedding light into Singapore's story as a whole, it is entirely unproductive because the people you want to affect will never take the time to ponder over this because it's easy to chalk it off as a disgruntled foreigner who has abandoned his country.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear R, allow me to make a few points in response to your post.

      1. I think that many people make the mistake of claiming, "oh you left Singapore that means you must hate Singapore" - how many times have I had this discussion before, sheeeesh. There are many reasons why I chose to leave Singapore the moment I could: I wanted to see the world, I wanted to have the opportunity work in different countries, experience different cultures etc. Also, I didn't get along at all with my parents and I wanted to be the complete opposite of my parents: they were primary school teachers from Ang Mo Kio who felt unease the moment they left the familiar environment of AMK and I wanted to show them that I can go work in somewhere like France, overcome the language and cultural barriers and have a great time there. Gosh, it's sooo much more complex than whether or not I liked the PAP or LKY.

      2. The whole irony about giving up my Singaporean citizenship was that I could go back and work in Singapore if I wanted to - and I did just that in 2011 for a while and I think I had a much better deal as an FT than if I had been a local. Don't hate the player, hate the game.

      3. Oh I totally do NOT respect the opinions of a lot of Singaporeans and I don't have any common ground with many of them - heck, never mind ordinary Singaporeans, I don't even have any common ground with my parents anymore. But then again, you're missing a vital point here.

      Am I trying to become the most popular blogger in Singapore? No.
      Am I trying to influence people in Singapore? No.
      Am I trying to be popular with the public in Singapore? Again, no.

      Look, I started blogging years ago because I thought it was fun to write and if thousands and thousands of people wanna read my writing, then well let me be the first to tell you how surprised I am. But please lah, I am under no illusions that somehow, people are going to read my blog and then suddenly change their whole perspective of the world. That is simply not gonna happen in the real world. I am happy enough preaching to the choir: ie. the small minority of well educated English speaking liberal elite in Singapore who are anti-PAP and they are my audience, not the average HDB-dweller who probably will not be able to understand half the things I am writing about here. From the way you write, I suspect that you may be in my core target group - but let me be clear: I have never ever thought that what I write would possibly appeal to a wide audience. Heck, I may have chosen to write in Singlish, very simple English or broken English if I wanted to do that.

      Am I preaching to the choir? You bet I am. Does that bother me? No it doesn't.

      Delete
  40. I will agree that from fishing village to first world is wrong but not entirely. There were still many kampungs around when he took over. Before HDB, my parents and grandparents live in huts. And thats like in the 60s already. Only key places for trade and governance were well developed.
    You mentioned that thr were alrdy government existing but you are so wrong. It was the British that were in power and they are mainly concerned with the benefits the western power can have. Look at all the riots before Singapore independence. Labour issues, racial issues, religious issues. With communism breeding, there were also idealogical issues. Yes he had a team helping him, that very team also betrayed him during by elections. We are not saying that he did all that alone, we do credit the team too be a S. Rajaranam, Goh Keng Swee and etc. just like how people say oh Steve Jobs is so smart and creative, his works are revolutionary. He do have a team working with him too. No? The leader of all makes a lot of final decision. Just like a leader in battlefield. To go out and fight it out or to retreat. The decisive call. He is a founder of modern Singapore. Look at the flora and fauna, MRT, HDB. A leader uses his people wisely. Be it he was the one who though of it or his coworkers, if he didnt support the policy, where will we be right now?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Emokia,

      1. The fact that some rural areas ('kampongs') existed doesn't change the fact that Singapore was a city by then. Most big cities today - Paris, London, New York, Beijing - all still have a rural hinterland with some 'kampong' like characteristics. Nonetheless, just because some areas do still remain rural characteristics doesn't render the city a 'village'. Heck, we have farms within the city limits of London - does that mean that London is just a small farming village because some farms still exist in London?

      2. Please refrain from words like "you are so wrong". Oh please. My mastery of Singaporean history is far superior than yours. You write with so much venom and you are extremely racist in the way you are judging the Brits - of course things weren't perfect, of course things could have been better but to claim that they were only interested in the benefits that they could reap couldn't be further from the truth. You're just being downright racist.

