[h=2]LKY letters show he is clueless without others[/h]
November 7th, 2014 |
Author: Contributions
Lee Kuan Yew
Let me provide a brief history before I touch on the following letters and news articles.
In the beginning, when he became PM in 1959 – we were still under the British. His hatred for the British was very deep (he likes to call them ‘white men’).
First, he had to get out from the British and that ‘merger with the Federation’ came to his mind. The Federation would provide for Singapore in terms of resources and a chance for him to seek a bigger role in Malaysia.
When Singapore was booted out in 1965, his dreams shattered. He broke into tears and did not know how to make Singapore survive under his leadership (in his mind, he thought Singapore was done without Malaysia).
He was fortunate to have some good men with him, together with UN advisor, Dr Albert Winsemius. They were the ones that came up with actual ideas and vision, setting the very foundation for Singapore.
In his letter to Dr Goh KS – he mentioned that it was the ‘most difficult letter to write’. It clearly showed that Dr Goh was the key person in doing all the good works for him:
The testimony from Dr Albert Winsemius also pointed that Dr Goh was the person who did all the works and not LKY:
The other 2 letters to Ong PB and Howe YC also showed that his men were the ones who did all the works for him and not that he was the one who provided them the ideas to implement:
Th
e letters were published in ST on 29 & 30/12/84. This was the period when 24 old guards stepped down for the 26 so-called new generation ‘leaders’ (including LHL) to take over the Government.
After 1984, without those fine old guards, LKY became a nobody. He came up with silly ideas like:
This was in fact the turning point in the history of Singapore. We are now sliding backwards – getting from bad to worse.
Don’t blame me for coming to such a conclusion.
Thanks,
Edmund
* Submitted by TRE reader.
Let me provide a brief history before I touch on the following letters and news articles.
In the beginning, when he became PM in 1959 – we were still under the British. His hatred for the British was very deep (he likes to call them ‘white men’).
First, he had to get out from the British and that ‘merger with the Federation’ came to his mind. The Federation would provide for Singapore in terms of resources and a chance for him to seek a bigger role in Malaysia.
When Singapore was booted out in 1965, his dreams shattered. He broke into tears and did not know how to make Singapore survive under his leadership (in his mind, he thought Singapore was done without Malaysia).
He was fortunate to have some good men with him, together with UN advisor, Dr Albert Winsemius. They were the ones that came up with actual ideas and vision, setting the very foundation for Singapore.
In his letter to Dr Goh KS – he mentioned that it was the ‘most difficult letter to write’. It clearly showed that Dr Goh was the key person in doing all the good works for him:
The testimony from Dr Albert Winsemius also pointed that Dr Goh was the person who did all the works and not LKY:
The other 2 letters to Ong PB and Howe YC also showed that his men were the ones who did all the works for him and not that he was the one who provided them the ideas to implement:
Th
e letters were published in ST on 29 & 30/12/84. This was the period when 24 old guards stepped down for the 26 so-called new generation ‘leaders’ (including LHL) to take over the Government.
After 1984, without those fine old guards, LKY became a nobody. He came up with silly ideas like:
• Graduate Mothers’ Scheme – a scheme to favour the children of mothers with a university degree in primary school placement and registration process over the lesser-educated [Link]
• Toiling with the idea to change the one-man-one-vote system – “I’m not intellectually convinced that one-man, one-vote is the best. We practice it because that’s what the British bequeathed us and we haven’t really found a need to challenge that. But I’m convinced, personally, that we would have a better system if we gave every man over the age of 40 who has a family two votes because he’s likely to be more careful, voting also for his children. He is more likely to vote in a serious way than a capricious young man under 30.” [Link]
• Toiling with the idea of polygamy – “And the way the old society did it was by polygamy. The successful, whether you’re a scholar, a Mandarin or a successful businessman or successful farmer, you had more than one wife. In fact you can have as many as your economic status entitles you or can persuade people to give their daughters up to you.In other words, the unsuccessful are like the weak lions or bucks in a herd, they were neutralised. So over the generations you must have the physically and the mentally more vibrant and vital, reproduce. We are doing just the opposite.We introduced monogamy. It seems so manifestly correct. The West was successful, superior. Why? Because they are monogamous. It was wrong. It was stupid.
When Mr. Tanaka was asked in the Japanese Diet five, six years ago “You’ve got another mistress with children there,” he nodded in vehement agreement. He said, “That’s quite right.” And the more Tanakas there are in Japan, I have no doubt the more dynamic will be Japanese society. There was no embarrassment.But we have worked ourselves into an awkward position. We’ve got to work ourselves out of it and your generation has got to do something about it.” [Link].
Many people did not know that he was just an empty vessel with the ‘gift of the gap’ that brought him this far.• Toiling with the idea to change the one-man-one-vote system – “I’m not intellectually convinced that one-man, one-vote is the best. We practice it because that’s what the British bequeathed us and we haven’t really found a need to challenge that. But I’m convinced, personally, that we would have a better system if we gave every man over the age of 40 who has a family two votes because he’s likely to be more careful, voting also for his children. He is more likely to vote in a serious way than a capricious young man under 30.” [Link]
• Toiling with the idea of polygamy – “And the way the old society did it was by polygamy. The successful, whether you’re a scholar, a Mandarin or a successful businessman or successful farmer, you had more than one wife. In fact you can have as many as your economic status entitles you or can persuade people to give their daughters up to you.In other words, the unsuccessful are like the weak lions or bucks in a herd, they were neutralised. So over the generations you must have the physically and the mentally more vibrant and vital, reproduce. We are doing just the opposite.We introduced monogamy. It seems so manifestly correct. The West was successful, superior. Why? Because they are monogamous. It was wrong. It was stupid.
When Mr. Tanaka was asked in the Japanese Diet five, six years ago “You’ve got another mistress with children there,” he nodded in vehement agreement. He said, “That’s quite right.” And the more Tanakas there are in Japan, I have no doubt the more dynamic will be Japanese society. There was no embarrassment.But we have worked ourselves into an awkward position. We’ve got to work ourselves out of it and your generation has got to do something about it.” [Link].
This was in fact the turning point in the history of Singapore. We are now sliding backwards – getting from bad to worse.
Don’t blame me for coming to such a conclusion.
Thanks,
Edmund
* Submitted by TRE reader.
