Forum Index
this forum welcomes all forumers who appreciate decent and well thought out views and discussions. all forumers are encouraged to accept that different forumers have different views and often there is no absolutely right or wrong views.
Menu
 Forum IndexHome
FAQFAQ
MemberlistMemberlist
UsergroupsUsergroups
RegisterRegister
ProfileProfile
Log in to check your private messagesMessages
Log inLogin/Out

Quick Search

Advanced Search

Links
mysingaporenews
Singapore River Tour
Singapore Education
Singapore Orchids
littlespeck
ypapforum
Singapore Hosting
Sample Link 2
Sample Link 2

Who's Online
[ Administrator ]
[ Moderator ]


Google Search
Google

http://www.phpbb.com
Legacies of LKY
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> Singapore Current Affairs
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2015 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LKY legacies: This is my country
When ordinary people like us say this is my country we mean it simply that we are a citizen of this country. When LKY said this is my country, it took on a different significance. He meant it, every word of it. No one dares to dispute this statement. As he said so, he belonged to a special group of people that were founders of nations. Before Singapore became an independent state, it was a British colony. Before that, it was a part of changing empires. There was no Singapore as an independent state. The Singapore of Raffles was a piece of colony. Only in 1965 that it became an independent state and the citizens assumed the right to determine their own destiny as a new country.
LKY and a few young men and the people who were British subjects were the original people that turned this island into a republic. This kind of history brought along special privileges that were personal to holders. When he made the Istana, the office of the President into the office of the PM, who dared to say no? In the last Presidential Election, Tan Cheng Bock was the only candidate who made it an issue, that he would want to move in if elected and to move out the PM’s office.
There is proper decorum and protocol, just like Chok Tong revealing that LKY was ‘protocolly’ correct to arrive earlier than him in meetings to respect his office as the PM of the country. Tony Tan also confirmed this that instead of him visiting LKY, LKY would visit him as Tony was the head of state, ‘protocolly’ correct. No one say anything about being ‘protocolly’ correct for the PM to have an office in the Istana. No one question if the office of MM or SM should be at the Istana. No one question or wonder if it is ‘protocolly’ correct for an MP to sit and work in the Istana.
It was ‘correct’ only because an MP or SM, or MM or PM to occupy the Istana if he is the founding father. It is correct if one could proudly proclaim that ‘This is my country’ and meant every word he said.
This right to occupy the Istana and use it as the office of a MP,SM,MM and PM is a legacy of LKY. Would this legacy be extended to any other PM,SM,MM or MP in the future? Would there be another one to claim this right without being questioned in the future? Would this legacy be buried together with LKY?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2015 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Law to protect Lee Kuan Yew
‘The government announced that it would come out with a law to protect the name and image of Singapore’s former Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, whom many around the world have regarded as a controversial leader. The official reason given by the ruling party was to ensure no commercial misuse and exploitation of his name and image. Lawrence Wong, the minister in charge of proposing the law, reminded Singaporeans, “I should make it very clear that the intent is not to restrict people from coming up with their own creative ways to PAY THEIR TRIBUTE TO MR LEE.”’
A blogger, Celia Lim, wrote the above in her article, ‘Law to protect or glorify a dead man?’ appearing the TRE. For a controversial leader, it is expected to hear all kinds of views and intent about the name Lee Kuan Yew, to be used with propriety or to be abused with liberty. I think a better way would be to copyright the name and his image internationally. The Tourist Board would have a new brand name and many souvenirs for sale to the tourists. LKY key chains, pens, beer mugs, umbrellas, this one very meaningful, to be protected by a LKY umbrella, little figurines. I think some creative people may have already jumped into the bandwagon. Yes, LKY T-shirts with his face on the front and back ala Che Guevara or Castro. Singapore Mint can also join the act with special editions of coins to commemorate him. The possibilities are unlimited.