      3. The fact that we are talking about LKY's very capable team doesn't diminish his legacy or is that in any way a criticism of him. However, the way Phneah was cyber-lynched for merely raising the issue shows the way Singaporeans have become totally unreasonable and irrational on this issue. No one is saying that LKY wasn't a great leader - but I do have an issue with the way Singaporeans are demanding that everyone conforms in the way we mourn and show respect to LKY; that kind of conformity and the way Phneah was attacked for daring to be different shows an extremely intolerant society.

      4. In short, I have great respect for LKY - it's Singaporeans like you I have a problem with. And that's why I am glad I have left Singapore years ago.

      Delete
  41. Well Hi everyone,

    Peace to all. Having attempted to read as much of the comments as i possibly could, i can only come to the following conclusion in the hope that we can take this as lightheartedly as possible :

    1. LimpehFT probably did not realise that he sounded much like Mr Lee in the way he puts forth his arguments. He does stand very firm on his beliefs and convictions. He even challenges those who do not fully comprehend history of Singapore as well as he does.
    2. Indeed, for Mr Lee to have spoken and met in person with LimpehFT, knowing how the system works, that means Mr Lee sought him out. The only problem is : was he sought as an identified talent or to be warned of the danger he poses to SG? For LimpehFT to know and for the curious to find out. :) Hope you did not quickly cabot after Mr Lee spoke to you.
    3. Speaking of that. Upon ORD, limpehFT immediately get far away from Singapore so indeed we have lost a talent to the British. Ah, our colonial rulers who seize land and refer to us as subjects, thankfully not objects.
    4. My knowledge of history is nothing in comparison so i'd like to ask limpehFT as question on the opium war. How is it possible that the British could sell opium to Chinese and then wage a war and annex HK and Macau? The Chinese were labelled "sick men of east asia". However, they do not sell opium to Englanders?
    5. Hence, i would like to also know which race LimpehFT is - i suspect he is Hokkien.
    6. After emigrating to the UK, would you consider yourself still very rooted to your Chinese upbringing or you have as a result morphed into a Chinese kentang? LoL.
    7. As you have met LKY in person, the rest of us are in no position to even think we know him. Wow, that is high almighty. Pardon us my good lord. Oh Blimey, i detect some arrogance here.
    8. I'd like to look at it positively, Mr Lee saw potential in LimpehFT but perhaps cold feet set in after understanding the challenge and pressure of expectations?

    Finally, (wah, so chiong hei) hope many of you would realise that bloggers do profit on mileage of page hits to blogs as well as comments. So i am as such, now also culpable of helping to increase the mileage and probably for the wrong reasons.

    If limpehFT has left our shores for good, then my question to fellow Singaporeans is : he is either with us or not. He cannot be with us for the good of SG from afar.

    I respect the intellect especially you'd probably speak Queens English while i'd drift between Singlish and try not to slang neither US nor Queens English for it is not my native language. On the same token, i would hope that everyone accords the equivalent of respect to the grieving family and the grieving Singaporeans and refrain from dissecting an individual's character or deeds.

    It is a good question of when is the right time and the only answer i can give is it should be perhaps after the funeral proceedings are over. I'd believe the British culture does practice the same values of respect, sensibility, sensitivity and compassion.

    You do sound like him and may i persuade a Foreign talent to consider coming back and contribute. We need all hands on deck for the next journey.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Koji, allow me to respond.

      1. I was a JC1 student when I had the honour and pleasure of meeting LKY and I was gushing like a little child, giddy with excitement. It was a great honour and privilege to have met the great man himself. I left Singapore many years later, once I had completed my NS and there was no real big push to hound me out of Singapore. I left quietly when I had the opportunity.

      2. If Mr Lee really had a problem with a JC1 student back then, really did you think that LKY would have been free enough to meet every single naughty student in every single school in Singapore back then? Believe you me, whilst I am sure he made great contributions to the Singaporean education system and was a great inspiration to many Singaporean students, did you seriously believe that he would micromanage every single difficult student? No, he would make a phone call and get someone within the civil service or police force to sort out any of the work like that - the great man is way too busy to get his hands dirty with naughty boys in JC. Even with LKY's political opponents, he never did any of his dirty work himself. But in any case, I think you forget that I was a triple scholar and an outstanding sportsman in those days and yes, I was indeed identified as a talent.

