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

The media in Singapore: Zip It

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–39 of 39 posts

Re: The media in Singapore: Zip It

#31

Post by crdoconnor »

autokad wrote: post #17
crdoconnor wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>no natural resources The port was considerably more valuable than any natural resources they could have had, and was tapped as the 'seed capital' used to build the country. Without it, they probably would still be as poor as they were in 1950. The 'we built this with nothing but our bare hands' canard is useful, though, for domestic propaganda. >It took a lot of sacrifice to get it where it is today. It mainly just…

'we built this with nothing but our bare hands' is more than just propaganda. sure, they had a sea port, but looking at what they have done is amazing. many countries have some advantage, but most do not use them properly. Malaysia is a bridge crossing away with just as much sea access and ample amounts of oil and other natural resources, yet I do not believe they have accomplished what singapore has done. taiwan, so…

>'we built this with nothing but our bare hands' is more than just propaganda.

It really isn't. The port gave the city a much greater head-start than PAP have ever given it credit for.

This intentional misdirection is used to give credence to the idea that it was Lee Kuan Yew's genius and the sweat and tears of ordinary Singaporeans that grew the country out of nothing.

Which isn't to say that the country wasn't reasonably well run. It's just saying that it just wasn't sheer genius or some kind of cultural superiority that pulled them out of poverty. The truth is much more mundane than that.

Re: The media in Singapore: Zip It

#32

Post by Fajita_Mane »

cdf wrote: post #30
Fajita_Mane wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The laws against insulting religions are part of a wider system to allow for smooth integration in a region that has known genocide and riots as the traditional means of resolving racial and religious differences. It has more to do with controlling public discourse than ensuring racial harmony. Despite Singapore's best efforts to forcibly integrate immigrants (i.e. racial quotas on public housing blocks) Sg has a ra…

You may want to read the link you cited. Also, Little India is not impoverished. It just looks so to a casual tourist. The fact is rent in Singapore is substantially driven by their accessibility to Little India.

I said it was "relatively impoverished". Singapore has a high GINI coefficient for a country so developed. Despite that, living in the bottom 5% of income in Sg is still much better than most countries because of subsidized public housing.

Re: The media in Singapore: Zip It

#33

Post by Fajita_Mane »

crdb wrote: post #27
Fajita_Mane wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The laws against insulting religions are part of a wider system to allow for smooth integration in a region that has known genocide and riots as the traditional means of resolving racial and religious differences. It has more to do with controlling public discourse than ensuring racial harmony. Despite Singapore's best efforts to forcibly integrate immigrants (i.e. racial quotas on public housing blocks) Sg has a ra…

This is not at all how I understood the riots. Roughly: a bus driver arrived in an area where people were partying in the street, and refused to let in a very intoxicated fellow. This fellow somehow ended up in front of the bus (I think he decided to lie there) and got run over by the driver (I doubt intentionally). As is customary in the country of origin of said partying folks, the crowd got angry and "defended" it…

>As is customary in the country of origin of said partying folks, the crowd got angry and "defended" its own. So the reaction to the accident was motivated at least to some degree by race. I agree that it wasn't an example of race on race violence, and I don't think it was widely interpreted as such. Though I'll admit I'm not informed on the specifics of how it started, it certainly was nothing comparable to the riots that happened before Singapore was undeveloped.

The riot isn't important in the context of the Amos Yee story except as an example of an event where Singapore was portrayed in a negative light in int'l press. The first instance of public violence in the nation for over 40 years made a great headline.

I wasn't posting that article for the coverage of that event so much as to show how journalism in Sg. The Strait Times will literally never publish anything remotely critical of the dominant political coalition.

Re: The media in Singapore: Zip It

#34

Post by crdb »

Fajita_Mane wrote: post #33
crdb wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not at all how I understood the riots. Roughly: a bus driver arrived in an area where people were partying in the street, and refused to let in a very intoxicated fellow. This fellow somehow ended up in front of the bus (I think he decided to lie there) and got run over by the driver (I doubt intentionally). As is customary in the country of origin of said partying folks, the crowd got angry and "defended" it…

>As is customary in the country of origin of said partying folks, the crowd got angry and "defended" its own. So the reaction to the accident was motivated at least to some degree by race. I agree that it wasn't an example of race on race violence, and I don't think it was widely interpreted as such. Though I'll admit I'm not informed on the specifics of how it started, it certainly was nothing comparable to the riot…

No, it was not motivated by race. Around 9% of Singaporean citizen are Singaporean Indian and 58% of those are Tamil (I attended two weddings in the last 3 years where one of the couple was Tamil) - the same as the non-Singaporeans involved in the riot. There have already been two Singaporean Indian presidents (Devan Nair and S. R. Nathan, the latter the longest-serving in Singaporean history).

It's hard to find a parallel with any Western country, because no Western country has as free an immigration policy for low income workers as Singapore does (the US has a large illegal immigrant population to meet demand, but the dynamics of that are very different) - around 12% of residents are on Work Permits (i.e. construction workers or domestic help) [1].

The Straits Time did not publish the event as a race-motivated riot because it wasn't - it was more about a bunch of drunk angry people burning a few cars - and that it wasn't was immediately obvious to the readers of the Straits Time (which include many non-Singaporeans; not to mention the ST has had its own feuds with the Singaporean government).

[1] http://population.sg/resources/population-composition/

Re: The media in Singapore: Zip It

#35

Post by crdb »

Fajita_Mane wrote: post #32
cdf wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may want to read the link you cited. Also, Little India is not impoverished. It just looks so to a casual tourist. The fact is rent in Singapore is substantially driven by their accessibility to Little India.

