He speaks about the race issues we had in Malaysia. He speaks about the race issues we would have if we didn't do this or that. In fact, he speaks about..... nothing else! Ever since he stepped into politics in the 1950s, Old Man's favourite topic, heck let me restate that, Old Man's ONLY topic is all about race, race, race.
Come on Old F*rt, surely you don't want the young generation(s) to remember you as race bigot.
View among young that S'pore can be put on auto-pilot still concerns MM
Yes, I have bolded to highlight the racial points in the report.
Here are my comments on his never ending racist ideas.
"In a wide-ranging and revealing interview with The New York Times, he spoke of his regret over Singapore being 'turfed out' of Malaysia and the determination of his generation of leaders to take a different path than what has happened across the causeway."Isn't it amazing how Old Man still tries to lie that we were "kicked out", when in reality, it is now known it was the Singapore side who planned the separation in the first place? Yes, a planned separation by the Singapore side, perhaps even before the merger itself! Here is what I posted earlier. Did LKY Lie We Were Kicked Out of Malaysia?
It was reported in Old Man's own eulogy that Dr Goh Keng Swee was the one who mooted the idea of the separation. How then could it be that Malaysia "kicked us out"?
I will never understand why Old Man keeps living in the past. Haven't we left Malaysia about more than 40 years ago? Why is the Old Man carrying the baggage of the past? Isn't he weighing Singapore down?
'But not as much, because it's a much broader base,' he was quick to add. But he went on to explain:
'We would have improved inter-racial relations and an improved holistic situation. Now we have a very polarised Malaysia - Malays, Chinese and Indians in separate schools, living separate lives and not really getting on with one another. That's bad for us as close neighbours.'
'We will not as a majority squeeze the minority, because once we're by ourselves, the Chinese become the majority,' he said.This is a big lie. A really blatant lie that is so obvious, but hardly anyone dares to talk about it. While Old Man pokes fun at Malaysia being a racist nation, because of its bumi policy, Singapore has its own racist policies favouring the Chinese over the other races. The racist policies include the racially divisive CDAC, Mendaki, Sinda funds, the SAP in schools, the race quota in HDB, just to name a few. Below are some articles about racism in Singapore, which I wrote earlier.
PAP's Racist MT Policy, Part 1 - The Sidelining of other Races and Cultures
PAP's Racist MT Policy, Part 2 - PAP is forcing Han Culture, not Chinese Culture, on us
Chinese Chauvinism Rampant at Heart of MT Issue
Race Discrimination in Singapore? Who Doesn't Know That?
Resistance against PSLE MT Change - It's all about Chinese Chauvinism, isn't it?
Singapore's PR Policy is about Racial Demographics first, Talent second
Let's Face the Truth - We ARE a Racist Nation
Racist HDB Quota Policy begins to show its Effect
More crap from Old Man Lee – what integration talking he?
Not ready for non-Chinese PM? Who is PM to speak on our behalf?
This article is about Old Man's son aping racist remarks like his dad. Chimp of the Old Block?
Racial Quota for HDB is for PAP to stay in power – and it is racially discriminatory
MM Lee does what he does best – play the racial card game
If I told you Singapore has racist policies, would you believe me?
In conclusion, we can safely say that we have our own racist policies in Singapore. So who is Old Man to take a dig at others for their race policies? It appears he cannot move out from his racist talk. He thinks he is still in the 1960s.
We don't need leaders who carry baggage of the past. We need leaders who are relevant. Unfortunately, his staying in power too long is the biggest stumbling block.
=========
Update - Another article here.
When Old Man rattles the race card, it means PAP has run out of ideas
53 comments:
solobear, do you believe that in a multiracial society, there must be laws and regulations put in place to maintain harmony and that if things are left to its own devices, people of the same races congregate and polarise the society?
Lee Kuan Yew's account of the separation has been documented in detail, not only in his books but several others; not to mention our history books.
Can you pls cite some examples of writers who hold to your view; i.e. that the exit was pre-planned and pre-meditated.
Lau CS,
Most of the history written about Lee KY are based on HIS story. Not to mention that Sg media bans a lot of articles that are not so flattering to him.
On the separation, I first came across an alternative view (besides the usual one that he claims we were kicked out) some years back on Discovery Channel. I wrote about that in this post - Old Man wants all the glory to himself You can start reading from the sub header "My viewpoint on the merger".
So my suspicion was that LKY wanted the merger so as to get rid of Lim Chin Siong, by getting the Tunku to lock him up. After that was done, all that needs to be followed up is to make life difficult for Tunku, so that he would let Singapore go - and presto - LKY is now PM of Independent Spore.
If not for the merger, the biggest rival, Chin Siong, would stand in LKY's way.
Although that is just a theory in my own books (based on the narration and documentation of what happened between LCS and LKY according to Discovery Channel), I was only able to confirm that later, when I came across a Forum letter, written by Assoc Prof Hussain Mutalib, about LKy's eulogy after the passing of Dr Goh KS.
Here is that article I wrote:
Did LKY Lie We Were Kicked Out of Malaysia?
Note that the Assoc Prof was sharp enough to note that the idea of the separation came from the Singapore side.
So I was not too far off, toying with the idea that it was Singapore who wanted out all along. In view of the clash of the titans between LCS and LKY, the merger and the separation all begin to fall in place, doesn't it?
>>solobear, do you believe that in a multiracial society, there must be laws and regulations put in place to maintain harmony and that if things are left to its own devices, people of the same races congregate and polarise the society?
>>
Me:
In any society, where there are minorities, there would be "racially marked enclaves". To eradicate that is tantamount to eradicating the culture of the ethnic minorities.
If integration is what PAP wants, there are other ways to do it. Like in schools - which means that the very racist SAP schools have to go. It also means that the racially divisive funds such as CDAC, Mendaki, Sinda would be better off merged as one.
But there lies the hypocrisy. How can we say "integration", when we have SAP schools which cuts off about everyone who is not Chinese? Or funds that demarcates who gets what based on race?
the mixture of political liberalism social conservatism and Islamic values is refreshing. keep it up.
Write articles on how a progressive islamic political philosophy would look like in pluralistic Spore.
"Write articles on how a progressive islamic political philosophy would look like in pluralistic Spore."
In a word: Scary. Imagine living in a country without pork; people forced to live in a country where women are covered up. No thanks. A secular nation is fine for me.
solobear, so are you saying we should remove the ethnic quotas for HDB ownerships but consolidate the ethnic funds into one and remove SAP schools? it sound to me that we are moving one step forward in one area but backward in the other. In any case I would think that the government would have less say in these ethnic funds and SAP schools(in terms of regulating them) than planning HDB development.
