• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Raffles, lky and singapore.

psy83

Alfrescian
Loyal
A news in Yahoo ftp has sparked off a debate about who to give credit to Singapore when the article was only talking about a letter from Raffles. The comments are pretty funny.. One side are LKY/Pap supporters giving credit solely to LKY and the Other side is Non-Pap/Lky who is giving credit to Raffles or is saying where we are now has nothing to do with Lky(Finance and Success) It pretty much shows that Singaporeans are also divided in History.

So lets discuss this...

Who is the Founder of Singapore.
Who is the Founder of Modern day Singapore.(If there is such a Thing as modern day Singapore in the 1st place)
Who is responsible for our Success.
Whose ideology was it to bring Singapore to where it is now.

I would like to hear your Opinions.
 

psy83

Alfrescian
Loyal
Cold, dim room sheds light on Singapore history
AFP NewsBy Philip Lim | AFP News – 22 hours ago
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/cold-dim-room-sheds-light-singapore-history-045526025.html

A nearly illegible letter from almost two centuries ago is kept in a dim, cold room in downtown Singapore accessible only to a privileged few via an electronic swipe card.

In flowing script dated June 9, 1819, Singapore's colonial founder Stamford Raffles described the island's formative days as a regional trading port in the Malay archipelago, and it turned out to be prophetic.

"The Settlement I had the satisfaction to form in this very centrical and commanding station has had every success ... our Port is already crowded with shipping from all the native Ports in the Archipelago," he wrote.

The letter, as well as some 7,000 other items in the room, form the Rare Materials Collection (RMC) of Singapore's National Library, offering a more intimate look into the past of what is now one of the world's busiest ports.

"The history textbook doesn't cover everything," senior librarian Ong Eng Chuan told an AFP reporter who was allowed briefly into the chamber.

"The RMC gives you an interesting perspective of Singapore, from a small fishing village to an international trading port," Ong told AFP.

"It offers an interesting window for the generation now to look into Singapore, and how it has developed into the current place that it is now."

Stepping into the RMC may seem rather underwhelming at first as nondescript boxes containing books and documents sit neatly on shelves with no indication of their historical importance.

The boxes -- made from acid-free paper -- as well as the 18-20 degree celsius (64-68 degree Fahrenheit) temperature, 50-55 percent humidity and dim lighting are necessary to prevent the collection from degrading, Ong said.

People allowed to handle the documents have to wear gloves.

"Some of our hands might have sweat, and the moisture is not good for the paper," he said.

Physical access to the RMC is strictly limited on a "case-by-case basis," with librarians routinely referring people asking to view the collection to digital versions posted on the library's website.

Anyone asking to see the real collection needs a pretty good reason.

"Seeing the actual item has an X factor that can make it more interesting for the people, but we have to balance the need to preserve the item and the need to provide access to the content," Ong said.

Publications kept by the RMC include European travelogues from as early as 1577, biographical accounts of daily life in Malaya and even love poems and cookbooks from a hundred years ago.

"The Mem's Own Cookery Book" -- meant for the wives of British administrators who established colonies around Asia at the time -- features recipes to suit the tastebuds of homesick Englishmen.

Recipes for spinach soup, roast hare and pigeon mingle with tips for more adventurous fare like jungle deer curry and sheep head broth.

In contrast, the "Hikayat Abdullah," an 1849 biography of the father of modern Malay literature Munshi Abdullah, offered a unique perspective often missing from records largely penned by Western authors, librarian Ong said.

"It offers an Asian perspective in contrast to the accounts you see from the East India company's records and the memoirs written by those officials," he stated.

In the biography, Abdullah praises Raffles -- who had employed him as a translator -- but offered a less than complimentary description of British sailors who docked in his hometown Malacca, now part of Malaysia.

"To see an Englishman was like seeing a tiger, because they were so mischievous and violent... At that time I never met an Englishman who had a white face, for all of them had 'mounted the green horse', that is to say, were drunk," he wrote.

"So much so that when children cried their mothers would say, 'Be quiet, the drunken Englishman is coming,' and the children would be scared, and keep quiet."

John Solomon, a postgraduate student from Australia's University of New South Wales, accessed the RMC twice for his research on 19th-century transmarine convicts sent to Singapore.

