Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

historytoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 203 posts

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

#51

Post by decimalenough »

execat wrote: post #43
jnaina wrote: post #34

My father landed in Singapore in the 1950s on the steamship SS Rajula, eighteen years old with 10 dollars to his name, to seek his fortune, stepping into a crime-ridden, filthy slum. As he described it, people crammed into shophouses, kampongs (villages) and squatter settlements with no proper toilets (human faeces and urine were carted away by "night soil" men carrying them in open containers in the streets), no cle…

> thinking the japs will invade from the sea Be mindful of using terms that are widely recognized as racial slurs.

Some 50,000 of OP's father's compatriots were killed by the Japanese, the survivors can call the invaders what they wish.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

#52

Post by decimalenough »

killingtime74 wrote: post #35
seanlinmt wrote: post #7

Singapore is a strange outlier among successful democratic countries. There's always stories that are untold. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lim_Chin_Siong?wprov=sfla1 Operation Spectrum untracing the conspiracy' https://share.google/2mRpZk3RGaYUKCRXS

It's not a democratic country. If it was then so is China and North Korea. They hold elections too

Singapore has been described as a "managed democracy". There are genuinely free elections, and there's an actual opposition, but the government/ruling party (they're largely inseparable at this point) exerts a heavy hand to ensure they keep their supermajority.

One of the big questions of Singaporean politics is what would happen if there ever was a "freak result" (in LKY's words) and the opposition won a majority, since thanks to the first past the post voting system further exacerbated by mandatory "group representative constituencies" the winner always wins big and coalitions or minority governments are not an option.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

#53

Post by kramadeshak »

jdw64 wrote: post #33

Lee Kuan Yew is praised by Western academia because of 'benevolent authoritarianism' — in other words, the idea that a small elite should rule over the workers. In fact, his policies were authoritarian and dictatorial. Despite Singapore's geographical advantages, Lee's achievement in transforming it into a great financial hub is certainly a testament to his capability. However, when you consider his track record 'Ope…

I grew up in the former capital of a country that was colonized by the British and one thing that stood out to me while I was studying the history of my city was how much the colonial structure survived in terms of vested interest and avenues of power exercised, including corruption. I learned how the most of the agents of the crown that came to my town were largely Scottish and Irish in ethnicity, taking a post here just to earn enough money to go back and live a lavish lifestyle, hence heavily indulged in corruption, and that working culture still survives. The reason why it wasn't reformed was not only governance apathy but also the same vested interests greasing the hands that held power at any given time to protect their cash cow. And if that doesn't work using inflammatory accusation to rile up a popular protest by scaring the populace using their insecurities.

I am not a fan of "authoritarianism" but I do recognize that Singapore had a lot of the same issues and Lee Kuan Yew effectively used authoritarianism to drive it out. But one thing to keep in mind is that Singapore got very lucky in getting Lee Kuan Yew as their leader, someone who was very idealistic in his goals and had the pragmatism to execute it. Such a person is very rare and even rarer is for someone like that to rise to a position of power.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

#54

Post by zulux »

execat wrote: post #43
jnaina wrote: post #34

My father landed in Singapore in the 1950s on the steamship SS Rajula, eighteen years old with 10 dollars to his name, to seek his fortune, stepping into a crime-ridden, filthy slum. As he described it, people crammed into shophouses, kampongs (villages) and squatter settlements with no proper toilets (human faeces and urine were carted away by "night soil" men carrying them in open containers in the streets), no cle…

> thinking the japs will invade from the sea Be mindful of using terms that are widely recognized as racial slurs.

[flagged]

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

#55

Post by vablings »

ggm wrote: post #3

Weaponised the court system to repress union backed opposition, despite having been engaged with the union movement in his early years (as I understand it) It is a kind of workers paradise. If you're well behaved and don't shout you get a good education, health system and housing. 95% owner occupied is pretty damn good. Huge dependence on south Malaysia migrant workers shuttling over the bridge every day, so it's "ho…

I think the last part really is why LKYs legacy is eulogized so heavily especially with more left leaning counterparts. In the USA there is no legacy matter for politicians, and they often scupper with one foot in the door and the other halfway out.

None of the things that LKY did that made Singapore great are unique to a dictatorship but him being the spiritual head and huge focus on education is critical. Interesting the USA has a good appetite for spending lots of money on students, but the education outcomes are really bad compared to places with half the spending

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

#56

Post by claw-el »

decimalenough wrote: post #52
killingtime74 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a democratic country. If it was then so is China and North Korea. They hold elections too

Singapore has been described as a "managed democracy". There are genuinely free elections, and there's an actual opposition, but the government/ruling party (they're largely inseparable at this point) exerts a heavy hand to ensure they keep their supermajority. One of the big questions of Singaporean politics is what would happen if there ever was a "freak result" (in LKY's words) and the opposition won a majority, s…

In comparison, another country considered to be a ‘flawed democracy’ also have governments exerting a heavy hand in redrawing the election map (even getting to Supreme Court) to ensure they keep their majority.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

#57

Post by SanjayMehta »

hirako2000 wrote: post #40
wahern wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the time the Europeans arrived Singapore had long since declined: > However, by the time the Portuguese arrived in the early 16th century, Singapura had already become "great ruins" according to Alfonso de Albuquerque. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Singapore How far back and how much context is required for a simple narrative to not constitute lying? And for a narrative about national origin, is it not…

Not sure about Singapore but Malaysia's racism is not complicated. It is discrimination into law. It makes things rather clear. About discourse of course there is not discussion to have.