But be careful and be sensitive with some items like footballs, punching bags, pillows or bolsters, bears, wheelbarrows, towels, and many other things that may not be suitable. The govt can come out with a list of the forbidden goods to keep things in control. They may want to introduce ratings of souvenirs and toys so that certain categories are only available to the public and children. The business people may get too creative. While on this, must ban portraits or toys of Margaret Thatcher as well.
Maybe the govt should set up a committee to do an in depth analysis on what are the things that can or cannot be done and must be banned. Yaacob would be the best man for this job. He is an expert in what is good or bad for the people to see and read. Off hand it is very difficult for a few individuals to think through thoroughly on all the funny things that could happen. Some of the funny people and their funny thoughts like urinating, throwing eggs, burning, tarring, graffiti, etc etc, so erecting statues and public portraits must be avoided unless well protected by fences and security cameras. There are people wanting to build shrines for worshipping. Can or not? It would need many super talents and creative people to fish out all the probabilities. A committee may not be good enough.
With the GE coming, the Party could follow the Taiwanese to use LKY as a Party mascot and designed things around it. Ah Bian had his cute soft dolls, caps and kopi cups. These would be hot selling items, including posters that people can buy as pin ups for the bedroom walls or the living rooms.
The royalties from these products could make the children and grand children very rich, like a pop star for many many years. LKY the Legend!.
PS. Unfortunately I cannot chop chop these ideas. Or else will be rich in no time. Want to take home a Lee Kuan Yew? Or you can buy a Lee Kuan Yew off the shelf for inspiration. No knuckle dusters please.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Jun 04, 2015 8:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lese majeste in Sin City
Lawrence Wong is sounding out a proposal to pass an equivalent of the lese majeste law in the republic and this has raised some eyebrows. Lese majeste is only applicable in a kingdom where there is a living king and it is just rude and disloyal to talk bad about a monarch. There will be no such law in Sin City for sure. This is a republic and there is no king to be loyal and be obedient to. But there is likely to be something similar in form to protect the name of the founding father, to prevent it from being abused, misused, or from profiteering like turning it into a brand for commercial merchandise. It used to be just an imagination but it is becoming true when many loyal believers would buy anything with a name on it, called branded product. Now brands YSL, FCUK etc will have a challenger in LKY.
Is this a bad thing for business or for people in love with the founding father? Or should a royalty be paid for the use of the name or for loving the founding father? I thought it would be such a great honour to have the name boldly and openly in display on goods and products or on the chest of everyone? Can it be about royalties that such a law is needed?
On the other extreme, the name could be used in very bad form for very unpleasant reasons by very horrible people. This should be protected, the question is how? Some may wonder why there is a need to protect the name of a founding father that is well loved by the people. All founding fathers are well respected and loved by the people. The thought of messing around with the name of a founding father is never heard of.
This must be another Uniquely Singapore thing, that the name of a founding father needs protection. Does it make any sense? Is this another case of putting up a target to be knocked down or shot at and needing protection so that it would not be knocked down or shot at? Singaporeans have this bad habit of craving for anything that the govt banned, like books, comics and movies and also chewing gum. Banning the use of LKY will only up the interest of the mob mentality.
The thought of the need of such a law says that something is not right about the whole thing. Or this could be another one of those Singaporean traits, kiasu. Better be safe than be sorry. What else need to be protected? I can understand if Hsien Loong needs more body guards after the disclosure of himself being a target to terrorists. Who else needs protection?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Saint Lee - by Yawning Bread