"As a historian, I enjoy being able to physically handle material from the period. It gives the past this powerful sense of immediacy and presence," he said.

"Being in contact with the physical material also makes me realise that Singapore's story is not merely an account of economic and social policies but is also enmeshed in the everyday struggles and triumphs of individuals from vastly different circumstances."
 

psy83

Alfrescian
Loyal
Post by @Red_Amoeba


Think we existed as a forgotten island in the backyard of the Johor sultanate from dunno which eons...then Sang Nila utama came around from indon...and proclaim this as temaesk...

then Raffles came around, and con the Johor sultanate for the use of this island as a trading port.

History will have it that Raffles is the founder of Singapore - technically having the foresight to recognise its potential as a trading port. Whether or not he could have landed in Batam and made that a trading port instead, I dunno...

Modern Singapore..yah depending on what you define as modern Singapore - i think there is no founder of Modern Singapore...

Who is responsible for our success - singaporeans as a whole.

Whose ideology to bring SIngapore - think its that Dutch economist assigned by UN - Weismeis or something. Think he is the architect of our economy policy. Till today, EDB and the government still relies on this think-tank / advisor panel for advice on future economic policies.

Think economics drive everything that we do.
 
Last edited:

kingrant

Alfrescian
Loyal
Actually, Stamford raffles has been overrated. History seems to have sidelined William Farquhar, who actually did far more due diligence with this place than SR. SR spent most of his time at Bencoolen/Batavia whilst WF was actually here, and set up a lot of infrastructure (incl. an early casino!).

WF was in the shadow of SR just as Goh Keng Swee was under LKY.
 

red amoeba

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Actually, Stamford raffles has been overrated. History seems to have sidelined William Farquhar, who actually did far more due diligence with this place than SR. SR spent most of his time at Bencoolen/Batavia whilst WF was actually here, and set up a lot of infrastructure (incl. an early casino!).

WF was in the shadow of SR just as Goh Keng Swee was under LKY.

of cse....history remembered the guy who planted the flag ...

jus like without the sherpas, tenzing & Hillary wouldn't have scaled Mt Everest...the sherpa was never named.
 

psy83

Alfrescian
Loyal
Farquhar i heard did a Very bad job when he was left in Charge. When Raffles came back, He was shocked at how bad the Island had become in the hands of Willam. He Quickly got rid of William, and started to govern it himself.
 
Last edited:

red amoeba

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Please explain further.

just that no body remembers the unsung heros behind the heros...

just like LKY is reckon as the founding father of modern singapore but it was his cabinet & advisors that brought the success.

obama cannot lead USA, he relies on this advisory team...he cannot have killed Osama, but he basked in that glory.
 

red amoeba

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Farquhar i heard did a Very bad job when he was left in Charge. When Raffles came back, He was shocked at how bad the Island had become in the hands of Willam. He Quickly got rid of William, and started to govern it himself.

I wuldn't say he did a bad job...i think he manage to control the crime...i think its perhaps the way of doing things differ from what Raffles want.

in short, its much like today's corporate world - the boss just said, ok follow this script and secure the deal...and he left to play golf...the kah-kia tried to follow the script but along the way, he has to make adjustment to react to changes or realities on the ground...but he managed to get the deal..but in the process maybe lesser margin of profit...the boss is unhappy...

here's the part from wiki:

With his long Malayan experience, and an intimate knowledge of Riau-Lingga politics, Major Farquhar was given the task to help Sir Stamford Raffles find a settlement on Singapore island. He helped negotiate the provisional agreement of 30 January 1819 with the local chieftain Temmengong Abdul Rahman of Johore; and the more formal Singapore Treaty of 6 February 1819, which Raffles signed with the Temmengong and His Highness the Sultan Hussein Mohammed Shah, confirming the right for the British to set up a trading post.
The next day on 7 February 1819, Raffles appointed Farquhar as Singapore's first Resident to develop the colony according to a specific plan Raffles had drawn up, Farquhar was left to manage the colony when Raffles left; an absence eventually lasting four years. He was appointed the first British Resident and Commandant of Singapore, 1819&n dash;1823. Farquhar took a more laissez-faire approach, which suited the local traders who had followed him there. In his new post, he quickly set about clearing the plain on the north-east bank of the Singapore River. Word of this new trading post soon spread and Singapore became a thriving cosmopolitan town. Communication with Raffles in Bencoolen and the East India Company in Calcutta were so poor that for more than three years, Singapore developed on her own with Farquhar at the helm.
On 9 May 1821, William Farquhar was sacked. Despite his many positive achievements in the formative period of Singapore's development, he adopted measures in his administration which conflicted with Raffles' instructions, notably in allowing the erection of houses and go downs on the Padang and on the nearby banks of the Singapore River. His justification was that in the fast rapidly expanding settlement 'nothing is heard in the shape of complaint but the want of more ground to build on'.
 