//
In a word: Scary. Imagine living in a country without pork; people forced to live in a country where women are covered up. No thanks. A secular nation is fine for me.
//
Much of our pork comes from Muslim Indonesia and Malaysia.
Women covering up is an Arabic custom. Not Islamic. The Wahhabi Islam is pretty much a Saudi export assisted by the very secular US of A.
And religion does not make good people do evil. Its desperation, poverty and disenfranchisement.
Malaysia and Indonesia officially have secular Constitutions. Indonesia in particular practices Civil Law (From the Dutch) and Malaysia practices Common Law (From the British).
You can talk all you want about the virtues of religion, but the truth is this is a multi-cultural society, so it is best for the government to be secular so that it does not side with any specific religion or creed.
"The Wahhabi Islam is pretty much a Saudi export assisted by the very secular US of A."
To be frank, I am not religious. I care more about humanism than vain beliefs. You can talk all day about the Wahhabi Islam, or the Islam in Iran, or Islam practiced in Afghanistan, but the point is that none of them is as secular enough to tolerate the various cultures present in a secular society.
Having been raised as Baptist I witnessed first hand as my pastors lampooned Buddhism with devil worshipers and rubbishing Science, particularly Evolution. Sure, Singapore keeps a tight lid on such things but it would be silly to assume that a religious government can ensure that equal rights be shared by all.
I sure do not want to live in a society whereby if I do not subscribe to a religion, I will be dubbed an infidel or kafir behind my back.
In a secular state, you are free to practice religion in your own personal space, your own church of worship and even proselytize in the streets (Not in schools and government institutions), without fear from persecution by religious authorities. In sum, you have freedom to religion, as well as freedom from religion, and that to me counts for a lot.
No one disputes the importance of a secular based society. Religion however is a fact of life in any society and progressive Islam has contributions to make in a plural society.
Dont confuse Islam with much publicised archaic practices and acts of terror. There is a progressive and benevolent strand in Islam.
Well, this is what you wrote:
"Write articles on how a progressive islamic political philosophy would look like in pluralistic Spore."
I was assuming you were actually talking about introducing Islam into local governance. Apologies if I misunderstood.
Finally, I find race arguments, particularly the one where the Malay guy criticizes the Chinese guy, silly and perplexing.
It is easy to stereotype another person according to race. When I was overseas people wrongly assume me to be the stereotypical Chinese who will haggle over the price of a slab of meat.
With the influx of globalization and the increase in mixed nationality marriages and offsprings the issue of race will
eventually be a non-issue in the grand scheme of Evolution.
Anon @ 14 September 2010 8:30 PM
>>solobear, so are you saying we should remove the ethnic quotas for HDB ownerships but consolidate the ethnic funds into one and remove SAP schools? it sound to me that we are moving one step forward in one area but backward in the other.
>>
Me:
The reason it sounds that is because the PAP makes you believe that the HDB quota is for race integration. Those who are old enough to recall how the quota system came about will tell you it is rubbish.
The quota system came about the same time as the GRC system. The idea was to dilute the opposition votes. It has long been the belief of PAP that the Malay votes are responsible for the swing to the opposition.
To counter that swing, the Malay votes had to be split up. The HDB quota was an ideal way to split that vote. At the same time, the GRCs were introduced so that the high Malay population areas would also be diluted.
Of course the PAP never said that. But we know that was the plan because it was made after the 1984 GE, where there was the severest swing towards opposition since PAP came into power.
It can be seen that before the HDB quota system was introduced, all the races had NO PROBLEMS integrating. So the belief that if there is no race quota it would lead to race polarization, that idea can be dustbinned. We tested it out in the 1970s, and we had no problems.The PAP is just imagining a big bad monster that doesn't exist.
Where the REAL polarization occurs today is at the SAP schools. Many SAP students don't even have non-Chinese friends. Same goes for the racially divisive funds like CDAC, Mendaki and Sinda.
The CDAC is the biggest fund, naturally. I have come across some Chinese who feel that "their funds" should not be used to aid other races! Isn't that polarizing the races?
>>In any case I would think that the government would have less say in these ethnic funds and SAP schools(in terms of regulating them) than planning HDB development.
>>
Me:
Trust me, the govt has a lot of say in all these. They DESIGNED it so. Their intent is to make it racially advantageous for the Chinese, while disadvantaging the non-Chinese.
There lies the hypocrisy of PAP, taking a dig at Malaysia's bumi policy, but promoting its own racist policies here.
solobear, but we used to have racial riots back then. I wasn't born yet in the 70's so I am not too sure abt the origin of the HDB quota. However regardless of whether it is a political ploy or not(perhaps partly their intention), it is still the correct decision to make. Humans are racist by nature(I definitely would choose to live in a Chinese neighbourhood if nobody tell me otherwise). Your claims abt the government being racially advantageous to the Chinese, I cannot see why the government need to do so. They have all along been promoting meritocracy and have no reasons to favour one race over the other. In a world where people fight and kill over race and religons, wouldn't it be nice that we can show them a place where people of all race and religions live harmoniously side by side(albeit with some guidance and stipulations at the start). I am not sure it will work but at least it is worth a try.
I think you might find China appealing, although that has to depend on how you define "Chinese" (Uighurs, Hans, Mongols, etc).
>>solobear, but we used to have racial riots back then.
>>
Me:
And how is that attributed to "racial enclaves"? The political situation then was different. In the 1960s, many still carried the baggage of merger and separation.
But in the 1970s to the early 1980s, youths like my friends, colleagues and myself had no baggage of the past and we had Malay neighbours, friends and colleagues who we were comfortable with. Yes, we didn't have the HDB quota then either.
Unfortunately, the PAP has used Social Studies in schools to brainwash students to believe that the race issue is still outstanding. The PAP needs to create a monster for you to fear, so that you keep voting for them, when you reach 21.
>>Your claims abt the government being racially advantageous to the Chinese, I cannot see why the government need to do so.
>>
Me:
But if you open your eyes, that is what the govt is exactly trying to do. Every policy. From the racially divisive funds CDAC, Mendaki, Sinda to the race recorded in your IC.
Did you know that the old IC had "Dialect"? I am a Hokkien. In the old IC, my race was recorded as Chinese and Dialect as Hokkien. My friends had Teochew, Hakka etc In the new IC, it is only Chinese. So all Chinese are grouped as Chinese.
