1) Not everything is
about Singapore, not everything is about the
Singaporeans...
Who are our feverish
nationalists here referring to as "us," "Singaporeans," "we,"
"local," and "native?
Chinese, Malay,
Indian? or the Tangren only?
2) The understanding
of our initial poster is flawed regarding LKY's comment--you see,
you do not take everything as stated in English, it goes for
other languages as well. Every language is capable of its own
humor, nuances, sarcasm, maybe you should ask LKY himself or more
native speakers of English to get what LKY meant with his
statement.
3) Personal industry
and virtue may have brought us into better life circumstances, but
is it all our own? 4) Maybe we should look at what others
before us have done for us. Consider yourself being born in
Myanmar, the Philippines, Bangladesh, would you attain the status
you have today? In such circumstances, individuals would have to
work hard, twice, thrice, a hundred times even in order to equal
the "Singapore lifestyle." Human beings are not equal in the same
way that opportunities in life aren't.
It has been a cause for concern among the Americans and
Europeans (Ang Mohs) that the rapid increase in China's wealth is
somewhat unhealthy for the Chinese people. Who can blame
them? Forty years of economic progress in Singapore and yet
its people are not showing modest signs of emotional maturity. It
is never enough to earn the buck, one also needs to know how
to 1) use it, 2) keep some of it, 3) make it grow, 4)
realize its true value--economically and socially. Europe with
all its sensibilities is aghast with the behavior of
Singaporeans, 5) because the latter are disproving one
important direct linear relationship: as living conditions improve
to be more conducive for human living, so must our
behavior be. A sense of humanity may be lacking in Singapore,
and who is most guilty? I don't know, we should ask our
nationalists here, is it across all lines or is it particular to
one?
You may talk like the financiers, economic geniuses that you
are, good schooling, good teachers, but realize that even economics
is a social science. Discussions on human populations, their
different qualities and subsequent interactions started the ball
rolling, even before stocks and derivatives came into the
picture. Do we really need a gargantuan GDP for so few
people? Apparently yes, because it is what the current [global
economic] system dictates, even if the wealth is more ephemereal
than physical. Singapore does not need the foreigners? Hmmmmm...
let me paint a picture:
you feel disadvantaged now, maybe in a few years that break will
come for you (don't be bored waiting, you're a Singaporean, your
chances are way better than a Myanmarese, Filipino, or
Bangladeshi)
congratulations Mr. Manager, so your wife wants to eat at that
swanky restaurant, who's going to serve her? the Singaporean not
that better off
wow that food attendant made it to branch manager, no matter
there are disadvantaged populations, still Singapore citizens
though
shiok! Singapore is filled to the brim with opportunities, even
that one has made it to manager, maybe we should make robots or
train monkeys to serve all of us?
now multiply this situation to the one selling your wife a
handbag in the future, cleaning your house, parking your car,
servicing your utilities, accepting your huge bank deposits,
advicing you on your investments, refining the petrol for your
benz, cleaning up the air after you. consulting you on your
appearance so it actually reflects your net worth...
Singapore is not the Philippines, it's not Indonesia, it's not
Cambodia, it cannot sustain 70 years serving you and the
economy with pure blooded Singaporeans, if there is one; especially
since everyone wants to be the "boss."
You say the government is unfair, favoring cheap and unskilled
(how sure are you about this?) labor. Prioritizing this and that,
what about the beggars, the Singaporeans who are still poor, and
you say you want real democracy? Give me a democratic society
without a poor individual, without a disadvantaged citizen.
6) Equality is never the
right course for any form of society simply because it is
impractical, even abstract. Egalitarian? maybe. Equitable?
yes. TO EACH WHAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR HIM/HERSELF. Your
Singapore government has given you half of the silver spoon dear
nationalists, it is up to you to forge the other half. The
foundations and scaffolding have been made for you, it's up to you
to finish up the house. Don't make me give another
analogy.
The early philosopher talked of men of gold, men of lead, men of
iron, that everyone must fulfill the role their substance
dictated in order to create a harmonious society. Now this goes
against self-determination and the Americans and atheists won't
like that. So let us modify it in such a way that an individual
determines for himself his own substance. One thing is certain, not
everyone will be made of gold or make himself out of gold. No
matter the arrogance, a person is still capable of
self-realization, he/she knows what he/she is really made of.
7) Try to be more
abstract, foreigners outnumbering you on the bus? Imagine them
taking over the government and subjugating you, not competing for
that job and that salary because it automatically goes to
them. 8) I can
forgive you for the lapses in understanding English ( which somehow
is still foreign in this country), but to see things with no
insight whatsoever, no empathy, no deeper understanding--a
chastising you are not in for, but lamenting for your immaturity,
ignorance, and hubris for the welfare of other people.
1) I think Singaporeans are only interested in Singapore...
the only time its interested in other countries is for
comparisons.
2) If the target audiences understanding of LKYs statement is
skewed. Then the speaker has failed.
3) SMLJ?
4) True. But I do believe in striving forwards not backwards and
thus comparisons with better countries would be the way. If I were
to compare with countries worse off, we should all
retire since we would not reach the lifestyle of impoverished
countries within one generation.
5) Blame meritocracy, elitists, the small landspace and dense
population.
6) Equality is the right thing to do and we should always strive
for it. Just because it is difficult to attain or "unrealistic" as
you put it should not deter the basic fundamental to strive for it.
It is in the national anthem of Singapore I believe.
7) That is what they are lamenting about... given that is an
abstract case.
8) You are forgiven for not reaching your target audience with
your shakespearean English which maybe native to your country but
alien to Singapore. Whatever the case, the choice to allow more
foreigners into whichever country should only be made AFTER the
consideration of the welfare of the ORIGINAL country's citizens.
That ...given more insight also ensures the welfare of the
foreigners that made it into the country and maintains the social
balance in Singapore.
Kind Regards
Genie...
the Troll