Last edited:

psy83

Alfrescian
Loyal
Oh... Good Pull from Wiki to sum things up about William.


Anyways.. Where does LKY stand in all this?

Please add any Dirty or Interesting History as well...
 
Last edited:

wikiphile

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Farquhar i heard did a Very bad job when he was left in Charge. When Raffles came back, He was shocked at how bad the Island had become in the hands of Willam. He Quickly got rid of William, and started to govern it himself.

Farqhuar did not screwed up, what happened was that when Raffles left the island, he gave Farqhuar vauge instructions and almost no funding to grow the trading settlement as best as he could.

The East India Company regional HQ, which was based in India at that time did not gave much funding or notice to Singapore and almost forced Raffles to give it up as they were careful not to offend the Dutch who were gaining a near monopoly in the Malay Archipelago. Singapore was not meant to be the cornerstone of EIC's trading empire but merely a stopover for the China-India-European trade.

What differentiate between Singapore and Batavia (Jakarta) which was controlled by the Dutch was that traders could come to Singapore to trade freely and paid very little taxes as opposed to being able to trade only with the Dutch and taxed relatively heavily. Traders active in the region who were tired of paying taxes, restricted trading and the arrogance of the Dutch heard of Singapore and quickly made their way there to trade.

In time to time, Singapore grew from a small village of a few hundred to a few thousands in less than 2 years. Farqhuar was overwhelmed and with very little security forces at his disposal and even less funding for civics sold all sorts of vice licenses to traders for funding. He was short of resources and even shorter on support from the EIC at Calcutta, India.

When Raffles came back and found out what he did, he was furious and reorganized the settlement and began allocating ethnic enclaves. Europeans, Malays, Bugis, Javanese, Chinese, Tamils and so on. The rest as we say is history
 

psy83

Alfrescian
Loyal
@Wikiphile.. Good Analysis.. Noted. So what i have gathered is.. The Only problem with Farquer was the Influx of Migrants into the Island and he had trouble with governing
the population..In terms of Crime.. But did a good job in the Economy aspect.

Dont forget the North Indians and Arabs There was a very large no. of them before the Influx of the Tamils and Chinese.

Any other Races during that Period?

Anyone one got any Idea on The stats of the Different Races etc. Indians(North and South), Chinese and Malays(Java,Bugis etc) as the Island was Growing.. On a Yearly basic?

What were this Group of Individuals working as or was Brought in to do..(In terms of Race) Etc.. Arabs as Traders....
 
Last edited:

myfoot123

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
A news in Yahoo ftp has sparked off a debate about who to give credit to Singapore when the article was only talking about a letter from Raffles. The comments are pretty funny.. One side are LKY/Pap supporters giving credit solely to LKY and the Other side is Non-Pap/Lky who is giving credit to Raffles or is saying where we are now has nothing to do with Lky(Finance and Success) It pretty much shows that Singaporeans are also divided in History.

So lets discuss this...

Who is the Founder of Singapore.
Who is the Founder of Modern day Singapore.(If there is such a Thing as modern day Singapore in the 1st place)
Who is responsible for our Success.
Whose ideology was it to bring Singapore to where it is now.

I would like to hear your Opinions.

Sir Stamford Raffles is the founder of Singapore.

Singapore is build by hard striving Singaporeans NOT Lee Kuan Yew.

Without Singaporeans LKY and cronies wouldn't have reached the cocky status

The Pioneer of Singapore were people like David Marshall, Lim Chin Siong, Goh Keng Swee, LKY, Jeyaratnam...and the list goes on. They are collectively an engineer of Singapore and not the founder. Thus LKY do not deserve a title called the father of Singapore.

