Tag: Lee Kuan Yew

Ismail Kassim: Tribute To Lee Kuan Yew – Part III

Part III: The guru that slip

If LKY had faded away three decades ago, I would have regarded him almost like a god, such was my reverence for him. Even 10 years ago I still retain much respect and admiration for him.

But in the last one decade his much admired mind seems to have decayed a little and he frittered away a little of the goodwill that he had deservedly accumulated over the years.

The Malays in particular felt that he was picking on them. In an interview with the National Geographic he expressed his doubts whether Malays were prepared to share their last loaf of bread with other races.

The same question could be posed to the non-Malays:For instance, would a Chinese Singaporean prefer to share his loaf with a Malay neighbour or with a new PRC immigrant?

Then there was of course other statements culminating in his claim that the National Pledge was only an ‘’aspiration’’ and not an‘’ideology’’.

I was outraged. My friends and I felt that somehow he seemed to be still carrying the baggage from the acrimonious days when Singapore was part of Malaysia.

The result was my article – For love of country, exercise your right to dissent – posted to NoHardFeelings memoirs at WordPress in Sept 2009. Here is an excerpt:

History is replete with examples of great leaders who overstayed and caused harm to their cause in the latter years of their rule.

One prime example is Mao Zedong, who held on to power until his death at the age of 83 in 1976. If he had faded into the background a decade or two earlier and spared China from the convulsions of the Cultural Revolution, China might today well be a superpower.

Great men make great mistakes. We must learn from history.

Back to our little island at the tip of the Malayan peninsula, Singaporeans found out in dramatic fashion on August 20 who is still in charge, the real commander-in-chief.

On that day, Lee took charge to change the course of a parliamentary debate that the government should practice what it preached in the Singapore Pledge.

He dismissed the call by NMP Viswa Sadasivan to the PAP government to live up to the ideals of the Pledge on such matters as racial equality and fair play as ‘’high faluting ideas’’ that needed to be ‘’demolished’’.

Lee must have felt that Viswa’s inspiring address that had caught the imagination of many Singaporeans represented a direct challenge to PAP rule in general and to his vision of Singapore in particular.

You do not need to have a great mind to appreciate that Lee’s idea of Singapore has since independence been premised on two contradictory principles: an outward commitment towards multiracialism and meritocracy to attract talent worldwide and an inward obsession with reinforcing Chinese dominance as a way to ensure Singapore’s survival and prosperity.

Lee has always made it known that it would be disastrous to allow the Chinese proportion of the population to fall below the current level of 76%. I am sure he would not shrink from taking any step,including importing wholesale from the Motherland, to make up for any shortfall.

Under the PAP, the non-Malay minorities pose no problem. As for the Malays, they are to be treated differently, not too harshly but not as equals also, because of their kinship ties with our close neighbours.   Just give them enough so as not to make them too unhappy.

Now that the dust is settling down from the Viswa controversy, it is perhaps timely to consider whether Lee did a service or disservice to Singapore and particularly to the government led by his son, Lee jr.

Just as many Chinese continue to revere Mao for his contributions, we too must always respect and revere Lee for all the good that he had done in building Singapore to what it is today.

If we love Singapore, however, we must not abdicate our right to dissent, even at the risk of being ‘’rubbished’’ or worse still,getting knuckle-dustered. We must not forget the lesson from history.

Six days earlier in his National Day address to his Tanjong Pagar constituents, Lee had also aroused resentment among Malays when he made a pitch to Chinese Singaporeans to be more conciliatory towards newcomers from China.

It was something I never expected from a man whom I once regarded as the Bapak of multiracialism in pre-independent Singapore.

I sent a letter to the ST Editor, saying that ‘’many Singaporeans see it as a deliberate and – unnecessary – attempt to play the racial card on a peripheral issue.’’ It never saw daylight.

I was agitated to write another letter after Lee’s interpretation in Parliament that Article 152 of the Constitution on the special position of the Malays meant that the government had the constitutional right ‘’not to treat everybody as equal.’’ It too never saw daylight.

By reviving memories of Malaysia days when he felt his life threatened on a few occasions, Lee seemed to be using it to justify his policy of marginalizing the community in the military and security sectors.