Yawning Bread has an article titled Saint Lee where he dealt with the issue of beatification and how the topic of a lese majeste law is in the brewing in Singapore. Actually there was no such thing. The idea came from two articles that talked about lese majeste in the Asian Correspondent and TOC.

In Catholicism, there is this process called beatification where a great dead man may be called a saint and be able to grant wishes to people who pray to him. In a way this is like Tua Pek Kong or Guan Kong or Sun Mo Kong. These are Chinese deities that can grant wishes to the masses that turned up to pray in the temples. But there was no formal process to raise them to the level of deities. They became deities by a spontaneous recognition by the masses of their goodness. The Catholic Church has a long list of saints that were beatified, St Joan of Arc, Saint Mary, Saint Nicholas, Saint Mother Teresa and many others by an established system of beatification.

In his article Yawning Bread suggested that the process of beatification was in full swing. The Catholic Church would require a miracle to happen and be accredited to the great dead man for sainthood. And this is no easy task and the Church would appoint a committee of inquiry to go through the life of the great dead man to see if there was a miracle in his life time. A miracle is not something that can be easily faked or created, like the founding of a nation or taking a country from 3rd World to 1st World. It has to be something out of this world. The ‘out of this world’ minister salary not counted, it must be really out of this world.

Come to think of it, the miracles in the Gardens by the Bay may come in handy. There are so many miracles happening there. You want snow, you can have snow. You want to have strawberry, raspberry, goose berry, goose pimples, no problem. If they can grow miracle olive inside the domes, what is so difficult about a few berries? The problem is whether these could be considered as miracles. And if acceptable, can these be credited to the good work of the great dead man.

I believe the Catholic Church has a long list of items to be ticked before any great dead man can be beatified and become a saint. The last and most recent saint was St Paul, the last Pope. Correct me if I did not get this right. Would there be another saint in the making? Or would there be a new deity for the masses to pray for protection from evil, for well being and maybe the favourite 4D number?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue Oct 20, 2015 8:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The burden of Mao’s Thoughts versus Lee’s Hard Truths
China’s leaders of today lived through an era imbued with Mao’s Thoughts. The overly powerful leader in Mao turned him into a godlike figure where his words were as good as gospel truths. The lives of the Chinese population centred around reading, reciting and living the thoughts of Mao Zedong, for good or for bad.
Mao was the ideolog and his thoughts were in many cases idealistic ideologies. China was thrown into turmoil when the young followed the thoughts of Mao blindly and religiously. Many suffered, many lives were lost, arts and cultures were burnt and destroyed.
Then came Deng Xiaoping who brought some realism and pragmatism into the lives of the Chinese, moderating the extremes of Mao’s Thoughts and made them more relevant to the new realities of a new world. In the tussle between ideologies and pragmatism, China found a middle path to modernization. The thoughts of Mao are still there, vivid in the minds of the present day leaders, but in most cases, for recitation and to respect the great leader. In practice, Mao’s Thoughts were furthest in the minds of the new leaders in China.
A leader that has acquired a stature that is undisputed and held in awe could do good and also harm to the people and country. Blindly following old thoughts that have gone irrelevant is a recipe for disaster.
Singapore has a similar all powerful and influential leader in LKY, a deity like figure that still lives in the lives of many Singaporeans. LKY is still very influential in the lives of Singaporeans in the leaders and the common folks. The hard truths of LKY still linger in the thinking of many who had worked with him. His words are gospel truths to many and acted as guiding principles in what they are doing. Like Mao’s Thoughts, some of the hard truths, principles and policies have been overtaken by time and no longer relevant, obsolete. Sticking to them unthinkingly would do more harm than good to the people and country.
Unfortunately there are still many parrots parroting some hard truths as if they are the perpetual truths to be passed down to the future generations in the same manner when they have been overtaken by events. Though many of LKY’s hard truths would transcend time and have far longer usefulness and implications, there are surely some that must be discarded into the bins, or be modified to the new realities. It needs thinking and reassessment to use and apply the hard truths and wise quotes of LKY to be effective and useful. Blind parroting is a sign of trouble, of lazy and unthinking minds at work, of cheapo with no confidence and ideas of their own. The safest thing is to parrot the oracle.
The quoting of LKY’s hard truths and assumptions of things and policies will still be heard for a long time to come. Some quoting them knowingly, some unconsciously as the thoughts have been ingrained into their psychic for good or bad. Some will still apply them blindly without knowing that time has changed, things have changed, to the detriment of the people and country.
This is the curse of having leaders that have too overpowering influence on their believers and being too godlike, or elevated to the level of powerful and beloved deities. Would Singapore suffer the same curse and fate of gods and deities? Or would there be another equally powerful, respected and wise leader to emerge to moderate the hard truths and wise quotes of LKY, to make them relevant to the changes in time?
There are just too many parrots all over the place. You can hear them when they open their beaks to expose their bird brains.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quoting and misquoting LKY’s legacy

On his first year anniversary, it is like LKY returning to life on the TV sets and appearing in every home. You see him, you hear him and you can feel him. He is shouting down into everyone his wisdoms and wise quotes. ‘Go chase the rainbow’, or ‘Do not mortgage the future of your children’.