I said it was "relatively impoverished". Singapore has a high GINI coefficient for a country so developed. Despite that, living in the bottom 5% of income in Sg is still much better than most countries because of subsidized public housing.

Little India is only "impoverished" relative to Sentosa Cove. The MRT station has an exit facing the back of the Istana (the Presidential Palace), there are plenty of condos popular with Western expats (City Square especially), high end malls, hipster cocktail and coffee bars and expensive design shops in shophouses.

It is one stop away from Dhoby Ghaut, the MRT station with the most connections to anywhere in the island, and three from Orchard, the one with arguably the highest commercial rents.

Re: The media in Singapore: Zip It

#36

Post by Fajita_Mane »

crdb wrote: post #35
Fajita_Mane wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said it was "relatively impoverished". Singapore has a high GINI coefficient for a country so developed. Despite that, living in the bottom 5% of income in Sg is still much better than most countries because of subsidized public housing.

Little India is only "impoverished" relative to Sentosa Cove. The MRT station has an exit facing the back of the Istana (the Presidential Palace), there are plenty of condos popular with Western expats (City Square especially), high end malls, hipster cocktail and coffee bars and expensive design shops in shophouses. It is one stop away from Dhoby Ghaut, the MRT station with the most connections to anywhere in the is…

It's not fair to equate its location with income levels or quality life in a place like Sg. It's not organized the way big cities in the US or western Europe are.

My point about it being relatively impoverished was that the majority of the Indian immigrant laborers live there. Relative to the average Sg citizen, they are living in poverty.

Re: The media in Singapore: Zip It

#37

Post by autokad »

crdoconnor wrote: post #31
autokad wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'we built this with nothing but our bare hands' is more than just propaganda. sure, they had a sea port, but looking at what they have done is amazing. many countries have some advantage, but most do not use them properly. Malaysia is a bridge crossing away with just as much sea access and ample amounts of oil and other natural resources, yet I do not believe they have accomplished what singapore has done. taiwan, so…

>'we built this with nothing but our bare hands' is more than just propaganda. It really isn't. The port gave the city a much greater head-start than PAP have ever given it credit for. This intentional misdirection is used to give credence to the idea that it was Lee Kuan Yew's genius and the sweat and tears of ordinary Singaporeans that grew the country out of nothing. Which isn't to say that the country wasn't reas…

if your statements were true, why is it that the country was in such a terrible position come 1960s? the port is much older then that.

Re: The media in Singapore: Zip It

#38

Post by Fajita_Mane »

crdb wrote: post #34
Fajita_Mane wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>As is customary in the country of origin of said partying folks, the crowd got angry and "defended" its own. So the reaction to the accident was motivated at least to some degree by race. I agree that it wasn't an example of race on race violence, and I don't think it was widely interpreted as such. Though I'll admit I'm not informed on the specifics of how it started, it certainly was nothing comparable to the riot…

No, it was not motivated by race. Around 9% of Singaporean citizen are Singaporean Indian and 58% of those are Tamil (I attended two weddings in the last 3 years where one of the couple was Tamil) - the same as the non-Singaporeans involved in the riot. There have already been two Singaporean Indian presidents (Devan Nair and S. R. Nathan, the latter the longest-serving in Singaporean history). It's hard to find a pa…

>No, it was not motivated by race. You mentioned in your previous comment that it was a "customary" reaction to the accident. I'm no expert on the culture, but I'd assume that public drinking is a great deal more socially acceptable in South India.

Singapore is lucky enough to be close to a tremendous supply of inexpensive human capital - even more so than the US/Mexico. Their immigration policy allows low-paying marine/construction jobs to be filled quickly, but workers' rights are essentially nonexistent.

Those 12% of foreign workers are almost all guaranteed to be earning enough to support themselves and their families back home - and that's without the benefit of a minimum wage or membership in an effective union. This sort of public policy may attract foreign investment, but it's unfair to the workers that have made Sg rich and it's unlike anything seen in the rest of the developed world.

>not to mention the ST has had its own feuds with the Singaporean government Are you referring to the long-standing tradition of the PAP suing print journalists for libel?

I was browsing the front page of their site after I looked up coverage of the riots. The biggest story currently is about a marine trade union leader and MP resigning in disgrace after embezzling funds. Nowhere in the story does it mention his involvement in the PAP. There's a reason they have the worst press freedom rating of developed countries.

Re: The media in Singapore: Zip It

#39

Post by crdb »

Fajita_Mane wrote: post #36
crdb wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Little India is only "impoverished" relative to Sentosa Cove. The MRT station has an exit facing the back of the Istana (the Presidential Palace), there are plenty of condos popular with Western expats (City Square especially), high end malls, hipster cocktail and coffee bars and expensive design shops in shophouses. It is one stop away from Dhoby Ghaut, the MRT station with the most connections to anywhere in the is…

It's not fair to equate its location with income levels or quality life in a place like Sg. It's not organized the way big cities in the US or western Europe are. My point about it being relatively impoverished was that the majority of the Indian immigrant laborers live there. Relative to the average Sg citizen, they are living in poverty.

No, they do not. They live in areas like the West industrial zones where rent is much cheaper, and commute to the sites by bus. HDBs, the government-built social housing towers you might see in photos, are by law racially mixed to population proportions and not available to non-citizen (some are available to permanent residents, which WP holders are not).

The lowest class by salary of any society lives, by definition, in poverty compared to the others.

Post reply on HN