      3. As you can see from the volume of comments on this blog piece, I have no time to entertain your silly questions on history. I know I am far more intelligent than you and if you can't deal with that, please don't bother coming to my blog.

      4. I hate the use of the word "race" - it is politically incorrect. My Chinese dialect group is hardly relevant: my dad's Hakka and my mum's Hokkien and I'm Eurasian in any case. Yes I have Angmoh blood and I even blogged all about it. http://limpehft.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/158-angmoh-just-spoke-to-my-parents.html

      5. I met him as a kid, I was in JC1 please lah. I had not even taken my A levels yet. I was but a child when I met him. I think he said something like "study hard" as a parting gesture, that was what he would say to all students he met I supposed. Get real. If you think that I was offered some kind of high speed fast track offer to rise to the top of civil service, you were wrong. I was 17, a kid - and for any 17 year old then, it was a great honour to meet LKY at an event as such.

      6. Please read my blog - I am a total banana: I consider myself white on the inside and yellow on the outside. I make no secret about it and have discussed my cultural identity a lot on my blog. But modesty aside, I daresay my Mandarin is probably still far better than yours.

      7. As for my future - I am considering a possible job offer but that would take me no where near Singapore if I accepted it. And as for contributing to any country's future, allow me to be honest and blunt: I'm looking out for my own future and doing what's best for me.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for your reply Banana,

      Well. i am glad you phrased it the way i was hoping you would not so i can dispense with diplomacy in a justified manner but i shall still try to keep it as polite as possible.

      a. You see, you have fallen for it. LKY would only personally speak in confidence with those he really assessed as talent. You revealed you were just in a group of JC1 students so, come on, please do not gloat over that. Your head swell just based on this. After 1 or 2 years, if you do not measure up, out you go. Yes, this was my plan to draw you in. I have met him one on one but that's no big deal and i cannot say more because it is classified. Learn to be humble.
      b. Indeed, you are a product of the SG education system and here you go losing patience and slamming someone as silly for a question you dare not answer. Simply because, you are sensible enough to avoid offending the Ang Mohs around you. So you decided you are Ang Moh and so, please stay put in UK.
      c. Your Dad's Hakka, Mom's Hokkien results in you being Eurasian. LoL, Think you are deluded.
      d. I do not need to prove anything and so what if your Mandarin is better? You are still a Chinese lost in Ang Moh dream land. Did they feed you opium or what? Hope they don't call you "sick Asian in UK" Do all these make you a better person?

      Hi all Singaporeans,

      I urge all of you to read and think carefully as far as this blog is concerned. We apparently have a blogger who is Chinese but thinks he is a supreme colonialist.

      Have to time to read his other blogs and i am exercising my prerogative to stay away from this blog.


      Delete
    3. Koji, kindly refrain from being rude but for what it is worth.

      1. You may think your use of faux-Singlish may be funny but I fail to see your humour. If you tried to pass yourself off as an uneducated fool, then I don't really see your point. In any case, yes the best students and scholars from the top JCs have a range of programmes they can participate in (in my days I remember the Pre-U seminar, the Temasek Seminar) and on top of that, I participated in the 1993 SEA Games representing S'pore - believe you me when I tell you that I had plenty of ample opportunity to rub shoulders with important S'porean VIPs that year at these events. A ordinary student from a neighbourhood school would never go near any of those events, so yes - it wasn't just the opportunity to have met LKY (amongst other important Singaporean dignitaries) at such an event and it was a polite chat with talented young people. So no, I was not exactly having tea at the Istana with him - it was at one of these events for the government to eyeball potential young talent.

      2. I don't know where on earth you get your North Korean style ideas "if you do not measure up out you go" - like WTF? You talk as if I was banished from Singapore. Nobody banished me. I went abroad to study primarily because I had managed to get myself a scholarship to a top British university. Frankly, if that didn't work out, I am not sure how my parents could have funded my university education but who knows - that's just a route that I didn't have to take, thanks to my scholarship. And I actually held on to my Singaporean passport for many years as a student studying abroad, then as an expatriate working in the UK - I had the option to return at any stage with my pink IC and red passport; but it was my choice not to return.