It is so easy to parrot what LKY was saying like quoting verses from the bible, ‘Whoever believes in me shall have ever lasting life’. Many people are mouthing about living his legacies, and living his wisdoms. But in reality do these people really understand what LKY was saying, what were his intentions? Or they took his legacy and wisdom and turned them upside down, turning his wise words into mockery, instead of doing good for the people, actually doing more harm than good?

When LKY talked about chasing the rainbow, he was talking to Singaporeans, the young and not so young. He was not talking to the foreigners. He wanted Singaporeans to be successful, to step on what he had built and get a lift to better things in life. It was never about foreigners. It was never about giving our rainbows to the foreigners, allowing foreigners to pluck the low hanging fruits that we grew by our sweat and tears. Did I get this part wrong, that LKY was telling the foreigners to go chase after the rainbow? Did LKY say take the rainbow and give it to foreigners? I did not read it that way? Anyone thinks LKY is telling them to snatch the rainbow away from Singaporeans to give it to foreigners?

The other part is about not mortgaging the future of our children away. Has anyone done that, mortgaging the future of our children away? No, no one is silly enough to mortgage the future of our children away. But has anyone give Singapore away, to foreigners? How much of Singapore has been given away to foreigners? No, we are only sharing our Singapore and our wealth and assets with foreigners. No one is giving them away. Please take this, it is a Singapore passport to prosperity, to a share of Singapore. It is complimentary.

Did I read LKY rightly or wrongly, in mortgaging the future of our children away? Quoting LKY is very easy. Primary school children also can do that. But understanding him, his intent, and the meaning of his wise words are a totally different thing altogether. One thing that people should not do is to turn LKY on his head, destroy his legacy and abuse his wise quotes or misquoting him.

What have we done to his legacy and his wise quotes?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Mon Mar 28, 2016 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LKY – too much of a good thing

The big celebration in the remembrance of LKY on his first anniversary is starting to raise eyebrows and turning a bit sour. It is opportune that Lee Wei Ling spoke up against it and warning those over zealous supporters and believers not to go overboard. Many great leaders in the past have been revered by their people through history. Many have made their marks decades ago, some hundreds or thousands of years ago and still fondly remembered by the generations of people coming to know them.

The celebration of LKY was compared to the celebration for Mao Zedong and Winston Churchill and to some, more like Kim Sung Il. In China and North Korea, huge monuments and statues of the two leaders were built to honour them. Some in China wanted to elevate Mao to the status of a deity, 神, and probably with temples built for him for people to worship him. This was rejected by the Chinese govt and similarly I don’t think there were temples to deify Kim Sung Il.

Without someone from the family to speak out against this irrational exuberance, it can be expected that the political opportunists could carry things a bit too far in revering and remembering LKY and turn it into a personality cult that Wei Ling rightly pointed out. And when that happens, a good thing could turn into a bad thing for the stupidity of it.

Too much of a good thing can easily turn bad. This is the 21st Century and Singaporeans, especially the highly educated, would find it a bit uncomfortable to stomach such overt expression of reverence. This is different from religious outpouring of love within the confines of a religious abode. Some may find it revulsive though they may not utter a word or show any sign of their true feelings. It is better to keep things in a proper and respectable perspective before it goes out of hand.

Wei Ling’s comment is timely and effective. Coming from anyone else outside the family may draw a mix bag of reactions. LKY shall be remembered by Singaporeans for generations to come and by the foreigners who came and gone home rich for his blessings on them. Let history and the millennial remember him in a way appropriate to them. Do not create controversies and a sour note so early after he left the scene. The first time was a nation in grief. This time it does not seem to be going the same way.

It will be perfectly alright to do such a thing in countries like North Korea, but in Singapore today, I think it is better to be more circumspect. Wei Ling has spoken but she is the only voice from the family. Is she representative of her siblings or they have different ideas?

Please feel free to disagree with me. Those who would like to set up altars in their homes, please do so as you like.