But wait - The Indians are divided because I know of an Indian whose race is "Malayalee". I know of Malays who have their race recorded as "Boyanese".
Why the unification of Chinese and the breaking up of other races?
>>They have all along been promoting meritocracy and have no reasons to favour one race over the other.
>>
Me:
That is being naive. Our polices are race based and they are bias towards Chinese. Be it in education, immigration, promotion in civil service, scholarship awards, whatever.
Singapore's policies are racist. The irony is the PAP pokes fun at other countries (particularly Malaysia), yet its own policies are just as racist, if not more.
Here is some food for thought. Youths in the 1970s to early 1980s did not have any race-phobia. We had Malay, Indian, Sikh, Eurasian friends and we did not see their skin colour as a barrier. It was our parents who were uncomfortable because of their past experience.
Come late 1980s, the PAP brought back the ghost of the past to the youths through Social Studies, and now we have youths once again, who begin to see everything through the race lens!
Stop believing the ghost stories PAP tells you. PAP is creating fear, animosity and putting a wedge between you and your non-Chinese friends.
There is nothing wrong if they want to live together nearby. It makes sense. After all, everyone wants to be near their relatives.
What is wrong with that?
Solobear, you linked GRC and HDB ethnic quota to the splitting up of Malay votes, after PAP's setback in the 1984 election.
Did Malay votes swing substantially to the opposition, to warrant such a move? First of all, I don't think Potong Pasir and Anson were the Malay enclaves then (correct me if I'm wrong). Secondly, LKY played the elitist card to promote MBT and looked down on Chiam. Coupled with not-so-popular policies like speak mandarin and graduate mothers, the vote was swung by Chinese. Note that these two policies did not affect the Malays as much.
solobear, I cannot say for sure that the racial riots are attributed to racial enclaves. However if we have racial enclaves, we will most likely be more susceptible to racial riots(perhaps incite by racial injustice happening around the world). In any case do you consider Singapore having a "Singaporean" identity if we have people of different races staying in separate zones?
It is true that I learned about racial riots through social studies but to say that it is use as a ploy by the government to win votes is a bit far fetch. Those riots did happen. Do you mean to say we should not educate our young about our history?
Our policies aren't racist. Racist policies are when you enact into the law and constitution to lower grades for certain races to get into top schools, helping them own business and perhaps giving them more medical benefits(sound familiar?). Racist policies isn't not writing your dialect group into your IC or creating targeted funds for your citizens.
What I really want to say is this. You cannot say that racial enclaves will not produce racial tension. In any case I cannot see racial enclaves being of any good to Singapore. You had said in your last paragraph that there is nothing wrong for people staying near their relatives which implies that people of the same race congregate. The policy(hdb quota) is right although it might be to the advantage of the government(like what you say)
> So my suspicion was that LKY wanted the merger so as to get rid of Lim Chin Siong, by getting the Tunku to lock him up. After that was done, all that needs to be followed up is to make life difficult for Tunku, so that he would let Singapore go - and presto - LKY is now PM of Independent Spore.
I think it is a little too simplistic to conclude LKY played those political games to get rid of LCS to become PM of sg.
1. The problems faced by sg then were very real. No hinterland, no industry, how to survive? After he become PM of this red dot, then what?
2. LKY purposely making life hard for the Tunku? Do you think PAP sent election team to KL for the purpose of stirring hatred/jealously so as to get booted out?
3. I'd like to hear your views on why PAP formed the MSC. To irritate the Tunku?
It is likely the Tunku could be used to lock LCS (reason why BS opposed the merger) but I don't think you can argue that as the reason for merger.
14 September 2010 10:09 PM :
>>I sure do not want to live in a society whereby if I do not subscribe to a religion, I will be dubbed an infidel or kafir behind my back.
>>
Me:
Secular countries are no saints either. Today, there are many Muslims in America, UK and Europe living in a country whereby they are dubbed terrorists BECAUSE they subscribe to their religion. They are singled out and profiled at airports, security areas and so on.
>>In a secular state, you are free to practice religion in your own personal space, your own church of worship and even proselytize in the streets
>>
Me:
That's not true. The moment a mosque is to be built, the society screams "terrorists". Hijabs and turbans are to be feared..
Secularism which was intended to stop "oppressive religions" from spreading is now currently oppressing freedom and behaving like the very "oppressive" religions it tries to stem.
Icemoon:
>> Solobear, you linked GRC and HDB ethnic quota to the splitting up of Malay votes, after PAP's setback in the 1984 election.
>>
Me:
It wasn't me. It came right from PAP's mouth that the Malays were "not happy" and hence the protest votes.
>>I don't think Potong Pasir and Anson were the Malay enclaves then
>>
Me:
Incidentally, before 1984, Anson was already an opposition controlled ward. There was a by-Election in Anson and JBJ won that seat. PAP, the ever-racist party, attributed that loss to the Indian votes. So they adjusted Anson ward (PAP always does that to distribute opposition votes, if you don't already know) to increase the Chinese population in preparation for the 1984 GE. JBJ won by a bigger margin.
As always, PAP plays the race card even though Singaporeans don't. PAP (especially LKY) sees everything through his race tinted lens.
In 1984, the swing was from 70+% down to 60+%. It never happened before. The highest opposition scores (after Anson and PP) were from the Eastern areas like Bedok, Geylang areas. It happened again in 1988 where the opposition had high votes in these areas.
>>Secondly, LKY played the elitist card to promote MBT and looked down on Chiam. Coupled with not-so-popular policies like speak mandarin and graduate mothers, the vote was swung by Chinese. Note that these two policies did not affect the Malays as much.
>>
Me:
You have to see the election results as a whole. Eunos GRC nearly was nearly captured by WP. So was Bedok and Aljunied areas. Of course the PAP then redrew these boundaries to the extent your neighbourhood is now unrecognizable because somehow you may be called a Marine Parade constituent, even though you live somewhere far, far away.
Icemoon:
>>I think it is a little too simplistic to conclude LKY played those political games to get rid of LCS to become PM of sg.
>>
Me:
On the contrary, I think it is simplistic that the Tunku simply kicked us out. Now that LKY has slipped up in his eulogy, it can be clearly stated that it was Singapore who mooted the separation.
Keep in mind the rivalry between LCS and LKY, we know only one could be PM of Independent Singapore. The wily fox outwitted his opponent. All this was documented in Discovery Channel, which was aired a few years ago.
>>1. The problems faced by sg then were very real. No hinterland, no industry, how to survive? After he become PM of this red dot, then what?
>>
Me:
Exactly! Wasn't it a rash act by LKY to risk Singapore because he needed to satisfy his power hunger?