Singaporeans hardwork has turned our country from 3rd world to first world when we were just a small populations of 2 millions and loyalty was strong

Lee Hsien Loong has turned our country from 1st world to 3rd world by massive import of cheap clueless and unproductive foreigners that turned our population into uncessary 5millions. Our NS men felt demotivated and no longer willing to serve this coutry.

Prataman is a traiter during japanese occupations and conspired with the current ruling party to plan genocide and diluate Singaporeans status.

LKY who now tried to protect his son by calling Singaporeans names such as daft, ignorant, grumbler and threatened people to repent and regret for not supporting his policies.

LKY godly status is just a cosmetics made by Lame Stream Media out of fear, not honour. His credibility over bloated and unnecessary. Singaporeans do not care if he is still alive or dead because Singaporeans are the pillar of Singapore. ONce he is gone, his whole gang will be cursed and history re-written to reflect the truth - the real Hard truth.

Without Singaporeans, Singapore will not succeed, and PAP cannot AND will not survive. If 40% of Singaporeans sneeze, you see PAP pee in their pants and the leader has to apologise. That is the power of Singaporeans.

The modern Singapore is a corrupted country approved by law. The reserves of all our hard earned is controlled by a maxtrixes of the Lee family members and each of them were paid a ransom and self-served to the maximum. Some of their children escaped harsh National Service and they have bred a pool of at least 35% dogs.
 
Last edited:

red amoeba

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Sir Stamford Raffles is the founder of Singapore.

Singapore is build by hard striving Singaporeans NOT Lee Kuan Yew.

Without Singaporeans LKY and cronies wouldn't have reached the cocky status

The Pioneer of Singapore were people like David Marshall, Lim Chin Siong, Goh Keng Swee, LKY, Jeyaratnam...and the list goes on. They are collectively an engineer of Singapore and not the founder. Thus LKY do not deserve a title called the father of Singapore.

Singaporeans hardwork has turned our country from 3rd world to first world when we were just a small populations of 2 millions and loyalty was strong

Lee Hsien Loong has turned our country from 1st world to 3rd world by massive import of cheap clueless and unproductive foreigners that turned our population into uncessary 5millions. Our NS men felt demotivated and no longer willing to serve this coutry.

Prataman is a traiter during japanese occupations and conspired with the current ruling party to plan genocide and diluate Singaporeans status.

LKY who now tried to protect his son by calling Singaporeans names such as daft, ignorant, grumbler and threatened people to repent and regret for not supporting his policies.

LKY godly status is just a cosmetics made by Lame Stream Media out of fear, not honour. His credibility over bloated and unnecessary. Singaporeans do not care if he is still alive or dead because Singaporeans are the pillar of Singapore. ONce he is gone, his whole gang will be cursed and history re-written to reflect the truth - the real Hard truth.

Without Singaporeans, Singapore will not succeed, and PAP cannot AND will not survive. If 40% of Singaporeans sneeze, you see PAP pee in their pants and the leader has to apologise. That is the power of Singaporeans.

The modern Singapore is a corrupted country approved by law. The reserves of all our hard earned is controlled by a maxtrixes of the Lee family members and each of them were paid a ransom and self-served to the maximum. Some of their children escaped harsh National Service and they have bred a pool of at least 35% dogs.

i find it quite bemused that we termed prataman as a traitor...he is for one, an Indian not a Chinese - whom I reckon at that time shared common hatred towards the Japanese vis-a-vis the events in China. The indians in Singapore did not suffer that much under the reign of the Japanese.

In any case, given the context and situation at that time, ruled by Japanese and din noe when this reign will end, he did what he could to survive...and working for the Japanese is one alternative.

its just like perhaps 30 -40 years later, we are no longer ruled by PAP, and we brand the civil servants today as traitors.
 

myfoot123

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
its just like perhaps 30 -40 years later, we are no longer ruled by PAP, and we brand the civil servants today as traitors.

YOu are right about the prediction, how many civil servants today are as honourable as Ngiam How Tong? Look at Ms Ooi from People's Association and Lim Swee Say of NTUC as some very close examples. Calling them traitor is not too far fetched.
 

Char_Azn

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
My personal take on this, why the fuck are pple even arguing about this.