PS. For those who benefitted greatly from LKY's policies, may I suggest a better way is to donate a bit of their good fortune to help the poor in his name. Would that not be better?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LKY’s hard truths outdated
There are many thoughts of LKY but not many are outdated. Many are still valid and would be valid for a long time to come. I am just referring to a couple of his thoughts or hard truths that have been superceded by recent events, proving that they are no longer valid. The first is the belief that Singapore is not ready for an Indian Prime. This is no longer true. From my observation, Singaporeans are ready for an Indian PM plus an Indian President simultaneously. Singaporeans are even ready for a cabinet filled with minority ministers on the principle of meritocracy. As long as they are meritocratic, that is all that Singaporeans want to know and will accept them. Black cat white cat, can catch mouse, good cat.
The second thought, that Singaporeans would vote based on their racial identity, the sole justification for the need for GRC, is coming to question as well. In this case, LKY is partially right, or his thought is still valid to some extent and circumstances. I will use the Bukit Batok by election to support my case.
Let me start with voting by race. How could a minority candidate win an election competing one on one against a majority candidate in a constituency that has 75% of the majority race? This simply says that the majority did not vote by race. Otherwise Murali would at most be left with 25% of the votes presuming all the minorities voted for him and the majority voted for Chee. And throughout the election you could see how popular he was with the Chinese voters, from Hsien Loong down to the grassroot leaders and ordinary voters.
In this by election, very likely the Chinese votes were split 50:50 or 60:40 in favour of Murali. If this was not the case Murali would have no chance of winning. In the case of the Malay voters, it could be the same pattern. The only part of LKY’s thought that is still valid is that the Indian voters would likely vote along racial line, ie more would vote for an Indian candidate. This is the only portion of the thought that is still holding true.
The most important thing, the by election dispelled the basis for the continued existence of GRCs. The majority Chinese would vote based on meritocracy or on party track records. They are colour blind. So, this LKY thought is not wholly true today. And the same argument should also be applicable to the Elected President.
The reasoning and voting on merits among the Chinese is now the dominant force in their thinking or no thinking. The Chinese have embraced meritocracy like it is the golden truth. Race is no longer an issue. They are only capable of thinking on one single factor, nothing more. They are incapable of thinking of other factors like social and political considerations. They could not see anything further than today. What is going to happen tomorrow with the full force of meritocracy is beyond their grasp. Look at how they accept the huge influx of foreigners into the country, how Singaporeans are conveniently being replaced by foreigners in work places for all the wrong reasons? As far as the Chinese Singaporeans are concerned, their mindset is already stuffed with the word meritocracy, and if they are replaced at work or forced to leave this country, it is meritocracy. They would not think that they have been cheated. Some even concede that this island belongs to anyone that comes here, and everyone and anyone has the right to take over this country as long as they are ‘good’ or ‘betterer’ than the daft Sinkies.
With this kind of mentality, to be generous, one can say the Singaporean Chinese are politically naïve. To be honest, the Singaporean Chinese are political idiots. On this ground, I conclude that the Singaporean Chinese are ready for an Indian PM plus an Indian President at the same time and with minority ministers in charge so long as they are meritocratic. I am not sure if the Malays would think like the idiotic Chinese and accept the same development.
So, the Bukit Batok by election has confirmed two things or thoughts of LKY. The Chinese would not vote on racial grounds. The Chinese are ready for an Indian PM and more. Having an Indian or minority President is not an issue. Many minority Presidents have been appointed and ‘elected’ as well.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue May 17, 2016 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The real leader is a dead man
This phrase came out in one of the comments in the blog. The first impression is that the reader was referring to China or North Korea where the big names were Mao Zedong and Kim Il Sung. These two names are so big in the two countries that Deng Xiaoping and Kim Jung Il and Kim Jung Un paled in comparison. Though dead many years ago, they are still revered leaders to their people, legendary heroes, folk heroes.
In this case, the blogger was referring to Singapore. The real leader of Singapore is still Lee Kuan Yew. Singapore just celebrated in a big way, with spontaneous ground up cries to revere Lee Kuan Yew. The initiatives came from the people, more than 100 celebrations, I heard, were organized by the people, ground up initiative, to show their love for their leader, like he is still alive.
To many of the supporters, the leader is still alive, never left, so no need to jump up from the grave. To many Singaporeans there is and always will be one leader. No one could come near him as a leader, no one is seen as a leader in the same light. Singapore is Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Kuan Yew is Singapore.
In this sense, yes, the real leader of Singapore is Lee Kuan Yew. People still look up to him for leadership, for direction, for solutions and answers when things go wrong. Lee Kuan Yew is still the leader of Singapore, like him, hate him, it doesn’t change anything.
If this is the case, when would Singapore have another real leader? Is this a good thing or a bad thing?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PAP is the Singapore Miracle
I don’t think any history or political science student or academic could figure this out. It has never happened before in history, for a political party or dynasty, to last forever. But if they are looking into the politics and political developments of Singapore, many would be shaking their heads, unbelievable is what they would say. No it is not about the evolving and emerging police state that is taking shape. It is about the PAP that is going to last forever and ever as the ruling political party of Singapore that has never happened in the history of civilisation. You cannot find any weakness in the system that would lead to the disintegration or fall of the PAP.
On the opposition front, it was like a given. None of the opposition party would stand a chance to challenge the dominance of the PAP. None of them can present a leader that is charismatic enough to lead his party or a coalition of parties to challenge the PAP. The position of the PAP is simply so comfortable, so invincible.
And the PAP is doing all the right things to keep themselves in power forever. They have a monopoly of all the political talents there is in the island in their team. They have the civil service, the uniformed services and all the organizations and institutions, social, cultural, sports and businesses on their side. They have all the right policies in how to run the country that no one else could do or capable of thinking, and have the confidence and undying support of the majority of the voters.
The PAP is flawless in every way. They are united, the leadership is united, those hoping for an internal split are wasting their time, and they have all the grassroot organizations behind them. And they have talents in depth with constant leadership renewal and more talents waiting to come on board. There is just no way to break the PAP stranglehold and vote them out. They are even planning years ahead, 50 years, a hundred years that no political party would bother to do so as not many would last through more than two terms in office.
Now is this depressing and exhilarating news for the citizens, a never ending story of a PAP rule into the unknown future. PAP all the way. And looks like God is on the side of the PAP.
God is also on the side of the American gangsters to start wars, destruction and killing people all over the world in the hundreds of thousands. How many have ISIS and the terrorist organizations killed, peanuts compared to the number killed by the Americans. And the people of the world love the Americans and called them benign power, full of righteousness and goodness. It only confirms that God is White and will support any regime that is white. Apologies, I got distracted.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2016 8:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