>>2. LKY purposely making life hard for the Tunku? Do you think PAP sent election team to KL for the purpose of stirring hatred/jealously so as to get booted out?
>>
Me:
Yes. I really believe so. After all, wasn't he the one who asked the Tunku to be allowed to join the Federation? The Tunku never wanted Singapore in. He just wanted Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei. Singapore WAS NOT invited. LKY asked to be invited.
After when Singapore was allowed in, (and knowing FULL WELL the bumi policies), LKY started to play the race card! What the heck! If he was not happy with that bumi policy, why ask to be invited in the first place?
It is like you asking your neighbour to invite you to his daughter's wedding when he never intended you as a guest in the first place. Then after he graciously lets you in, you kick up a ruckus and make a mess out of his daughter's important day.
>>3. I'd like to hear your views on why PAP formed the MSC. To irritate the Tunku?
>>
Me:
The terms of the merger was that Singapore was to respect the bumi policy. Why the backtrack? Isn't that bad faith?
If LKY and PAP feel that the bumi policy is not good for Singapore, why ask for the merger then? We were doing fine with the Brits. It was just a matter of time the Brits gave us independence anyway.
But there is a catch. If the Brits gave us independence with Lim Chin Siong around, in all likelihood, the first PM of independent Singapore would be Lim Chin Siong! Somehow, LKY has to get rid of LCS before Singapore became truly independent. The merger was the perfect ploy to get the Tunku to lock CS up because LKY could not handle CS himself.
After CS was disposed of, all that needs to be done is to create problems for Tunku, so that he would let us go. Tada! LKY is now PM of Independent Singapore!
>>However if we have racial enclaves, we will most likely be more susceptible to racial riots(perhaps incite by racial injustice happening around the world).
>>
Me:
The race riots we had in Singapore were mostly an overflow from Malaysia. Singapore itself had its own riots and they were mostly labour related. Guess who were the most active in those riots? The Chinese.
In the 1970s, all that was forgotten. Race enclaves is an accepted norm in any country. Removing that enclave is tantamount to racism.
Imagine a Chinese family now migrates to say Vancouver. Suddenly the govt there decides that there are too many Chinese congregating in certain areas. So you now can't buy certain residential property because that place has "too many Chinese". You are now forced to "mix" with the white skins in the name of "integration". How would you feel?
>>In any case do you consider Singapore having a "Singaporean" identity if we have people of different races staying in separate zones?
>>
Me:
Why not?
>>It is true that I learned about racial riots through social studies but to say that it is use as a ploy by the government to win votes is a bit far fetch.
>>
Me:
Then you have yet to learn about the real world. All govts brainwash the young in schools. Even in America.
>>Those riots did happen. Do you mean to say we should not educate our young about our history?
>>
Me:
Who says anything about not educating our young? We had more labour related riots than race riots in Singapore. We had more riots involving Chinese than Malays. Yet, in your social studies, you only know of race riots where Malays are involved attacking Chinese?
>>Our policies aren't racist. Racist policies are when you enact into the law and constitution to lower grades for certain races to get into top schools, helping them own business and perhaps giving them more medical benefits(sound familiar?).
>>
Me:
Yes! Very familiar. In Singapore! The SAP system locks out bright non-Chinese pupils. Why can't we have a system where the non-Chinese are not locked out?
The CDAC fund which is the BIGGEST fund, locks out non-Chinese. Why can't we have just one fund where all enjoy its benefits?
>>Racist policies isn't not writing your dialect group into your IC or creating targeted funds for your citizens.
>>
Me:
But that is part of the Master Plan. The plan is to homogenize all Chinese, whereas at the same time divide the non-Chinese.
>>What I really want to say is this. You cannot say that racial enclaves will not produce racial tension. In any case I cannot see racial enclaves being of any good to Singapore.
>>
Me:
I never said that racial enclaves are good. I said that is PART OF LIFE, in any country where there are minorities. We just have to live with it.
>>You had said in your last paragraph that there is nothing wrong for people staying near their relatives which implies that people of the same race congregate. The policy(hdb quota) is right although it might be to the advantage of the government(like what you say).
>>
Me:
It is right to you, but it is not right to the minorities who are affected. Racism is always felt by the ones affected. The ones not affected can talk till the cows come home. But in the end, they are not affected.
solo bear,
your thesis is that PAP played the racial card and GRC and HDB quota were policies to counter any future swing in minority votes, am I right?
while there were unhappiness among the minorities, was this the main reason for the PAP shift in policy?
In 1984, the swing was from 70+% down to 60+%. It never happened before. The highest opposition scores (after Anson and PP) were from the Eastern areas like Bedok, Geylang areas. It happened again in 1988 where the opposition had high votes in these areas.
Not true. Let me show you the statistics:
Bedok: PAP's Jaya won by 37.8%
Geylang: PAP's Othman won by 31.2%
Toa Payoh: PAP's Eric won by 30.4%
Chua Chu Kang: PAP's Tang won by 10.4%
Of course it is simplistic to say the Tunku kicked us out. GKS might have mooted the separation but this does not mean LKY engineered the separation. As chief troubleshooter, GKS might have realized earlier than the idealistic LKY that it is unwise to stay in the federation.
Exactly! Wasn't it a rash act by LKY to risk Singapore because he needed to satisfy his power hunger?
On the contrary, PAP's actions indicate they intend to stay for a very long time and LKY is not a short-sighted person.
If LKY and PAP feel that the bumi policy is not good for Singapore, why ask for the merger then? We were doing fine with the Brits. It was just a matter of time the Brits gave us independence anyway.
In corporate world, it is not uncommon for M&A to happen even when you know the risk to your own coy. So why they still do it?
Yes! Very familiar. In Singapore! The SAP system locks out bright non-Chinese pupils. Why can't we have a system where the non-Chinese are not locked out?
The CDAC fund which is the BIGGEST fund, locks out non-Chinese. Why can't we have just one fund where all enjoy its benefits?
The SAP schools were mostly Chinese medium schools in the past, correct me if I'm wrong. Bright non-Chinese students still can go RI and RGS right?
CDAC is biggest due to majority Chinese as contributors. I think zakat from Muslims go to Mendaki as well, not sure if Muslims prefer their zakat to benefit the majority race than their fellow Malay Muslims?
Malaysia has the misfortune of being ruled by Muslims, hence their intolerant attitude to you non-malays.
It was the Chinese and Indian minorities that have begun to lift Malaysia out of third world poverty, and those malay bastards should be grateful to them for this but like I said before, that is too much to ask from a Muslim.
