SDP - Mar 2014 - Lee Kuan Yew, Wee Shu Min and Anton Casey

[Cosmos10]

Lee Kuan Yew, Wee Shu Min and Anton Casey

Added on: 17 March 2014

by the Singapore Democrats

http://yoursdp.org/news/lky_wee_shu_min_and_anton_casey/2014-03-21-5779

 

[Cosmos10]

Throughout his life, Mr Lee Kuan Yew Lee has held the view that heredity determines intelligence and, therefore, the elite in society must be given priority when allocating state resources.

In 1967, he said that every society has approximately 5 percent of the population who are more than ordinarily endowed physically and mentally and in whom we must extend our limited and slender resources...

 

[Cosmos10]

He repeated his ideas in 1969, this time more forcefully:

Free education and subsidised housing lead to a situation where the less economically productive people in the community are reproducing themselves at rates higher than the rest. This will increase the total population of less productive people. Our problem is how to devise a system of disincentives, so that the irresponsible, the social delinquents, do not believe that all they have to do is to produce their children and the government then owes them and their children sufficient food, medicine, housing, education and jobs.

 

[Cosmos10]

In his 1983 National Day Rally, Mr Lee reiterated his life-view:

If you don’t include your women graduates in your breeding pool and leave them on the shelf, you would end up a more stupid society...So what happens? There will be less bright people to support dumb people in the next generation. That’s a problem.

 

[Cosmos10]

As recently as 2008, Lee re-stated his position at the Singapore Human Capital Summit:

You marry a non-graduate, then you will worry about whether your son or daughter is going to make it to university. You marry another graduate, especially if she gets a first or an upper second and if you get a first or upper second. Chances are you don’t have to worry about them. They will look after themselves.

 

[Cosmos10]

We present these quotes not as red meat for PAP's detractors to hurl more invective at Mr Lee. In fact, as objectionable as these views are, we would like to see political discourse remain civil and respectful. Anything else would distract us from the central problem of reforming the way our country is governed.

From education to healthcare to the wage structure, Mr Lee's elitist outlook permeates public policy. Indeed, the PAP has not been diffident in lavishing state resources on people it defines as intelligent and capable, its minister included.

 

[Cosmos10]

This has led to a Singapore that has been seeing our fortunes take a turn for the bleaker as we presented in our piece "We must turn Singapore around".

Singaporeans, in increasing numbers, are seeing the train wreck in slow motion and are making their views known: Change is not only necessary but also urgent.

The current crop of ministers know this and, every so often, they come up with measures like Medishield Life and the Pioneer Generation Package. Unfortunately, such policies are meant more to placate critics than a genuine attempt to resolve the underlying problems that its elitist model has engendered.

Consider, for example, the move to pay cleaners a minimum wage. While the Government is loathe to betray its views of subsidising "stupid” and "economically unproductive” people, it cannot ignore the crescendo of opinion against the injustice and dangers of growing income inequality in this country. But minimum wage for cleaners only ignores workers in other vocations who are still paid a less-than-survival wage? Are they not entitled to a living wage?

 

[Cosmos10]

This is the problem that Singapore faces today: We have a ruling party that is unable or unwilling to extricate itself from the philosophy of its founder which has, to put it mildly, become an anachronism as far as the present and future needs of our people are concerned.

Unless the younger leaders of the party jettison Mr Lee's unfortunate view of humanity, the PAP will continue to make patchwork revisions to policies which will only confuse and exacerbate the malaise in our society.

The PAP must go beyond spouting buzzwords which are ultimately vacuous when not accompanied by meaningful policy change. Remember former prime minister Mr Goh Chok Tong's adoption of the "kinder, gentler society” slogan and his vision of creating a "gracious” and "compassionate” society? It has resulted in the Wee Shu Mins, Amy Cheongs, and Anton Caseys popping up with disappointing regularity. And when altercations break out, Singaporeans belittle each other on the kind of jobs they hold or the type of cars they drive.

The divide is picking at the seams of our community; sooner or later society will come apart.

 

[Cosmos10]

If Singapore is going to succeed as a nation, we need a very different governing outlook. The SDP has articulated a vision antithetical to the PAP's. We believe that if state resources are limited, then all the more they should be used to assist the trampled and voiceless; to give those in non-elite circles a leg up so that they can compete fairly. There are no "intelligent” and "stupid” people, only exploitative ones – and they should not be at the seat of political power.

We believe that "compassion” is not merely a word in a slogan, it is an ideal that can be attained with the right people in government. Competition, individual reward, and meritocracy present enormous problems when they are not tempered by an equally strong regard for compassion.

It is on such a philosophy that our alternative policies – be they healthcare, housing, population, education, treatment of our minorities – are derived. Only when we have a clear idea of the kind of country we want for ourselves can policy-making be carried in a coherent and effective manner.

This is what the SDP is working towards, it is an alternative Singapore that we hope to persuade our fellow Singaporeans to help us build.

 

[da dick]

In his 1983 National Day Rally, Mr Lee reiterated his life-view:

If you don’t include your women graduates in your breeding pool and leave them on the shelf, you would end up a more stupid society...So what happens? There will be less bright people to support dumb people in the next generation. That’s a problem.

i wished he practised what he preached instead of letting in all these 4th-world scumbags and overgrown monkeys into the cuntry. say monkeys breeding is bad, then let in 2 million monkeys to fuck us in the backside.

 

[methink]

In 1967, he said that every society has approximately 5 percent of the population who are more than ordinarily endowed physically and mentally and in whom we must extend our limited and slender resources...

Now where are we... Mr Lee? We have come this far to see your results! The 5 percent to rule over the population?

 

[yellowarse]

Now where are we... Mr Lee? We have come this far to see your results! The 5 percent to rule over the population?

He's simply advocating an oligarchic dictatorship, a throwback to feudal society where only a handful of people are bestowed by the heavens to lord over the rest. Old fart is a dyed-in-the-wool absolutist, despite his proclaimed democratic credentials.

It would have been a better Singapore without him, maybe less prosperous, but certainly happier and kinder.