More LKY legacies falling

I wrote about the meritocracy legacy of LKY at the verge of being dumped by including race as a key factor in the election of the EP. Under the present criteria, though very, actually extremely elitist, it still has the hallmark of LKY in it, ie meritocracy. The EP will be chosen on merit and elected by the people. No tokenism. The likely proposed changes to the criteria to include race as a key element soundly denounced the ideal of meritocracy, that does not need to be elected base on merit but on race. Several minority bloggers have spoken up against this compromising change that would not look good when a minority candidate is elected under a different and unmeritocratic rule. They expressed their objections to such a patronising move. How strong is this view from the minorities against or in support of the changes has yet to be determined but it sure irks the minority elites as was seen in a CNA programme.

What is certain is that this meritocracy legacy of LKY will be the first to fall and not the last. In last week's ST there was an article by Kor Kian Beng on how Singapore walked the tight rope in a balancing act between the two super powers, China and the USA. In the article he quoted LKY saying that Singapore must not choose between the two super powers. Singapore should be neutral in their conflict. And Singapore might host Chinese military facilities as well after offering such facilities to the Americans. That was another hallmark and legacy of LKY. A wisdom only fools should disregard.

Vivian Balakrishnan and Chan Chun Sing have both been quoted that Singapore's position between the two powers was and is neutral, Singapore does not take sides. This was the position of Singapore in the past. Has this been changed recently over the South China Sea dispute?

Hsien Loong took pains to explain Singapore's position at the National Day Rally not for no reasons. China is fuming and has lodged protests to the govt on Singapore's pro American stand, read as anti China, after several govt officials made statements that were obviously unfriendly to China. Singapore's role within Asean on this issue, the favourable comments on The Hague ruling, freedom of navigation, etc etc mirrored the American positions to the chagrin of China. And the Americans are using military facilities in Singapore to conduct provocative manoeuvres in the South China that further put to question about Singapore's neutral position between the two super powers.