Malaysia is a xenophobic country – the bitter truth is that malays are afraid of competition from other races – they are indeed lazy and want everything for free.
If Malaysia is to divide into two countries with malays taking the east and the west to the Chinese and Indians – watch the malays starting to migrate to the west illegally for a better future.
It is no wonder Singapore is a country which is 50 years ahead of Malaysia. Malays are fool racists indeed.
The writer should know that most of non-malay community realised what the government have done to them is unforgiven.
If we still depending on government we won’t be in top position in overseas, for example (60% in NASA is Indians), two-thirds of the community of practicing doctors in Singapore is Malaysian Chinese.
We (non-malay community) have been proven our intelligence around the world but not in Malaysia. So what we have to do just emigrate or use Malaysia as an investment base.
Actually we (non-malays) should know that government will never change their policies unless there is a ‘protest’, here we don’t do that – that is the problem, anything the government says we just simply raise the Barisan flag.
It will be good idea if we emigrate, like one say in English, ‘Where is a will, there is a way.’
But always remember the ‘will’ for non-malays is not in Malaysia.
Islam in Malaysia is suppressing humanity, dignity and desire of a normal human being.
Islam in Malaysia is causing trouble to non-Muslims who goes about their everyday life to do what any other normal human being on earth are doing.
Islam in Malaysia does not respect traffic law when Muslims can park their cars all over the road and cause inconvenience to everybody.
Islam in Malaysia does not contribute to the progress of the malay race and any other race in Malaysia.
Islam felts threaten in Malaysia, when nobody actually gives a damn about them.
Dr Mahathir is the worst thing that has happened to this country. He continues to spew venom. Why? All he cares about is himself, his family, his relatives, his friends and his cronies.
It doesn’t require a PhD to analyze the reasons why many malays are still poor for the new economy in spite of the NEP and all we hear – the true reason for the failure of the malays are MAHATHIR MAHATHIR MAHATHIR……….and nothing else.
Mahathir biggest achievements are not the white elephant KLIA, the robber highways, the meaningless Twin Towers, ghost town Putrajaya, failed MSC, sweat shop factories run with foreign labour, etc.
His true achievements are the destruction of good governance, law and order, quality education, religious brotherhood, peace and harmony.
The Pedophile beast/hector/yongwah is back with his usual multi-personalities. He is a Muslim hater and a Christian basher as well as a sexual harasser of young girls.
Najib can formulate any policy. On the ground level where the heads are not qualified themselves as their staff – many problems will arise.
Further the NEP will somehow make good talents frustrated and will certainly be the main causes of frustrations. At best we can get the second rate staff to stay – the top ones will have no problem seeking better salaries and futures elsewhere without the glass ceiling overhanging their heads.
Our national sense of belonging will be lost when day in and day out we feel the impact of marginalisation in almost every sphere of educational or economic activities.
I think we are in even more for hubs of abandoned projects because it is the brains that matters, not real estate buildings which politicians are only good at how to initiate to build for their own gains. When coming to real research and real productive work, you only have lots of unemployable graduates lining up to fill them.
Best of luck Malaysia, while Malaysians of the best calibre are in our neighbouring countries creating state of art products and discoveries.
The people with brains first go to Singapore, then Australia, then the US. Apparently roughly 2 million Malaysians have emigrated since the 1970s. Wow, what a brain drain that is……….
Let alone those whose have already left. How about those who came back earlier with their foreign wives! The immigration department has made their renewal of visa a living hell, and they are not allowed to work no matter how qualified they may be. Eventually these “loyal Malaysians” also end up packing their bags and leave.
The politicians can say one thing but it never gets implemented at the ground level. Look at the mess surrounding Malaysia “My Second Home” campaign – how many have actually come here and then left in deep frustration!
The racists in Umno will also make certain that such policies will be doomed to fail. They would rather give citizenship to unruly and uneducated illegal Indonesians than some non-malay PhD holders.
Get your children out of this sucking country before it is too late! This is a hopeless and dirty country with all the lousy ministers and corrupted politicians.
I am afraid there is nothing second class citizens like us can do.
Emigrate to other countries looks to be a better option. Of course, the exodus has started decades ago. In fact, Umno will be most happy to see us go (race ratio, you know what I mean).
Umno does not depend on the second class citizens for the brains. They have the many universities in Bolehland to train their kind and churn out any number of experts you want. So brain drain is not a problem.
The name Melayu is an Indian word to denote hills or mountain range. There is a place in south India called Melayur.
Indigenous people who marry Muslim Indians from Melayur identified themselves as Melayur.
Over time, as the malay kingdom spead through insular SEA, the word Melayur became simply as Melayu.
If one were to do genetic test on the modern malay in Peninsula Malaysia, they would invariably carry genetics from Indian to explain the darker complexion and kinky hair of most malays as opposed to the Mongolid look of some malays of original Malayo Polynesian, Dusun or Dayak stocks.
The real natives or indigenous people of the Peninsula Malaysia can be found in the northern parts of Peninusla Malaysia apart from the aborigines.
Icemoon,
Whether it was the Malay votes that caused the swing, we can debate till the cows come home. What is for sure is that the PAP thinks it is that way.
You posted:
>>Not true. Let me show you the statistics:
>>
Me:
Let's look at the stats from the Election Dept itself.
1984
Note that the constituencies with high Malay population, eg Bedok, Changi, Changkat, Fenghsan, Geylang. Kg Kembangan, Kg Ubi, are either near the national average 60+% or below for PAP. Those that maintain the 70+% are constituencies where the Malay population are far less.
1988
This was the year we had our first GRC. Note the further drop in Malay populated areas like Aljunied, Bedok, Changi, Eunos, Fengshan.
Again, we cannot really tell if the Malays are responsible for the swing. But what is for sure is that PAP made it clear publicly it thought so.
>>Of course it is simplistic to say the Tunku kicked us out. GKS might have mooted the separation but this does not mean LKY engineered the separation. As chief troubleshooter, GKS might have realized earlier than the idealistic LKY that it is unwise to stay in the federation.
>>
Me:
It does not matter. The truth is now revealed that we were not kicked out. We wanted out.
>>On the contrary, PAP's actions indicate they intend to stay for a very long time and LKY is not a short-sighted person.
>>
Me:
I disagree. It is not that PAP was not aware of the bumi policy. They went in with their eyes opened. So if PAP was not comfortable with that, why merge in the first place?
>>The SAP schools were mostly Chinese medium schools in the past, correct me if I'm wrong. Bright non-Chinese students still can go RI and RGS right?