The most amusing part of Malaysia's discrimination is in the term "bhumiputra," which is Sanskrit for "son of the soil," but today it's used for Malay muslim.

All these lands were Dharmic originally, all the way to Japan, before the various cults arrived.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

#58

Post by teleforce »

freewestpapua wrote: post #41
teleforce wrote: post #18

>Stamford Raffles stands – according to the plaque attached to the plinth – on the ‘historic site’ where he first landed as an agent of the British East India Company on 28 January 1819 and, thereafter, ‘with genius and perception changed the destiny of Singapore from an obscure fishing village to a great seaport and modern metropolis’. This is one of the greatest lies ever told, that Singapore was an obscure fishing…

> The people who originally settled in the Malay Archipelago several thousands years ago were successful maritime explorers. That comment upset me as a Melanesian. I'm sorry, but I need to challenge the above statement as it is factually incorrect. What you are claiming is widely spread in a politicized way in Malaysia and Indonesia, and in a similar but different context in Thailand and Phillipines. Firstly, I'm sur…

Naturally they inter-married, the first wave from out of Africa people (e.g Perak man) and the second wave from the Taiwan diaspora [1]. This as you probably know happened over many thousands of years.

The word one to ten in most Austronesian countries from Madagascar to Hawaii, spanning more than 17,000 km or 10,000 miles (about half of earth's perimeter of 40,000 km). These countries main languages including Malagasy, Malay, Indonesian, Javanese, Tagalog, Sulu, Palau (Micronesia), NZ Maori, Hawaii (Polynesia), etc are very similar. In particular, "Lima" meaning five/hand is the common and signature Malay/Austronesian world, even in Hawaii.

Based on your throw away name, most probably you're from Papua Island, you probably know that one of its original main languages, apart from the recent colonial based Tok Pisin, is the Malay Austronesian based Hiri Motu [2].

>Today, they have been mostly genocided by 'Malay' (sometimes used to cloud the term Austronesian term) settler populations.

What nonsense, as they said the proof is in the pudding. If genocide happened as you claimed most of these people are gone but they're everywhere. Please check Borneo Island for example, ruled by the Malay Brunei Kingdom for several centuries until the colonial Brooke the White Rajah came. This third largest Island in the world probably has the most diverse demographic population of indigenous peoples in the world [3].

Fun facts, as comparison the Champa Malay people were genocided by the Vietnamese warlords mainly by the Nguyen lords. They controlled majority of Vietnam for about two thousands years but now you hardly find this Champa Malay people, similar to what happened in muslim in Spain. The highly contested South Chinese Sea original name was Champa Sea [4].

>I hope this information will help you and others correct your misunderstanding and stop spreading such disingenous claims intended to enable land grab by settlers.

Since we are in the Singapore topic, by your own definition of land grab by settlers, the Chinese immigrants where the first PM LKY are from, that constitute majority of Singaporean were performing land grab by settlers because just 200 years ago majority were Malay?

[1] Asia’s secret World Heritage site:

https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20160518-malaysias-11000-...

[2] Hiri Motu:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiri_Motu

[3] Borneo:Demographics:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borneo#Demographics

[4] The Cham: Descendants of Ancient Rulers of South China Sea Watch Maritime Dispute From Sidelines:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/140616-so...

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

#59

Post by roenxi »

Pay08 wrote: post #27
roenxi wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea and probably not, but it is a bit more complex than that. There isn't any particular rule saying that the only functional democratic model is multi-party democracy. One could imagine a successful democratic model with one party allowing diverse internal factions, for example. It is really hard to get a read on China, but their success raises some interesting questions of how exactly their internal part…

From what I've read (and this may very well be outdated), Singapore is generally democratic, but the PAP does such a good job of running the country that people don't vote for other parties.

Yeah we've heard that before from people who turned out to be filthy liars. Not saying it is impossible, the Singapore numbers are borderline plausible, but if the leading party gets more than 60% of the vote I'm going to assume shenanigans unless I've seen some pretty strong evidence beyond what a propaganda department would put out. People don't agree with each other all that much.

Opposition can literally just converge to the PAP positions over time. Or internal factionalism causes a schism and leads to 2 parties forming from one overwhelming ruling party. In political settings there are enormous incentives to set up roughly 50-50 coalitions.

Re: Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore Story (2023)

#60

Post by claw-el »

itsthecourier wrote: post #21
roenxi wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no idea and probably not, but it is a bit more complex than that. There isn't any particular rule saying that the only functional democratic model is multi-party democracy. One could imagine a successful democratic model with one party allowing diverse internal factions, for example. It is really hard to get a read on China, but their success raises some interesting questions of how exactly their internal part…

been in China for decades, benevolent dictatorships allow long term planning, elections every 4 years favor short term decisions, populism and waste a huge percentage of time in after elections and pre-elections China and Singapore showed democracy is not necessarily the most productive way to run a country

The election happening once in a while helps ensure if the long term planning is still aligned with the population, because, new people will be born and some others will ‘age out’, the original long term planning might no longer represent the voice of this new set of population.
Post reply on HN