      In any case, whilst the SG government did not offer lucrative scholarships and job offers to anyone and everyone who attended these events for potential scholars, there was certainly no element of "if you do not measure up, out you go" - like what? You make it sound like some crazy Asian parent who says, "if you do not get 4 A-stars for your PSLE, you will sleep in the streets: out you go!" Duh. If any of these students didn't do well in their A levels, then the worst case scenario is that they can forget about applying for a scholarship.

      3. I took a DNA test and discovered that I have 15.8% European ancestry; I had a very interesting journey of discovery to try to try to find out whether this came from my mother's side or my father's side. It's official - I still have the results from the DNA test and I blogged all about it as I traced my family tree back to China and identified the grandparent where it came from. Yes I have one non-Chinese great grandparent and my grandmother is mixed: that means that I am mostly Chinese; no I don't have blonde hair and blue eyes and it does go to show that it would be wrong to simply assume that you are 100% Chinese just because your parents self-identify as Chinese. How much do you know about your great-grand parents? You have a very superficial understanding of what one's cultural identity is and how some people can draw in cultural influences from a range of sources - I'm somewhat more complex than you in that aspect, I'm sorry if you find that hard to deal with. Why not look into your own family tree - you might find something interesting too.

      4. You're making some extremely racist and rude remarks by the end of your post. That reflects very poorly on you.

      5. As for the other thousands of readers from Singapore, I'm sure they're not airheads and they can exercise their own judgement about my blog. Are you going to try to tell them what to do or think - or will you gladly trust them to make up their own minds? I have people who hate my blog as well as people who love my blog - I love provoking a reaction, I say it's better to be read and provoke a reaction than to be ignored.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  42. 1) "Thus, PAP merely had to work with this existing infrastructure to help Singapore progress."

    Merely!? Sure... Singapore back then was merely plagued with racial riots, high unemployment, unfriendly neighbours, and merely little, or no, semblance of a country.

    2) "Lee Kuan Yew was not the person who came up with the brilliant economic policies that brought us to success... Singapore merely followed his economic plan for Singapore."

    Oh gosh! Merely again! But never mind that. The man must have had many an advisor. In fact, I cannot imagine any country leader, in history or current, does not employ experts to help develop the best policies. He picked the best blueprint for Singapore go forward. He made the call. He made the decision. That is why he was the leader. That is why he is the founding father of Singapore.

    3) "While his leadership was important to the old guard, he did not make all these contributions alone and had the assistance of a team of brilliant people."

    The man himself said he was no one-man show. That he had a great team to help him. But he assembled the team. He recruited his team members. To give an analogy, Steve Jobs created the iPhone. But I cannot imagine the iPhone 3GS I bought years ago was made by his hands from scratch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fatboytail, let me respond to your points:

      1. Singapore had its fair share of problems upon independence, that much is true. But without the infrastructure that the Brits have left, it would have taken far more time than it took to deliver the economic miracle. The Brits didn't leave behind an island that resembled Pulau Tioman - no, they left something behind that LKY's government could work with. He certainly didn't start from scratch, as some people have implied.

      2. No one is doubting the fact that LKY was the founding father and the leader of Singapore - he was very wise in creating a strong team to support him in this process. Is it wrong to mention the fact that he had a good team?

      3. Like Shane mentioned, most of you Singaporeans are just upset that Jeraldine Phneah wasn't slipping on her tears to pay LKY another sappy tribute - you expected her to conform and she didn't and now you guys are attacking her for daring to come up with a slightly different opinion.

      Delete
    2. What the British left us, was not too different from what she left her former colonies. And I won't even begin to compare how Singapore has developed to how the other colonies have done.

      It is alright to mention he had a great team, but nowhere near okay to use that to undermine his legacy. The man is great, period. You can just about stop right there. What you did in your post is an example of how much, or should I say little, grace you have. Or may I suggest a secret agenda that you may have? (This is just a suggestion.)