Do you have to punish an entire community for the sins of Albar and a few Malay ultras? Is not 44 years of collective punishment long enough?

Lee obviously prefers not to remember how impatient and demanding he was when advocating for a Malaysian Malaysia and equality for all races when Singapore was in the Federation. He was certainly not prepared to wait.

Now he tells the Singapore Malays not to expect‘’equal treatment’’ instantly as the Singapore Pledge on equality for all regardless of race and religion was only an ‘’aspiration’’ and not an‘’ideology’’ and therefore would take a long time to realize.

As an example, he cited the United States experience on Black-White relations. He does not seem to appreciate that unlike the Blacks, the Malays did not come to Singapore as slaves.

What the Malays want they already enjoyed before Singapore was handed over to Lee and the PAP on a silver platter by a Malay-dominated government in Kuala Lumpur.

The starting point for the Malays is British rule,when all communities enjoyed equal rights and equal access to all sectors of public life. Malays only enjoy special arrangements with respect to their religion and customs.

For the record, I can say that many Malay Singaporeans want nothing more than equal rights – not special rights – just like what other Singaporeans, including newcomers and their children from China and elsewhere,enjoy.

To sum up, Lee is undoubtedly a great leader and all Singaporeans will have much to thank him for. I think his success is due to the interplay of four factors:

1.      Strength of character – he knows what he wants and he is willing to use any means within his reach to achieve it

2.      He runs a cadre party in which it is almost impossible for him to be overthrown

3.      He introduces a restrictive type of democracy which makes it impossible for the PAP to be overthrown through the ballot box

4.      A conducive external environment, both within and outside the region

Source: Ismail Kassim

May 5, 2015
Ismail Kassim: Tribute To Lee Kuan Yew – Part II

Part II: My teacher, my guru

I was at my most audacious when I named the fourth chapter in my A Reporter’s Memoir as Lee Kuan Yew and I.

My purpose was not to claim intimacy to a great man but rather to attract readers to browse through my book.

I also felt that I could justify the chapter title as I regarded him as my greatest my greatest teacher, my guru who opened my mind to the big world outside the school.

Excerpts from A Reporter’s Memoir: No Hard Feelings Published in 2008

‘’The brush-off with the civil servants was just a sideshow. By the time I became a teacher on 2 January 1961, the real life drama was just beginning.

Imagine a youth just out of school after his ‘O’ levels, with a mind still half-filled, and whose only redeeming quality is that he can and likes to read.

Imagine also, no television, no English football league, no bowling alleys, and no internet. In short, there were very few distractions except for Rediffusion, radio stations, the cinemas, and club competition football at Farrer Park.

My interest in politics began to stir. I realised that it was more than about which party was going to win power. The pay cuts had shown in a very personal way its impact on my family and me. Of course, all the talk about liberation struggles and freedom fighters in other parts of the world and the struggle between communism and democracy also played a part in fuelling my imagination.

Before I knew it, I was caught in the political turmoil and found myself carried along by its currents, in the same way that many Singaporeans nowadays get caught with World Cup fever or Premier League Football and would go out of their way, even feigning sickness, just to catch the action live.

Singapore was then one huge stage. We became absorbed in the high drama of the political life and death struggle that would, we know, determine the fate of our little island that has often been lightly dismissed as a cross between a bullet and a pill, or to borrow a more contemporary description, as “the little red dot.”

Events were unfolding before my very eyes.It was like being in the front row of a prize boxing fight. For an 18-year old youth, it was just not possible to remain unaffected by all the heat and tension of the struggle within the PAP between the non-communists led by Lee and the group dubbed as pro-communists front men led by Lim Chin Siong. I began to attend political rallies held by both sides.

So great was my interest that I was not satisfied with just listening to their speeches live, I would also listen to the news, and then read in the papers what I had heard the previous night.Reading the news first thing in the morning just to catch the latest news became a habit.

This drama played on night after night for years.

The best and the greatest of them all was Lee and his weapon of choice was reasoned logic, simple and clear to even an O level student, yet elegantly structured with a certain rhythm that struck a chord in listeners and readers.

Throughout 1961-67, he was an indefatigable politician making speeches almost every other day, everywhere from street rallies to overseas

In particular, I remember his series of 12 radio talks in 1961 on the inside story of the struggle for control of the PAP between the group of English-educated non-communist nationalists, and the pro-communist group. He described the cooperation between the two groups as a united front.