>>
Me:
And if they don't qualify? What next? The Chinese still have SCGS, Hwa Chong, Dunman High, St Nick's and a whole host of SAP schools. What do the non-Chinese have?
>>CDAC is biggest due to majority Chinese as contributors.
>>
Me:
Are you saying the Chinese contributions should not be used for non-Chinese Singaporeans? Isn't that racism? Haven't you confirmed that racism exists in Singapore?
>>I think zakat from Muslims go to Mendaki as well, not sure if Muslims prefer their zakat to benefit the majority race than their fellow Malay Muslims?
>>
Me:
Zakat is not a racial fund. It is a religious fund. Just like Christians, Buddhists or any religious groups.
Fargowin,
Are you a Singaporean or a Malaysian?
If you are a Sgporean, what the heck are you grumbling about Malaysia for?
If you are a Msian, what the heck are you letting off your win about Msia here when the target audience is Singaporeans?
solo bear, can show me what PAP said about Malay votes in 1984 election? Thanks.
It does not matter. The truth is now revealed that we were not kicked out. We wanted out.
Both perspectives are not irreconcilable as I've shown. Or are you insinuating the Tunku was lying when he wanted us out?
So if PAP was not comfortable with that, why merge in the first place?
You ignored my real life example about M&A. Of course la, even in real life, people make use of each another, fully knowing the risk of cooperation. You are like saying if PAP not comfortable with the communist tiger, why ride it.
And if they don't qualify? What next?
You are assuming the minority student die die want to go SAP (read: Chinese) schools. If they don't qualify for RI & RGS, they can go TKGS, Cedar, ACS etc .. are you implying these schools are dumping grounds?
Are you saying the Chinese contributions should not be used for non-Chinese Singaporeans? Isn't that racism?
That is why CDAC, Mendaki are self-help groups. If the minorities are denied workfare and SPUR, that is racism. Zakat as religious fund also goes to Mendaki. You don't find Muis and Mendaki kind of relationship with CDAC and temples/churches right? Chinese and Indians are split along language and religious lines. Not every Indian speaks Tamil and many Indians are Catholics not Hindus.
just came to know about your blog while stumbling around Tun's blog.Must admit your arguments and perspective, especially on funds like CDAC Mendaki etc, makes any liberal/neutral pause and consider your views. Just would like to applaud fine, argumentative, literary works.
Icemoon,
>>solo bear, can show me what PAP said about Malay votes in 1984 election? Thanks.
>>
Me:
This is based on recollection. I remember GCT mentioned it was the Malays who swung the votes and he even gave the example where a group of Malays "booed and taunted" the PAP team during campaigning.
>>Or are you insinuating the Tunku was lying when he wanted us out?
>>
Me:
No. I am saying LKY fibbed that we were kicked out. The Tunku never admitted we were kicked out.
>>You ignored my real life example about M&A. Of course la, even in real life, people make use of each another, fully knowing the risk of cooperation. You are like saying if PAP not comfortable with the communist tiger, why ride it.
>>
Me:
So you admit that it is OK with you that the PAP did knowingly go in with its eyes opened, then created a ruckus to get out?
>>You are assuming the minority student die die want to go SAP (read: Chinese) schools. If they don't qualify for RI & RGS, they can go TKGS, Cedar, ACS etc .. are you implying these schools are dumping grounds?
>>
Me:
Tell me. Why should the Chinese have more bites of the cherry than non-Chinese, with a whole host of SAP schools on top of the ones you mentioned above? Isn't that racism?
>>That is why CDAC, Mendaki are self-help groups.
>>
Me:
Self help groups can also mean one big fund contributed by everyone and everyone gets a share of it. Why are you saying self help must be drawn along racial lines? Isn't that racism?
>>Zakat as religious fund also goes to Mendaki.
>>
Me:
Zakat is zakat is zakat. It DOES NOT go into Mendaki.
>>I don't find Muis and Mendaki kind of relationship with CDAC and temples/churches right?
>>
Me:'
Does CDAC go to temple building and churches? Are you saying it does? I am a Chinese and I contribute to CDAC. I don't like my contribution to go to some church or temple! Now what?
Mendaki is race based fund. Zakat and mosque building funds are SEPARATE from Mendaki. Why can't Mendaki merge with the others?
>>Chinese and Indians are split along language and religious lines. Not every Indian speaks Tamil and many Indians are Catholics not Hindus.
>>
Me:
So? That justifies that Chinese funds cannot be used for other races? That's racism!
solobear, I found this:
Although the PAP has always stressed that it is a multi-racial, non-communal party in terms of its leadership, membership, ideology and policies, it has never secured proportionally as much support from the minority Malay and Indian communities, as from the Chinese. Lee Kuan Yew has openly acknowledged that at least half the Malay electorate consistently votes against the PAP.
One wonders how LKY knew, isn't voting secret, haha! After WP's hot contest for Aljunied, people were saying the Malays swung the votes towards PAP. So I'm quite confused.
I stand corrected. I can't find evidence that zakat goes to Mendaki, opps. I wanted to say the close relationship between MUIS and Mendaki due to Malays being Muslims (most of them).
Self help just means we help ourselves. It can be a common pool for all races but this will create other problems. If after 10 years of common pool and the Malays realize they are still not as good as Chinese, then what? Will they think their money is channeled to other races? Due to liberal immigration policy, Chinese can only get better economically (due to imports from you know where).
See, the question to ask is, is there any value from self help groups formed along racial/religious lines? I think there is.
I don't think you should label every such attempt as playing the racial card and intrinsically *evil*. Surely there are pros and cons to every policy?
Icemoon
>>Self help just means we help ourselves. It can be a common pool for all races but this will create other problems. If after 10 years of common pool and the Malays realize they are still not as good as Chinese, then what?
>>
Me:
What is this repeated talk about "Malays" not as good as "Chinese"? So what if they are not good as Chinese? Are they not Singaporeans?
If they are not as good as Chinese, we help them till they are as good as Chinese! Any problem there?
We help every Singaporean, regardless of race or colour, till they are good as anyone of us. What is your issue?
>>Will they think their money is channeled to other races?
>>
Me:
Sorry to say this, but that is PAP's thinking. All my life as a Singaporean, I have NEVER come across a Malay or any other minority race saying that their money is used to help another race. That talk is always from a Chinese. It is always a Chinese who has reservation that his contribution may end up helping someone not of his race!
Not that I am saying all Chinese are like that. But if that talk kind of talk surfaces, for sure you can bet it is from the mouth of a Chinese! Not from a Malay or minority.