      I have nothing against Phneah, and you should not have assumed so. I have everything against what you wrote in this post. You used the ignorance of some people who criticised you, or Phneah, to belittle all other criticisms. And undermined the legacy of a man with a skewed, and almost weird, argument.

      Man up. At least admit that some of your views presented in the post were flawed.

      P.S. Being a former Singaporean does not give your words credibility when discussing matters related to Singapore.

      Delete
    3. Fatboytail,

      I welcome the opportunity to talk about Singaporean history with you - but you seem only interested in hurling personal insults. If there is no mutual respect, then there is really no point in us trying to talk about the state of Singapore in the 60s when the British left. Of course LKY can take much credit for the economic miracle that he has delivered post-independence, but you're going to far to try to paint Singapore out to be some kinda of chaotic mess when the Brits left. You're not being rational.

      Likewise, I take issue with the way you're trying to tell me what I can say and what I cannot say - allow me to be clear on this point: I have deep respect for LKY, but it is people like you I have a problem with. You don't have the right to tell me what is appropriate, what I can say, what I cannot say, you certainly can try to censor me but I will not give a toss what you have to say because I do not value your opinion. This is my blog and if you don't like what I write, then what the hell are you doing here I wonder? When did I say that LKY was not a great man?

      Look, I have made it very clear. I have left Singapore. As a foreigner, I have no political ambition in Singapore and certainly cannot participate in Singaporean politics - but I still have the right to say what the hell I like about Singaporean politics in cyberspace. I have already written very candidly about my feelings about Singaporean society and let's just say, I am far more critical about Singaporeans like you than the PAP itself actually.

      If I actually thought that I had any power to change the way things were in Singaporean society, I would have stayed and fought for a better Singapore. But after NS, I thought nope, no way, not in my lifetime, I'm gonna cut my losses and leave.

      And you're being EXTREMELY NAIVE if not downright stupid to think that what I say here on my blog can possibly affect LKY's legacy - please don't insult yourself by saying that kind of stupid bullshit. Everyone has the right to form their own opinion about LKY and what he did - you cannot go round censoring the internet person by person; LKY is such a famous person that they are talking about him all over the world now, are you going to go to each and every single person who has said anything about LKY and try to censor them as well? Get real. Grow up. If I had the power to undermine the legacy of such a great politician - LOL, excuse me whilst I roll on the floor with laughter - like seriously, do you read what you even write? The shit you come up with. Like what's the deal man?

      You're an idiot. You know what? You're such an idiot. I'm going to leave your comment up there to show the others how bloody brainwashed and stupid some Singaporeans can be. You can't even present a cogent argument. Such is the failure of the Singaporean education system.

      I actually have deep respect for LKY - it's you I have a problem with. LKY was a great man who was extremely intelligent; you on the other hand, sir, are a total idiot. I'm not attacking LKY - I'm attacking you: deal with it. LOL.

      Delete
    4. You accused me of hurling insults when you were the one who has perhaps been unnerved when discussing matters with someone your intellectual equal, or lo and behold, someone way smarter than you ever will be. Keep all our comments here. I am sure the readers can tell who is the sane one between us two.

      You can at best accuse me of sarcasm. Yet you started the name calling and unabashedly admitted to doing it. You did exactly what you said brainwashed Singaporeans should not have done to Phneah. Do what I say and not do what I do, eh? Awesome.

      All this while, I thought we were having a discussion. I read your post and disagreed with certain points you made, least of all the inappropriate use of 'merely,' twice. You responded, yet not always directly to the points I raised. I can totally understand why you are unable to substantiate your views but feeling unnerved is not excuse for accusing me of telling you what you can or cannot say.

      I did not do that, I could not do that, and it is not my nature to do that. Sarcasm though, I can dish out plenty. Your own this blog, but are you telling me you have the final word here or I cannot voice out my views here? Oh well, so much for freedom of speech, from a Londoner, no less...

      You insist that you truly feel LKY is a great man. Yet you used the word merely twice to belittle his achievements, among other senseless things you mentioned in your original post. This disconnect is the source of how little sense your post made.