It was Lee at his best as a storyteller that gripped many Singaporeans to their chairs night after night.

In those tension filled days, I think I read practically every speech, sometimes twice over, always marvelling at the way his logic flowed along. Often I would read slowly, verbalising every word,relishing the cadences and the elegant turn of phrase. It was a source of constant joy.

The speeches were also very informative and provided a continuous flow of knowledge to a mind that was then only half-filled but malleable. It was my initiation into the world of adults and politics, human conflict and ideology, colonialism and independence, democracy and socialism and communism.

Many of the ideas that I came across when I listened to or read his speeches were new to me. They were novel, stimulating,opened up my mind, and stretched my imagination.

In terms of intellect, no teacher or public figure that I had come across could match him. No one also, before or after him, could command my total attention in the way Lee could with his speeches.He was persuasive. Even listening and reading his speeches were enough to shape my attitude towards many public policy issues.

Imagine reading word for word, speech after speech, week after week, month after month, for five, six, seven years. You would not be wrong if you conclude that it could be the equivalent of a correspondence course for a liberal arts university degree.

I think that was how I unconsciously learnt the rudiments of how to write simply and plainly and how I began to appreciate the beauty of the English language, with all its colour and nuances.

I suppose I was lucky. I was at the right place and at the right time. Just by being absorbed in the drama, I managed to get the best teacher available for my post-O level education’’ Page 52 to 55

‘’To me, the way Lee out-manoeuvred the communists over the merger proposals showed him at his most brilliant. It was political poker at its best. Of course, if you want to be unkind, you can describe it as Lee at his most cunning.’’ Page 58

‘’I think Lee was at his most idealistic during the ’59 to 65’ era, especially in his quest for a more equal and just society, regardless of ethnic or religious affiliations, a society where only the man counts and not any of his born-with affiliations.

‘’Nothing seemed impossible then. No goal was too high or too difficult. If necessary, change the world, and turn the environment upside down.

‘’After independence, he became pragmatic and realistic, a very different person from the one who was willing to climb any hill, face any obstacle and brave any danger.’’ Page 61

‘’The Lee that I knew as a young man, the fiery leader out to reshape the world according to his ideals was no longer around. An older and perhaps wiser Lee, who now all too readily accepted the realities of the world, has replaced the younger Lee.’’ Page 64

In conclusion, we must judge Lee by the standards of his contemporaries. He was indeed an extraordinary man shaped by the circumstances of his time.

At a time like this, we should remember his contributions, and for the time being, forget whatever might be his misdeeds.

I take this opportunity to express my condolences to the PM and the Lee family.

Source: Ismail Kassim

May 2, 2015
Amos Yee: My Father Was Abusive

Now some fellow Mediacorp Actors attributed my actions on the Lee Kuan Yew video solely on the fault of my parents. Now of course being Mediacorp actors, they have the brain size of that of a peanut, with their views having as much insight as the quality of their shows.

Unless you are enslaved, parents are not the primary influence to their children, especially in our technologically advanced world where influences are much more eclectic. And to claim that the fault of a child, lies mostly in the fault of the parents, is absolutely fucking dumb. However, I do acknowledge that though parents are not the primary influence on a child, like your friends, the books you read or the movies you watch, they do have an effect in your life. And the abusiveness of my father, probably affected me in some ways.

During my childhood, my father would viciously berate me whenever he was upset with me (For cases such as when I had rubbed my eyes too much), and though I never saw it, I heard that my mother was slapped by him several times. And he did violently pin me down onto a bed when he admonished me for my Chinese New Year video a few years ago (The implications of that image is stunning).

But, the exact moment that I would I want to talk about that I feel is most indicative of his abusiveness, is the incident that happened just a few hours before my first time in court.

The night before the hearing, my once-Godmother (Now simply aunt because you know.. Atheist) and my family pleaded with me to ensure that I wore outdoor clothing the next day in court instead of my initially planned, pyjamas(A frequent apparel of mine due to comfort). Claiming that if I did not wear ‘decently’, the judge would be more severe towards me, and would issue harsher conditions that I had to comply with. I of course completely disagreed with the notion that clothing had or should have anything to do with a person’s view towards me, and was reluctant.