So your fear that the Malays may feel that their money is channeled elsewhere is an invalid and non-existent issue.
>>Due to liberal immigration policy, Chinese can only get better economically (due to imports from you know where).
>>
Me:
See the Chinese bias? Why must our immigration policy be such? Why can't you see that every immigrant contributes to all Singaporeans and not just benefit the Chinese?
>>See, the question to ask is, is there any value from self help groups formed along racial/religious lines? I think there is.
>>
Me;
And what is the value? That the Chinese won't have to part their hard earned money to help a non-Chinese? Sorry for being direct. But it begins to sound that you are pushing for that.
>>I don't think you should label every such attempt as playing the racial card and intrinsically *evil*. Surely there are pros and cons to every policy?
>>
Me:
This is not a matter of evil. I am not saying it is good or bad.
I am saying that before we poke fun at other countries being racist, we should take a look at ourselves first.
> If they are not as good as Chinese, we help them till they are as good as Chinese! Any problem there?
solo bear, we can agree that is the goal but how do you go about doing that? Will having a common pool solve the problem?
If after 10 years, the Malay community realize they are still not as good academically as Chinese, what will they think? Will they think, hey how come my contribution 70% goes to the chinese community, what about my own community?
Mendaki does have its value. As community self-help, the Malay Muslim community are assured 100% of their contribution goes to Mendaki. They can even donate to Mendaki if they think not enough.
My 2 cents.
> And what is the value? That the Chinese won't have to part their hard earned money to help a non-Chinese? Sorry for being direct. But it begins to sound that you are pushing for that.
Are you "daft" or what? :P
We already have the system where "Chinese has to part with hard earned money to help non-Chinese" - taxation. The more you earn, the more you contribute. The state distributes it in the form of workfare and others.
But don't be like Americans pls. Money and resources are not silver bullets. Mendaki is doing more than channeling money to the deprived.
>>solo bear, we can agree that is the goal but how do you go about doing that? Will having a common pool solve the problem?
>>
Me:
Why not? Tell me why not.
>>If after 10 years, the Malay community realize they are still not as good academically as Chinese, what will they think?
>>
Me:
Please stop making it a "Malay" problem. Every citizen left behind is OUR problem. What's your problem?
>>Will they think, hey how come my contribution 70% goes to the chinese community, what about my own community?
>>
Me:
This is the second time I am telling you. All my life, I have NEVER seen a minority saying that. Those kind of words come only from the CHINESE.
It is the CHINESE who are not happy that their major contribution will eventually help a minority pool, if there were to be one common fund.
I have worked on the ground at grassroots level. I am telling you as it is. You said you want to learn from me, that is what I am teaching you.
In all my years, I have never come across a Malay or minority who is worried about their contribution will go to someone not their race. It is always the Chinese who say that.
Stop imagining a problem that does not exist in the first place.
>>Mendaki does have its value.
>>
Me:
Yes, it does. But that's not the point, is it? The point is why cut off the minorities from the big pool of money the Chinese contribute? Why not have one big fund? Having problems that your contribution as a Chinese is helping a minority? What's wrong with that? Are they not Singaporeans?
>>As community self-help, the Malay Muslim community are assured 100% of their contribution goes to Mendaki.
>>
Me:
There lies the racist talk! So to you, "self-help" means the Malays help themselves, Indians help themselves and Chinese help themselves.
But if you truly want a racial harmony, "self-help" should mean we the citizens help OURSELVES, without govt handouts. What is wrong with the one big fund?
Having problems that your contribution may be used by someone not your skin colour? What's wrong with that?
>>Are you "daft" or what? :P
>>
Me:
Did you really come here "to learn" from me as what you claimed?
>>We already have the system where "Chinese has to part with hard earned money to help non-Chinese" - taxation. The more you earn, the more you contribute. The state distributes it in the form of workfare and others.
>>
Me:
So? What's wrong with the one big fund? Your tax argument still doesn't explain what's wrong with the one big fund concept.
You still haven't said what is wrong with it.
> This is the second time I am telling you. All my life, I have NEVER seen a minority saying that. Those kind of words come only from the CHINESE.
Cool down. I think you are the one playing the racial card now. Do you have to shout the name of the race? Err .. I hope you have no axe to grind against Chinese.
If those Chinese are racist, that is their own problem. Are you targetting Chinese or PAP now, I wonder ..
> But if you truly want a racial harmony, "self-help" should mean we the citizens help OURSELVES, without govt handouts. What is wrong with the one big fund?
Actually we citizens are helping ourselves. If you donate to NKF, the money (by right) should go to subsidizing treatment for citizens regardless of race?
If you have one common pool, the $$ would still be distributed by quota. The Chinese would still get 70% from the pool. How is this gonna help the minorities?
Of course if everybody is that noble, he/she will donate to other self help groups 'cos the other groups are not 'getting enough'. From your grassroot experience, have you came across minorities who donated to CDAC 'cos he/she thinks the Chinese are not much better off? Probably a few cases, but not the norm. (You said they dont mind contributing to other races)
Like I said, Mendaki does more than channeling $$ to the needy. It is no secret Malays (maybe Indians too) are not as well-off as the Chinese economically and academically. Better for gahman to intervene - come out with schemes to help these people. Dunno why are you so fixated with the common pool solution - as if that is a good solution.
>>Cool down. I think you are the one playing the racial card now. Do you have to shout the name of the race?
>>
Me:
Shout? Where? The word "CHINESE" which I put in caps? You are over-sensitive. I capped it to highlight my point you missed.
>>Err .. I hope you have no axe to grind against Chinese.
>>
Me:
I worked with the ground and the main ground people were Chinese. I am one myself.
I hope it is YOU who have nothing against the Malays, because it does sound that you are so unwilling to part your contribution to help the Malays.
>>If those Chinese are racist, that is their own problem. Are you targetting Chinese or PAP now, I wonder ..
>>
Me:
Problem is that it is not their own problem. It is OUR problem. The moment you have divisive funds, you polarize.
>>Actually we citizens are helping ourselves. If you donate to NKF, the money (by right) should go to subsidizing treatment for citizens regardless of race?
>>
Me:
Irrelevant. Doesn't address why the one big fund concept should not exist. Are you saying because there is NKF, we therefore must have divisive funds? Huh???
>>If you have one common pool, the $$ would still be distributed by quota. The Chinese would still get 70% from the pool. How is this gonna help the minorities?
>>
Me:
Quota? Quota? Why must you put a quota? Just give to whoever needs it most!