      But you got one thing right. Nothing you write here will threaten the legacy of the man. I saw an intelligent guy posting something that I disagreed. I thought we could have an intellectual conversation. I thought the angmo in you would be receptive to disagreeing viewpoints. Pardon me for the sarcasm, but they were not insults. Your name calling was totally uncalled for and utterly unbecoming of a Brit. Or perhaps you only claim to be British but...

      P.S. Your personal attacks only make me look stronger. LOL

      Delete
    5. Alamak, fatboytail - you really reading comprehension fail leh, you have no idea just how salah you are.

      So I am going to explain it to you again. The first part of this post was my personal opinion, the second part of the post was me reproducing a part of Jeraldine Phneah's original post that she had taken down from her blog. I felt it was wrong for her to be bullied into censoring herself, so I reproduced her piece on my blog. I felt very disappointed that she caved in under pressure - hence in defiance, I decided to cut & paste her piece onto my blog.

      Ms Phneah was the one who used the word 'merely' - not me. You are so buay-song with the use of the word 'merely' then please go and find Ms Phnean and 算帐 with her okay? You can ask her, eh Jeraldine, how come you use the word 'merely' to describe LKY's actions hah? And then if you ask nicely, maybe she will give you an answer. But you are totally salah in coming to me and kao beh kao bu about the use of the word "merely" - aiyoh. Why you so blur one? Can't you tell when I was quoting from Jeraldine Phneah? Just because I quote her blog doesn't mean that her words become my words. What if I quote Lee Kuan Yew - when will you think that they will become my words just because I cut and paste the quotation into my blog? Aiyoh.

      Please scroll up and read the post again, I did state clearly, "So, rescued from the internet, here are the paragraphs removed from Phneah's original post on LKY's death." I have made it very clear that when I was quoting Ms Phneah, okay?

      I cannot be asked to explain why Jeraldine used that word - why don't you find her and ask her yourself lah: http://www.jeraldinephneah.me/ She also got Facebook and Instagram if you like.

      You want to have an intelligent conversation then kindly please show me you can handle primary 6 standard reading comprehension. Otherwise I am going to dumb down my language and talk to you liddat because I actually think you quite bodoh bueh-tak-chek one leh. #readingcomprehensionepicFAIL Next time, please read properly before you kao beh kao bu liddat on social media - because when you get kena expose liddat, very malu one leh.

      Delete
  43. LKY is glorified as though as he was a Messiah. Many of the socialist policies that the Old guard implemented were from the Barisan Socialis. Using ISA, the entire leadership of the barisan was locked up so that no one could challenge LKY's rule. This guy was extremely ruthless. He did achieve a lot for Singapore but there's a dark side to his persona.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oooooh Mike, beware, the haters are gonna attack you for daring to speak up....

      Delete
  44. As a Singaporean, I don't think that we should be hiding behind the screens of our devices to comment on what he did right or wrong.

    Simply put, IF you think that you could have done a better job than what the late Mr Lee has done for Singapore, and you could prove it with your actions, then go ahead and say what you want.

    Going back in time, if you were able to take the place of the late Mr Lee, would you have done a better job? Given the chaotic country that was Singapore? How would you have done things differently and ensure that they were successful given the resources you had at the time?

    If you cannot answer the above then I believe you should keep silent about what you know nothing about, because you are not the late Mr Lee.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pamela, I don't think you're being logical. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, it's just like if you listened to Madonna's latest album Rebel Heart and I asked you, "so Pamela, what do you think about this album? Do you like it? How does it compare to her music from the 1990s and 2000s? Do you think she can remain relevant in today's music scene?" Surely you will have an opinion - be it good or bad, you will have an opinion. How would you feel if I then turned around and said, "hey Pamela, do you think you can sing like Madonna? If you were able to take the place of Madonna, if I put you in a recording studio, do you think you could sing better than her? If you cannot do that, if you cannot answer the above, then I suggest you shaaaddup about what you know nothing about, because you're not Madonna."