However seeing that they were exceptionally worried, I felt a generosity to put their minds to rest, therefore though I disagreed with them, I obliged to their request. After all I did have some outdoor clothing that I was comfortable and satisfied with, so I felt that the compromise was worth it.

A couple of hours before the hearing, my mother and I picked that black shirt and beige pants, the clothes you’ve seen me wore during the court hearing, that were to my great satisfaction.

However, contrary to the views of mother and I, my father wasn’t satisfied with those outdoor clothing, in fact he thought that they looked too casual for court.. He wanted me to wear more ‘formal’ clothing, with buttons, collars and possibly a tie or bow, otherwise the judge wouldn’t accept it.

Such arrogance for my father to put his own personal perspective, and claim that it is that of others. If the judge were to truly dictate his decisions on me based upon the quality of my ware, he would be unjust. Though maybe that was what my father was going for.

Since I was completely negligent of the state of my closet, formal clothing was scarce, and the only clothes that managed to fit my father’s meat-headed criteria were these horrid-looking collared blue shirt and these exceptionally uncomfortable black pants. Those clothes appealed to his idea of a ‘formal’ appearance.

I put them on to and they looked absolutely awful, I witnessed myself in the mirror and was flabbergasted by the sight of a blue leprechaun. However, my father said that those were the only clothing that were acceptable, and I had to wear them.

Naturally, I expressed refusal to do so, and thus commenced my father’s violent behaviour. He pulled my shirt towards him, and made the gangsterish gesture, of clenching one’s fist and pulling it back, threatening a punch on my face, if I did not comply.

My mother screamed, pleaded, and desperately attempted to pull me away from my father’s supposed oncoming attack.

Initially having complete fear of the violence of my father I had developed ever since I was a child, I said something along the lines of “alright, alright I’ll wear it”, which led him to cease his attack. I proceeded to walk into the toilet to look into a mirror and contemplate (Dramatic I know).

Then ultimately, having developed a subversiveness that had transcended anything that I had as a child, knowing that I’ll be completely uncomfortable wearing those clothes, it would probably act as a distraction in court, and the fact that of course it looked absolutely wretched, I refused to comply, and so went out of the toilet and told him:

“It’s either I’m going to wear the black shirt, otherwise, I’m going to wear pyjamas.”

He, with uncontrollable, savage anger, held my shirt again and incessantly pushed my body repeatedly on the doors of my cupboard as my mother resumed her fruitless screaming.

However, he, supposedly wondering why after all these years I had actually resumed a provocation even after threats of violence. Having a kind of uncanny, revelatory expression like that of a confused hog, slowly released his grip and said something along the lines of, “ You know that if I hit you, and there is mark.. and then there are reporters out there….’

And of course, I grinned, and then responded, “Ahh.. I see you have found out my plan”.

He plodded away in defeat. I proudly went back into my room, and changed my clothing.

This was the 1st ever instance in my life where I had overcome the threats of violence from my father, when I had not acceded to his demands, but he had to accede to mine. There was a sense of victory as I donned my black clothing, and beige tight pants. And after I had equipped myself, I sauntered up to him and said a few words.

And those few words catalysed his almost brutal execution…

With both hands, he took my head and violently slammed it on the wooden table beside us. Then he held me on my head and my body, flailing me around as I wailed and shrieked in terror, before he released his grip. I fell down hard on the floor.

He, had still not satiated his anger, and thus took my head and violently banged it on the hard, concrete floor.

In the background, obviously with the incessant screaming from myself, it caught the attention of the other people in the house. My mother continued her pleading for him to stop, my grandmother and maid just stood in a corner and did absolutely nothing.

Finally I think that my mother realised the ineffectual nature of her noise and decided to implement some form of tugging to my father. I think she used quite a considerable amount of force as she pulled my father’s arm. And quite surprisingly, in a sort of miracle, the beast was finally tamed.

Huffing and puffing, he lumbered away.

Now fortunately, during both times my father slammed my head on the table and the floor, I had both my hands, firmly placed on the sides of my head, protecting me from the impact. If I had not had both those hands on my head, I would have the full impact of both the force of my father, and the floor. Knowing that the head was an especially sensitive area, I could have potentially become a vegetable, or died before I entered the court.

