http://www.straitstimes.com/Free/Story/STIStory_194240.html
| Jan 9, 2008 | ||
| ISEAS 40TH ANNIVERSARY A gracious Singapore? Not in my lifetime: MM | ||
| He says cultivating social graces will take longer compared to environmental consciousness | ||
| By Li Xueying | ||
But attaining a gracious society will take more time, said Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew on Monday at a dialogue marking the 40th anniversary of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (Iseas). In fact, he believes it will not happen in his lifetime. 'I will not see it, maybe you will live long enough to see it; I wish you well,' he told 48-year-old economics academic Euston Quah to laughter from the audience of diplomats, academics and government leaders. Dr Quah had asked a question about Singapore's progress in terms of social graces and environmental consciousness just as the country succeeds economically. The issue he raised was among a host of subjects brought up by the audience, from the situation in Myanmar to the rise of China and India. In his reply, Mr Lee said a gracious society will not happen so fast. 'I think it will take more time to develop and mature culturally as a people.' Even the British, he said, were 'sitting at a very high level over an empire for nearly 150 years before they developed their culture and then being invaded by football hooligans and foreigners who are now joining them and coarsening their society'. 'So it's very difficult to get a rough society onto a cultivated plane and it's very easy to bring it down,' he concluded. Environmental consciousness, on the other hand, will come very quickly 'when something happens and they say, you do that, your whole environment changes and you are in trouble'. On the other hand, the idea of a gracious society - 'where people are considerate to one another, where you don't make more noise to upset your neighbour than you need to, where you tell the other motorist, please have the right of way' - was 'harder to come by', said Mr Lee. 'It will take time, but I hope it will come with cultivated living over a long period of time.' Mr Lee recalled how, 45 years ago, Singaporeans wanted to take their chickens with them when they were resettled from kampungs into high-rise flats. 'So it took some time to get them adjusted. A more cultivated way of life takes a very long time,' he said. | ||
WIth all due respect, I feel the MM should reflect on how Singapore did not become a gracious society under the influence of the government he led for decades - I feel he is part of the reason why Singapore is not a gracious society today.
ReplyDeleteSomeone once wrote that had David Marshall instead of Lee Kuan Yew been at the helm of post-independence Singapore, Singapore would not be the economic success it is today, but would probably be culturally vibrant and a more gracious society, comparable to the Philippines in these aspects.
Under the British colonial rule, Singapore was a "survival of the fitness" society, so it did not have the makings of a gracious society.
The "by the book" mentality imposed by the PAP brought a lot of benefits, but did not nurture graciousness.
Courtesy campaigns for decades had not achieved its aim - graciousness is more than just being polite.
Truly, having been to several different countries, I found there is no society that is wholly gracious. As for environmental consciousness, it is only a relatively recent construct.
Nonetheless, there are pockets of societies around the world there one experiences more gracious encounters than not. It's just that the pocket in Singapore is very small, even considering the island's miniscule dimensions.
MM Lee's remarks linking "bringing of chickens from kampungs into HDBs" to "a more cultivated way of life" is an indication his idea of gracious and cultivated living is very different from mine, and from what I could observe in the pockets of gracious society around the world.
It seems that his idea of cultivated living is nothing more than urban lifestyle artificially insulated from the natural world, under the guise of sophistication.
Seems pretty sound to me...
ReplyDelete1. At least we might not have a MM today... David Marshall died in 1995... even if he had been MM, we have 13 years less of a MM... unless someone step into his place.
2. We won't have Baby God taking over...(still smacks of dynastic sucession, as far as I am concern)
3. We might not be separated from Malaysia.... we still can get cheaper palm oil based product from JB and no have National Service for men, until 2003.
... there are of course more... I leave it to the rest to add on... :-)
I believe David Marshall himself said it, an interview not long before he passed away.
ReplyDeleteI do believe you're right. IIRC, he also commented that his appointment as ambassador to France, while intending to get him out of Singapore, proved to be a good decision for him and for the country.
ReplyDeleteI personally don't think the appointment was primarily to get him out of the country. David Marshall was brilliant man in his own way, eloquent and a little too emotional (just like the French no?) According to LKY he was against the appointment of Marshall as ambassador but it was Rajaratnam who successfully argued for Marshall's appointment.
ReplyDeleteNo doubt Marshall and Lee were strong rivals, not so much politically after Marshall stepped down, in my opinion, but personally. You sort of gather this from reading both their remembrances as is often the case in hindsight, rose-tinted in some aspects and a certain skewed view of events. While their rivalry wasn't friendly, it was more in the arena of one-upmanship, each in their own way prefer to see themselves as having scored some points here and there, in separate score-tables each telling a different story. (Even after Marshall's death, Lee can't seem to help having a jibe at the man once or twice)
Marshall was a patriot and a Singaporean in name and deed, he will (hopefully) forever be remembered as Singapore's first Chief Minister on our road to independence and served his duty well when called upon by his country.