      Let's replace Madonna with any film director, writer, TV host or politician. Anyone who puts himself/herself out there, in the public domain is sacrificing an element of privacy - once you choose to do a job that puts yourself in the public domain, then you accept that you're entering some kind of popularity contest, where you are trying to win the favour of your audience. Entertainers do that - but politicians who are trying to convince you to vote for them are involved in a far more intense popularity contest. If Madonna's latest album doesn't turn out to be a big success, that's no big deal (she's rich enough) - but if a politician fails to win a seat at the next election, that means spending the next term out in the wilderness of politics instead of being in parliament.

      Hence any politician does understand this aspect of public opinion - no one less so than LKY himself, who was an extremely intelligent politician. Pamela I have deep respect for LKY, but it is you I have a problem with, because I don't like the way you're trying to censor others into keeping quiet. Certainly, everyone has a right to an opinion about LKY and if you don't like what they have to say, then by all means please speak up to defend LKY and his legacy and engage them in a debate, convince them that they have misjudged LKY and inform them about his legacy.

      But your shaaadddup lah approach is just plain wrong. It seems like you're unwilling to engage others in a mature, sensible discussion because .... why? You're not from a culture that knows how to have mature, sensible discussions as adults in a civilized way?

      Like I said, I have deep respect for LKY. It is Singaporeans like you I have a problem with, Pamela.

      Delete
    2. Ms Wong, you're wrong. I simply cannot agree with your attitude. Everyone is indeed entitled to an opinion and they have the right to express it. Politicians are in fact engaged in the ultimate popularity contest where they are fighting to win your votes in the democratic process - so by engaging in the process as a voter, you are supposed to form an opinion about the politicians, the candidates, their political party and what they stand for. Given how LKY is such a pivotal part of the PAP, you cannot ignore that connection and thus any Singaporean is certainly going to form an opinion about LKY and his legacy.

      If you encounter someone who expresses a different opinion, then the right thing to do would be to engage the other person in a debate and through civilized conversation, convince them that you have a different point of view and that you may be more correct. Simply telling them, "shaaadup you donno what you're talking about, you couldn't have done a better job, so shut the hell up" is just plain lazy Pamela. Why are you so afraid about publicly defending LKY's legacy and talking about him, if you have such great respect for him? What is holding you back from engaging others in a civilized conversation about LKY?

      Like I said many times before, I have deep respect for LKY - it is Singaporeans like you I have a problem with Pamela.

      Delete
  45. One must understand who pieces the puzzle together. There must be a man to lead even if there is resources available for him. Which to use, when to use and not to use. It's easy to say what he have at his disposal but if one don't have the vision to execute there won't be the final piece.

    People's expectations were based on their past experience. The older generation wanted stability, peace, roof, bread on the table after going through war, riots, poor economy and dismay living conditions. Mr LKY gave them that and more. The younger generation demanded different expectations based on their era. If there's no strong singapore to begin with, these younger generation expectations will be largely different.

    It should be noted that it will be a different singapore if there is no such leader like LKY. Better or Worse, just visit our neighboring countries for comparison since we were all poor to begin with, even though some have natural resources.

    ReplyDelete
  46. One must understand who pieces the puzzle together. There must be a man to lead even if there is resources available for him. Which to use, when to use and not to use. It's easy to say what he have at his disposal but if one don't have the vision to execute there won't be the final piece.

    People's expectations were based on their past experience. The older generation wanted stability, peace, roof, bread on the table after going through war, riots, poor economy and dismay living conditions. Mr LKY gave them that and more. The younger generation demanded different expectations based on their era. If there's no strong singapore to begin with, these younger generation expectations will be largely different.

    It should be noted that it will be a different singapore if there is no such leader like LKY. Better or Worse, just visit our neighboring countries for comparison since we were all poor to begin with, even though some have natural resources.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Hi Alex
    I am a local who is planning to study & migrate to Europe after my ORD.I have been an avid reader of your blog and I first just want to thank you for being an inspiration to me.I see that you face loads of critics and the BS you have to endure on this post & I sympathise with you.Really impressed of the way you tackled an ignorant "reader".I quote "Just because I am grieving doesn't give me the right to tell people what they can do - and it is not about respect, it is not about sensitivity - it is about being reasonable, rational and recognizing that others are free to react the way they like to LKY's death. You are entitled to your personal response as much as I am entitled to yours and you simply do not have the right to tell others what they should or should not do."
    Thats why I am truly baffled as to why the locals here cant seem to voice their opinion on any issue with reason & logic let alone issues that are utmost important.
    Thank you for reading my reply amongst hundreds of others.
    Cheers