And after this episode, as I sat on the floor trembling in fear, my grandmother, instead of berating her son for his horrid behaviour, went up to me and said to me in Chinese ‘He’s just doing this because he cares for you, you should behave yourself and not make him so angry’

He’s doing this because he cares for me? Well if almost killing me is his way of expressing care, then I absolutely fear the instance when he ever decides to express love.

I can see from the view of grandmother, how these violent tendencies runs in the family. I so dearly hope that these acts of abuse, turmoil and violence, is not hereditary, because I would not be able to live with myself if I ever had to resort to violence to solve my problems, or to express to anyone my quote unquote ‘care’.

And whenever I tried to tell people what he did to me, they like my grandmother just said, ‘he only did that because he cared for you’ and would not do anything to try to stop him. And when he and I were out of the sight of others, he would tell me ‘There is no harm, or damage to your body, no one will ever believe you’.

Now the few words I said to him before he commenced his nearly brutal execution, were:

‘I am willing to let the previous incident slide, let bygones be bygones. But If you are ever violent to me again, I will reveal to everyone what happened.’

He then proceeded to almost killing me, so here we are.

Now of course, the common viewer could blame me for being terribly provocative to my father, but are you actually going to validate that my provocation was worthy of such a behaviour? It’s like trying to validate summoning bears to maul 42 children for making fun of a bald priest. God actually did that by the way (2 Kings 2:23-25).

Ever since that incident, whenever I talked to my mother, I would refrain from referring to my father’s previous titles of ‘father’ or ‘daddy’, and instead refer to him as ‘the killer’ or ‘the bastard’.

If one is able to almost kill a person over the choice of one’s clothing, seeing how the pressures of my court case is prevalent and as you can see I am as subversive as ever, I think it would be wise for me to have some semblance of a restraining order.

I seek and implore for help. If my mother would kindly file for a long overdued divorce and some sort of child protection service could be in order, that would be great.

Source: https://amosyee.wordpress.com

April 30, 2015
Amos Yee: The Ridiculous Terms Of My Bail
What is the purpose of the terms of a bail? It is to ensure that one attends court. Which so far, I have quite obediently complied to. But how I am going to be punished in lieu of the terms of the bail, has absolutely nothing to do with my presence in court, but the added uncanny conditions that were placed.

In addition to showing up to court, the conditions of my bail are:
1. Not to post, upload, or otherwise distribute any comment or content, whether directly or indirectly, to any social media or online service or website, while the current case is ongoing.
2. To meet IO Jason Chua every morning at 9am in Bedok Police Station.
And if I breach, anyone of those bail conditions. My bailor loses $20000, and I have to be sent to remand until after the trial has ended.

I heard that in the case of a simple theft, when one has pleaded guilty, it takes 3 months for them to attain their sentence. In my case, since I am going to trial, and also the fact that how I’ve attained my charges is quite unique, especially the charge concerning obscene imagery, which I found out, I am the first person ever in Singapore to be charged for that. Everything is probably going to take much longer…Let’s estimate say… about 8 months.

So technically, they are saying that if I do not meet Jason Chua for 1 morning, I deserve to be sentenced for 8 months in prison and be fined $20000.

So not meeting Jason Chua can have a punishment more serious than that of a robbery.

Every morning during weekdays, at around 7:30am, hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans stand up and recite the national pledge, and say the 2 lines ‘to build a democratic society, based on justice and equality’

And now. Wow… god fucking damn, I’m really feelin that ‘Justice and equality’…

Source: https://amosyee.wordpress.com
April 30, 2015
Tribute To Lee Kuan Yew – Part 1

Part 1: A candid obituary

So powerful once, yet so helpless in his last few weeks… hooked to a ventilator for dear life until he passed away this morning at 3.18 am.

For about half a century LKY hogged the stage, relentlessly pursuing power, slamming down opponents, but unswerving in his determination to turn a little red dot into a precious pearl.

His authoritarian ways resulted in great economic success, but also claimed many victims.

It will take time to look at such a towering and controversial figure in perspective. History may be the best judge.

A litmus test of his greatness is: How long will Singapore remain stable and prosperous without him?

I think his baby – Singapore – will take his demise in stride and life will proceed as normal except during the short mourning period.