The big question, is Singapore really neutral or has Singapore taken side with the Americans, abandoning its policy of neutrality? It is not just what the Singapore govt and its officials were saying but what Singapore has been doing in recent times that would be judged. And only China and the USA know and matters whether Singapore has taken sides.

If Singapore has taken side, then another legacy of LKY is going down the drain. The next question to ask, are these legacies obsolete, outlived their usefulness, or they were wrong in the first place and have to be dumped, LKY legacies or whatever? How many more of LKY's legacies or wisdom would be ignored, challenged and buried away? How many people have the audacity to think they are wiser than LKY and dare to show disrespect to his legacies, to put them away, barely one year after his demise?

Was there a call to protect and preserve his legacies?

PS. I understand there are people that would pui when LKY’s name is mentioned. Let’s be objective about this. Not all his legacies are bad and some are critical to the continued existence and well being of this little Red Dot. Abandoning the good stuff indiscriminately would be an unforgiveable sin, an injustice to the future of Singapore and the millenials.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Who should be responsible to protect the legacies of LKY?

I may be asking the wrong question here by assuming that the legacies of LKY need to be protected. They should only if they are good legacies. Legacies should not be protected just because they are legacies. To ask such a question lies an underlying assumption that the legacies are good and worth protecting. Of course some may say the legacies are worth nothing, useless, should all be forgotten, dump into the dustbin of history.

I don’t think all of LKY’s legacies are bad. There must be some that are good or else we would not be what we are today. Then who should be the ones protecting his legacies? Should it be the people, the PAP or his children. As for the people, even if they want to protect his legacies, they are hapless. At best they could go to Hong Lim to kpkb but would be ignored. I bet Gilbert will be thinking about this seriously, to try a protest to protect LKY’s legacies instead of against govt policies and see how the govt will react, how the people will respond. Maybe he will get more supporters coming for free chicken rice.

Would the PAP protect and preserve the legacies of LKY? After all the PAP is his baby. The elite and the wealth they have accumulated were only made possible because of LKY and his legacies. Should they be honourable and grateful to want to protect his legacies that have made them rich and powerful? No country would have politicians becoming millionaires legitimately by just living on their million dollar pay. This is a legacy of LKY.

If the PAP does not think it worthy to protect the legacies of LKY, though I think they would if they are honourable, then it would be left to his children to do the necessary. Who among his children would be zealous enough to want to protect papa’s legacies?

We are already seeing some of his legacies being overturned and put away. Would there be any LKY legacies left by the end of this decade or sometime further down the road? During the mourning of his death, everyone was talking about his legacies. Now there is a silence, no one seems to be interested or bothered to talk about them, to bring them out to justify what they are going to do, to praise the legacies for the success of Singapore.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Sep 28, 2016 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Singapore wants to improve ties with Japan
‘Japan is an “important friend” to Singapore and a key contributor to the region, and Singapore hopes to take the relationship between the two countries further…In our early years, Japanese investment made a lot of difference to our economy….’ Hsien Loong said these in Tokyo.
He was polite not to mention that much earlier, in the 1940s, Japan invaded and conquered Singapore, colonized Singapore, and massacred hundreds of Singaporeans during the Occupation. But that was too long ago and Singaporeans have gotten that Singapore was once Syonan To, and many were forced to learn Japanese and to bow to Japanese or be slapped or kicked or even bayoneted.
During this 4 day official visit Japan had in a way apologised indirectly by giving a posthumous award to ‘the late founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew – the Grand Cordon of the Order of the Paulow nia Flowers - an award Mr Lee described as “a great honour”.’ Hsien Loong and Ho Ching were also given an audience with the Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko and had tea with them. This is another rare honour.
With improving relations between the two countries, maybe the next person to be given a posthumous award in the same Order would be past President SR Nathan. Maybe next year.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> Singapore Current Affairs All times are GMT + 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group. Hosted by Vodien Internet Solutions