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Jemson. Yeah it's crazy the way my blog post had gone viral like that, I've had several months worth of traffic in the last 3.5 days and it's just unreal. Had I known that it would have been so popular, I would have put in a bit more effort into it. But I threw it together in a huge hurry as I was rushing off to Manchester for work. Do look out for my follow up post which I am currently working on. Many thanks Jemson and all the best.

      Delete
  48. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I think you spelt Mr Lim Kim San's name wrongly.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Reading the announcements and letters etc from the visible people in SG, e.g. the President, it quickly becomes clear who refers to him as "Founding Father", and who do not. PM himself refers to him as "Founding Prime Minister".

    ReplyDelete
  51. - Quote: "Strangely despite their key contributions, they were not featured much in our social studies textbooks, so not many young people know about them. "
    > It is very normal that all these people were not credited that much. During a war, do you even remember the soldiers who sacrifices or the general who leads the army? It is natural to give credit to the leader more. Just like how a leader who get all the blames if anything goes wrong, Would anyone blame the followers? This is fairness And that;s the heavy weight a leader needs to bear, the responsibility and heavy load of a leader.

    - Quote: He didn't exactly "sacrifice a lot" for Singapore
    > Sorry i completely disagree with her, and that is a strong statement. But oh well, everyone opinion of sacrificing is different, but obviously if she were to state such strong statement, be prepare to receive many angry comments who would feel she is discrediting LKY.

    -Quote: Even if he has to sacrifice privacy and time, isn't it something that all politicians and celebrities choose to sacrifice in return for power and status?
    > Again, it is implying LKY did things for his own selfish reason. As if telling us, ya, he got paid, so of coz he need to contribute all his time and energy for the country. I hope she be able to provide more pointers to support here statement on why she feels that way.

    - Quote" No doubt LKY has did his best and contributed greatly to our country but I guess many people have a very exaggerated view of his contributions and how perfect he is because their impression and knowledge of him is ENTIRELY based on what they've studied in Singapore's history textbook or his memoirs.
    > I guessed she is the one who is judgemental here.

    So, to me, her views on the whole thing seemed too on the surface. It doesn't really feel middle ground with too much judging and personal feelings in it. It would have been better to point out what exactly he have been giving too much credit for, and the credits needed to be given to him. That will be more like middle ground.

    I guessed she still have alot to learn regarding her choice of words used.

    Anyway if one wants to create such a sensitive topic, especially about politic and country's leader. Do prepared to be bombarded with negative and positive comments. Its not only Singaporeans, I am sure citizens from other countries would have reacted the same way when topic itself is sensitive. It's inevitable.

    ReplyDelete
  52. If we follow Singaporean logic and groupthink there will never be an appropriate time to provide a counter-analysis of LKY's legacy. Its either too soon or too late. I just find it very interesting, knowing that the dissent is in the minority, that the majority wants to take a hatchet to the small outpouring of counter-opinions instead of just letting it be. Like the blog entries are going to stop the other millions from publicly celebrating each others holidays and enjoying each others foods...but not in "tolerating" dissentingopinions unless the ruling party has pre-approved the "time and place". No one ( well, most of us) are not trying to harsh your mourning vibe, guys. Maybe we are just a little put off by deifying a man with false exaggerations not just of what he accomplished but also by minimizing and excusing the harsh things he said and did. Of course we'll never know what Singapore would be like without his iron fist and of course many of us "weren't around", don't be ridiculous. No one is talking about going back in a time machine or taking Singapore through a wormhole to an alternative reality. At some point, history WILL be written and analyzed by the survivors. That's just how it goes.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I completely agree with that girl blogger. I mean how much money did lky earn as senior minister and minister mentor? He contributed to spore greatly but he and his family did not sacrifce fiancially.

    ReplyDelete