This is double-edge: it can be seen as a compliment or otherwise, for the departure of great leaders will usually stir a storm in their wake that will take time to settle.

You can say many good things about Lee: brilliant lawyer, fearless politician,peerless nation builder, but he is no prophet, no revolutionary, no Mandela.

He leaves behind him a first class civil service, a developed economy,highly-literate and technologically savvy population and though not perfect, a stable society based on multi-racialism, meritocracy and rule of law.

But he also leaves behind him a rather meek and depoliticised populace, obsessed mainly with material comforts, and a ruling party determined to maintain its monopoly on power by fair or foul means.

What has become apparent especially in the latter part of his life is that his first class mind that can analyse the toughest of problems with logical precision and prescribe solutions based on pure logic and reason is both an asset and a liability.

They have their limits as shown by his past policies: no alternative to merger within Malaysia, the two child policy that brooked no opposition and his embrace of globalisation to the extent of becoming even more capitalist than the capitalists.

It is also the over-reliance on both logic and reason that led him from day one of independence to discriminate against the Malay minority in the security services; a policy that is still being wound down by his successors.

That, I suppose is why, despite his boast of rising from the grave if he felt the Singapore ship was off course, he fail to act when the present government put growth first and the people last in the years leading up to the last general election.

He could not because they were just following in the path that he had laid out. If he had, would PM Lee junior have to apologise to the electorate a few days before polling day for ‘’mistakes’’.

As can be shown from his past actions since independence in 1965, he is no idealist reformer. He is not interested in tearing down the old and building a brave new one, but only in making the existing one more workable through two basic principles: equal opportunities and meritocracy.

His brilliance too has its limits and his much respected skills as a geopolitical strategist appears to be limited only to the Far East, Japan, China and Taiwan.

For,as the records show, he was one of the earliest and most ardent supporters of the Iraq War, a war that Bush initiated more to exact revenge from the Muslims rather than to make the world safe.

The consequences of that disastrous war, which claimed hundreds of thousands of victims, continue to be played out in Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, as well as in Paris, Copenhagen, Madrid and around the world. The only winners were Bush’s right-wing clique and the industrial-military oligarchy.

In fighting tooth and nail for what he wants, mainly power, he can be both determined and cunning, and even ruthless and vindictive against anyone standing in his path.

Just look back at his political life and you will not have any difficulties in finding how he had bent the laws and stretched the rules to outmanoeuvre his opponents: the flawed 1962 Referendum on merger, the vain attempt to get the PAP to take over from the MCA in the Umno-led Alliance, the frantic struggle for Malaysian Malaysia and the jailing of opponents after independence.

Even now, it is difficult to say whether Lee wanted power for power’s sake or he wanted power to build a better world for us. I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between.

I have often asked myself what Lee would do if he had lost through a fair vote.Would he hand over power peacefully or would he continue the battle to the bitter end, even if it results in the burning of Singapore?

The story of his political life is like the story of a firebrand who slowly evolves into an arch conservative, more rightists than the rightists, accepting the widening wage gap as inevitable and seemingly callous towards the woes of the working class.

But people of my generation must be grateful to him. Almost all of us had benefitted in many different ways from Lee and the PAP.

And that was why we had preferred to look the other way and stifled our conscience to the victims of his authoritarian rule. They ranged from those who were detained longer than justified to those held behind bars on charges so flimsy that few believe in the government story.

Most observers now believe that the so-called Marxist conspiracy was a cynical exercise to clear the deck of possible threats and potential opposition to his hand-picked heirs.

Anyway, Lee has run his race and we should thank him and move on. Just as many Chinese continue to revere Mao for his contributions, we too must always respect and revere Lee for all the good that he had done in building Singapore to what it is today.

In mourning him, we must also spare a kind thought for his victims…..Lim Chin Siong, Poh Soo Kai, Chia Thye Poh, Said Zahari, Vincent Cheng, Teo Soh Lung and so on…and give them their just dues.

Let us use this opportunity to work for reconciliation and the healing of past wounds. Let the exiles from Tan Wah Piow to Francis Seow return in peace to the land of their birth.

Forgive but not forget

Honour but not whitewash

Mourn him but respect his opponents

Source: Ismail Kassim

April 30, 2015