Problem is that at the back of your mind, the Malays need it most. And that's where you are not happy! You just do not want the majority of YOUR contribution to be disbursed to the majority of someone who is not your skin colour!
I can read you mind. I worked the ground before. Your answers are the very same answers the Chinese ground gave me when they objected the one big fund concept.
>>Like I said, Mendaki does more than channeling $$ to the needy. It is no secret Malays (maybe Indians too) are not as well-off as the Chinese economically and academically.
>>
Me:
Confirmation of my thoughts that you are indeed not willing to part your contribution to someone who is not of the same skin colour as you.
What is wrong with helping the Malays (and Indians too) who are not as well off as the Chinese with the one big fund concept?
Why should race even come into the picture?
Why can't we say we contribute to any citizen who needs it?
What do you have against the Malays?
Are you not a product of PAP's school system, where you are now polarized?
Unlike me, who has no baggage to carry against any race?
solo bear, I hope you are not painting a strawman caricature of my argument.
How do you define whoever needs it most? Err, are you denying there are needy Chinese as well?
My view is that if you go for the common pool concept, how is this different from taxation?
I'm now "contributing" $1 to CDAC. If you ask me my honest opinion, I think this is a bit rubbish. Since when I agree to contribute? Can I opt out? The gahman can just increase my tax so that my $1 goes to coffer.
I read gahman has scheme to "top up" Mendaki. There's even funds/schemes to help needy members. Obviously I'm also contributing to these funds/schemes (which do not benefit me at all) through tax. For the record, I have no problem with that. I see value in gahman working through Mendaki to help those people. Likewise for CDAC.
> Irrelevant. Doesn't address why the one big fund concept should not exist. Are you saying because there is NKF, we therefore must have divisive funds? Huh???
I'm saying the big fund self-help concept exists, like in NKF. Are you denying that?
For the record, I disagree with the $1 to CDAC, but I don't disagree with the idea of having CDAC and Mendaki. Of course each community has other self help, like clans who give out bursaries and MUIS. I believe zakat is distributed largely to Muslims, correct me if I'm wrong.
Icemoon
>>I'm saying the big fund self-help concept exists, like in NKF. Are you denying that?
>>
Me:
No. Are you saying because of NKF, we therefore must have separate funds? If yes, why? If no, why bring up NKF, a non-issue?
I like your post on 17 September 2010 8:58 PM best because you have shown the real result of PAP's divisive racist policies. I will come to that in a moment.
>>solo bear, I hope you are not painting a strawman caricature of my argument.
>>
Me:
No. I have not. In fact, you have. See next line.
>>How do you define whoever needs it most? Err, are you denying there are needy Chinese as well?
>>
Me:
See the strawman? Where did I deny the needy Chinese? ????
I said anyone who needs it most. Why are you so fixated about race?
>>My view is that if you go for the common pool concept, how is this different from taxation?
>>
Me:
Tax is tax. Tax is used to pay to run country. Self help funds is to supplement and help those who need it most.
>>I'm now "contributing" $1 to CDAC. If you ask me my honest opinion, I think this is a bit rubbish. Since when I agree to contribute? Can I opt out? The gahman can just increase my tax so that my $1 goes to coffer.
>>
Me:
Now you are griping.
>>I read gahman has scheme to "top up" Mendaki. There's even funds/schemes to help needy members. Obviously I'm also contributing to these funds/schemes (which do not benefit me at all) through tax. For the record, I have no problem with that.
>>
Me:
Let me ask you this. If you have NO PROBLEM with that, why are you bringing this up?
Do you know that SAP is heavily subsidized by govt and the minorities who are also paying taxes are subsidizing the Chinese for their SAP, yet they themselves cannot benefit?
The difference between you and the minorities is that they truly don't mind - because they never complained or bring it up.
You said you don't mind, but you brought it up. Bring up for what? Like the Chinese ground who griped that they contributed to Mendaki through tax and they are not happy?
I can read your mind. Just like the Chinese ground I talked to, you are not happy that part of your money goes to someone who is not your race!
Like I said, I like this post of yours best. That's because it truly shows that PAP has polarized you into thinking that your money is only for the Chinese!
>> I see value in gahman working through Mendaki to help those people. Likewise for CDAC.
>>
Me:
Of course you do. You don't wish to have your contribution touched by the Malays! You are the polarized product of PAP's policies!
I like this post of yours best! Your own words proved my point.
No. Are you saying because of NKF, we therefore must have separate funds? If yes, why? If no, why bring up NKF, a non-issue?
NKF is not a non-issue. At least as a self-help group, it brings across the pt that shows self help groups are "polarised" along disease, community, religious and even dialect/clan lines. Are you gonna give govt credit for approving NKF? :P
Tax is tax. Tax is used to pay to run country. Self help funds is to supplement and help those who need it most.
Huh, can't tax be used to "supplement and help those who need it most"? Like workfare and bursaries??
Since when I say I don't wish to have my contribution touched by the Malays? In the first place, I'm against mandatory contribution to CDAC. If you want to argue, then I don't even want my contribution to be touched by needy Chinese .. happy?
Mendaki as a community self help group has its value. Are you denying that? I'm not complaining if my tax goes to helping the group. But unlike you who gripe about SAP schools in all your posts, why dont you suggest cutting down those MOE scholarships to foreigners and channel the $$ to these self help groups (Mendaki, CDAC etc.)? Or channel the $$ to bursaries and scholarships for local citizens? Isn't that more helpful?
You should go join the opposition. Or have u already?
Reading through all the replies here, the two threads seem to be that singapore's policies are a response to Malaysia bumiputra policies and whether race/language based education endowments are fair.
the polarization of Malaysia and Singapore separated at birth is tragic. The union and separation likely had to do with British/western strategic interests as much as the local interethnic squabbles. 40 years later it is a mistake for both sides to continue with reactionary politics. Are all Malay communities alike? Indonesia and Malaysia are more antagonistic to each other than either would ever be with Singapore. That is indeed food for thought isn't it? The us vs. them idea was always an artificial construct dating back to the British and later subsumed by the present day rulers of Singapore and Malaysia. how common are intermarriages these days among Malay and Chinese since we no longer live in the same kampungs? Are we going backwards instead or forwards in race relation? Why do our own people rule over us with same colonial race based policies that the british used to subjugate us? Think about it.
One way out os for the minority is to go and chaneg their ICs to show that they are Chinese.
Imagine, I as an Indian looking person goes to the ic office and say I am actually chinese, pls change it
Post a Comment