SG - Pre Independence
Raffles founded and set in motion what we now call home without him we won't exist. He had the foresight of seeing how strategically located SG is and put in Free Trade to get the country started - I don't think anyone can/should dispute it and we honor him by having tons of stuff named after him

SG - Independent Country
I find it very pathetic that pple are trying to change history by twisting facts and discrediting the government and especially LKY back then. A country, any country is built by it's pple, every single one of them. The government is the org in a country that gives pple it's direction. Whether a country succeed or fails depends a lot on the direction the government takes.

The SG PM role as leader was to say Yes or No to whatever was proposed by the cabinet and more importantly he was the one who decides who to assign the role of ministers. He and his 1st gen cabinet of ministers are the ones responsible for pulling the country from being in danger of disappearing into a first world country. That we should never deny nor change.

We wouldn't be living in modern apartments if they have not setup HDB. It wasn't that long ago that pple live in shophouses and whole families live in a single room. My mum still tells stories of how our family of more then 12 used to live in this kind of condition back in the 50s-60s. We wouldn't had become the aviation hub we are today had they not made the decision to build Changi Airport. We wouldn't have our MRT if it wasn't for them making the decision to build it. Yes there were some really dark spots, mainly 2 from ISA one of which had nothing to do with politics but ultimately a lot more right have been done then wrong. If it wasn't for them moving the country forward, you probably wouldn't even have an internet to be posting nonsense. Leave history alone. Stop twisting history to make them something that was not

Whatever our problems are today, blame the source of those problems. The FT gates only opened from 2005-2008, the old guards wasn't around and LKY wasn't PM. The million dollar salary question, 1994, PM = GCT. High Cost of living - Effects of globalization in the 21st Century = PM GCT and LHL.

We should give credit when credit is due, GCT brought us through the SARs and Asian Economy Crisis, LHL ensured the majority still had jobs during the Global economy crisis. At the end of the day, judge them by how far they have brought the country forward. Look at history as how it went and not twist it into something that was not by only looking at the negatives. History should be presented as it is, both the good and bad should be given equal consideration before passing judgement. Pple should leave the history alone and concentrate on the present and the future.

If the future is one that PAP is obsolete so be it but do not twist what they have achieve in the past just because you are unhappy with them in the present.
 

psy83

Alfrescian
Loyal
There was a large no. of Indians who joined the Japs when the Japs arrived here... Cos in India at that moment/Period, The Indians were fighting the Brits to get out of their land and Sought independence from the Brits, And being part of the Colonial Establishment became a sought of Betrayal to the Indians here. The Japs gave them a choice to Join them and Fight the British which many didnt think Twice about, Or be POW soldiers and get ship off to Burma etc..(Some Joined the Japs and Some stayed Put with the Brits) The Brits has always used the Indians as their Mercenaries, In almost all Theaters of war/colonization of Countries by the Brits, They had the Indians fighting along side them(Not along but more like dispensable Soldiers).etc. South Africa.. Where you have a very large no. of 4th and 5th Generations Indians at the Moment.

As mention, The Local Indians didnt suffer much during that Period unless you were with the Brits.. Same case for the Malays, They were left alone unless they were with the Brits or solely against the Japs. The Chinese defiantly suffered the most as the Japs had pure Hatred for them even till this day.. Prataman can be forgiven, But LKY cannot.. Cos he was working with the Japs while the Chinese population was being killed in the Thousands regardless if they had anything to do with the British.
 
Last edited:

red amoeba

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
My personal take on this, why the fuck are pple even arguing about this.



If the future is one that PAP is obsolete so be it but do not twist what they have achieve in the past just because you are unhappy with them in the present.

no body is twisting anything...what you have just wrote are simply honoring the guy who planted the flag. Not the guys / un-named guys who has sweated and toiled to enable this guy to plant the flag.
 

myfoot123

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
If the future is one that PAP is obsolete so be it but do not twist what they have achieve in the past just because you are unhappy with them in the present.

Stop reading too much into Lame Stream Media and all its self-crediting books. Have we reached our swiss standard of living yet? Are people much happier today compared to 30 years ago?

During our Ah Ma and Ah Kong times, they can still raise at least 8 to 10 kids just by selling ice-cream at road side and still able to keep tonnes of gold in their old biscuit tin. Today? you worked 24 hours a day and can't even afford to rear an egg. Are we prospering?
 
Top