MM Lee has a point about the UK's worsening manners. But that's about all I agree with.
ReplyDeleteAnd I do agree with Snowy's observation that LKY's PAP did precious little to cultivate or instill graciousness.
I think you made an excellent point that I overlooked.
ReplyDeleteIf Lee still can't help making a jibe at the man after he passed on, it is a rather certain indicator of Lee feeling he hadn't gotten the best out of Marshall while the latter was alive, at least not in this game of one-upmanship.
Yeah, but I question his perspective when he included "foreigners" as a factor in coarsening of the society in the same sentence as football hooligans.
ReplyDeleteI had limited experience in the UK, but during my last visit, I stayed in London with a (semi-retired) social worker of Singapore origins and heard a lot from her.
There could be certain groups of foreigners who contributed to "lowering the level", but there are many other groups of foreigners whose conduct do just the opposite.
I am searching for that interview, hoping it will be on the Net somewhere.
ReplyDeleteNo success yet, but here's another interview I found which makes very interesting reading.
http://thinkhappiness.blogspot.com/2006/08/meeting-david-marshall-in-1994.html
I really have to read LKY's memoirs someday.
ReplyDeleteAt the risk of offending my French friends, yes, I do believe the French are more open about expressing their emotions, a definite contrast to the Brits.
It is also quite interesting how they differ from their Spanish and German neighbours too.
Anyway, having the hint of being a political exile would have served David Marshall very well in Paris - I suspect he might have been showered with lots of sympathy, and his intellect and personality would have just endeared him to the natives all the more, especially when he defended Singapore's interests with his characteristic integrity despite being "victimised" by his own government.
His facts are right; his perspective clearly not.
ReplyDeleteThank you for posting this. That was a great interview. I attempted in vain to get our French friend to read it.
ReplyDeleteIn fact I like the piece so much I am going to pull it down from the web and archive it myself.
As for the interview (the earlier one we talked about) IIRC it was published in the Straits Times and I remember it came with a picture of Marshall, but I cannot remember when. Might have even been a posthumous piece or on the very occasion of his death.
It was after his retirement as ambassador but before his death, I'm pretty sure.
ReplyDeleteI think you are right. I do try to remind myself of the fallibility of memory. It is quite amazing (shocking some times) how the way we remember events may be quite different in how they actually were.
ReplyDeleteTo establish a 'gracious' society, it has to be done through education. I believe a gracious society means "cultivated' society, where people are generally cultivated.
ReplyDeleteI do believe those who study confucianism will know what "Rites" (Li Yi 礼仪）is. As long as people are cultivated to follow rites and etiquette, behave in a proper, polite and friendly way, the whole society will become a gracious one. LKW should be looking into Confucianism, in particular 礼仪
For those who have been to Japan, Korea or Taiwan, you will probably notice that they are more refined and 'polite' than Singapore. Take Japan for instance, they are known to be very polite and courteous (people are more 'refined'). Even Taiwanese speak a more refined mandarin and are more friendly/polite compared to Singaporean.[sorry, but I hope Singapore can be better]
I believe Japan is the best when it comes to civil education (公民教育）. That's why Japan was successful in making its people so polite and refined.
This is just my observation after spending at least 6 short trips to Malaysia KL, the people there are far better than us in terms of service. You will be surprised, but the pleasant ones are the non-Chinese. Just one example, the Chinese cab drivers mark up their cab charges sky high, while the non-Chinese faithfully charge according to the meter. It was a very different experience compared to many years ago when I visited KL, their sales service sucks! But today, thumbs up.
ReplyDeleteChina? nah.. imagine being brushed and pushed aside while you are looking up some stuff in the supermart? It happened to me not once, but twice. No apologies, no 'excuse-me', no nothing.
I hate to say it, but yes, LKY is right. We are not there yet. One just need to observe your neighbours' behavior, do they press the lift for you when they see you running towards it from a short distant? Well, some do, but most of them pretend they did not see you.
People pretend to sleep in a crowded mrt, but when its their destination, they automatically wake up. Strange.
GZ, I do not agree with what you mean by gracious.
ReplyDeleteI have experienced far more gracious treatment from people from rural areas who are less educated and cultivated, than from urban dwellers who are supposed to be educated.
Education helps, but education is not graciousness, nor is education the same as cultivation.
Sincerity is the difference whether cultivation is a mere veneer or authentic.
This is why I am totally opposed to LKY's perspective on how he commented about kampung people bringing chickens into HDB.
Yes, HDB living is totally unsuited for rearing chickens. On the other hand, one cannot expect kampung people who had been living in their rural community all their lives to know that or forsee that. Their practice of consideration, courtesy, graciousness, are manifested in a very different way from what LKY was expecting, or to be more precise, to what he was demanding.
IMO, learning and observing rites and etiquette is just one of the ways to exercise graciousness, but it is merely the form, not the substance.
Certainly, Singapore is still not a gracious society, and I say that Singapore will never be as long as people focus on the superficial forms instead of the substance.