PAP should cease wasting tax dollars on its propaganda because it is no longer effective in the internet age.
This is also an insult to citizens and will invite even more ridicule. Unless PAP doesn’t mind becoming a laughing stock.
How ineffective is propaganda? Just listen the the nonsensical factual errors spouted by our taxpayer-funded President Tony Tan about Lee Kuan Yew.
He began his speech by claiming “….Yesterday, we lost the founding father of Singapore, Mr Lee Kuan Yew.”
According to Wikipedia, the “founding of modern Singapore” was between “1819 – 1826”, at least 196 years ago. Lee Kuan Yew was only 91 when he died so Lee couldn’t have qualified to be even the founding father of modern Singapore.
Going a little further back, “the written history of Singapore dates back to the third century”, some 1800 years ago. Is Lee a reincarnation then? Why was Tony Tan so certain about Lee being the founding father of Singapore?
Whichever way one looks at his statement, Lee is not, and never will, be the founding father of Singapore. Perhaps PAP considering editing our school history books?
Tony: “Mr Lee Kuan Yew dedicated his entire life to Singapore.” Lee was able to ‘dedicate’ his entire life because the PAP had instilled fear in citizens by imprisoning and bankrupting political opponents, constantly gerrymandered and implemented the GRC system, abused the civil service and grassroots, etc to perpetuate its power. Without the GRC system, who would have voted for those PAP clowns which helped PAP to remain in power? Serving the people was only incidental.
This can be confirmed by Lee who once said, “If nobody is afraid of me, I’m meaningless”. Lee’s objective has always been to instill fear in order to gain total control. That gave meaning to his life. By pricing ‘dedication’ at million$, it appears to be more of a rip off. What do you think?
Tony: “He rallied colleagues, built up a capable civil service and led the founding generation of Singaporeans to achieve this vision.” But from our experience of PAP-created issues, we know that Tony was trying to take us for a ride. It was true during the first couple of decades with competent men assisting Lee but certainly not with clowns during the past 3 decades. Questions for Tony Tan:
– The majority of Singaporeans are not able to retire despite having a ‘capable’ civil service tweaking our CPF for decades. Was this Lee’s vision?
– Ordinary citizens, mostly dual income families, require 25 to 30 years to pay off their last HDB mortgage installment. Another one of Lee’s vision?
– The civil service is devoid of any idea to generate economic growth other than by increasing foreign labour/foreigner population. Did Lee contribute to building up such a ‘capable’ civil service?
– Three decades ago, the PAP told Singaporeans our HDB flats were our assets. Was it Lee’s vision that most citizens would have to sell our assets to fund our retirement?
– Almost 55,000 Singaporeans have to eke out a living as cleaners and thousands more as security guards in our ‘wealthy’ country. Was this Lee’s vision?
But we certainly know what a ‘capable’ civil service has done ie profit from citizens from public housing, public healthcare, COE, GST, fees, etc. Did Lee have any part in building up such a ‘capable’ civil service?
Tony is right to state that “many of his (Lee’s) ideas for Singapore live on”. These brilliant ideas include muzzling free speech, control of the civil service which could be used against opposition parties, the use of lawsuits against citizens, etc. Lee’s idea was to do whatever the PAP wants, never mind what the people think.
Tony: “Mr Lee’s passing is a great loss to all of us”. Try telling this to fellow citizens who were jailed without trial. Lee’s passing is a great loss to only those who had benefited disproportionately from Lee’s system of total control.
Tony says we should continue building on Lee’s “legacy” without objectively defining what has been left behind by Lee. Is it a political system which has been corrupted by greed? One which parliamentarians are blind to the elephant in the room?
Giving credit where credit is due to Lee Kuan Yew is fine. But Tony should know this is not the time to joke about our history.
likedatosocanmeh 
Seriously Phillip Ang, you embarrass yourself with your argument that LKY is not a founding father of modern Singapore.
Here is a history lesson for you. Sir Stamford Raffles founded a little island and turn it into a british colony. Singapore wasnt even independent and a sovereign country.
Later Singapore became part of the Federation of Malaya which was one of the reason the British agreed.
Singapore was forced to leave the Federation and we became a city state and a independent country.
Your lack of understanding is truly amazing and I hope people will not get misled by your misinformation.
In LKY words, you failed.
Please do not insert “modern” into Tony Tan’s speech. : )
You seem to have mistaken propaganda for history. Hope this link helps. http://therealsingapore.com/content/don%E2%80%99t-cheapen-what-it-means-be-founding-father
Thanks for your comments.
Another useless article, you really have no idea what a country means. Singapore prior to 1965 was never a country. Dr Tony Tan message is Mr LeeKuan Yew is one of the founding fathers of our country Singapore. Sir Stamford Raffles discovered a little island that the British claim as their colony.
The article is full of bias and misinformation.
You clearly do not appreciate Singapore as a country, are even a Singaporean? In the colonial days, there was no singaporeon identity. You were either chinese, malay, Indian or Eurasian. The article you link is as clueless as you.
Please, stop embarrassing yourself further.
Albert,
Yes, you are right that Mr LKY was one of the founding members of the independent Singapore in 1965. However, the modern Singapore precedes LKY and its founder has been widely recognized to be Sir Stamford Raffles, even in primary school history textbook.
Here is the exact quote from Wikipedia on Singapore –
“Modern Singapore was founded in 1819 by Sir Stamford Raffles as a trading post of the East India Company with permission from the Johor Sultanate.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore
Finally, stop being rude in other people’s blog.
@Xmen – don’t detrack this in unsubstantial claims about me being a PAP supporter because of my comments. This issue to me is not about politics but about our understanding of the history and the sense of what we are and who we are as a country, as a nation and as a singaporeon. Reading, what our own Singaporeons are writing and their thoughts and understanding of history saddens me.
This blog is a public document, you have people reading and worst even agreeing with such views which doesn’t do history justice.
I repeat Sir Stamford, discovered singaporeon for their own selfish reasons. The British owned Singapore, later the Japanese came and they owned Singapore. Singapore was like a mistress first to the British, than Japanese.
1965 Singapore is a mistress of no-one but our own. The question here is who contributed and made Singapore a tiny dot on the whole map respected the world over. In 1965 it was a group of people that made us what we are today. You can debate about PAP policies, etc.. But this simple fact that 1965 Singapore became our own nation is a fact. It also a fact that a team at that time brought us today where we are. At that time, the alternative was communism or Singapore crawl back to join Malaysia on their terms. All these are recorded in history.
If you think I am wrong, please convince me.
Hi Albert
There are many other blogs and thousands of Singaporeans who do not share your view on our history.
I am flattered that you think, and also worry, there are many readers can be swayed by my ‘wrong’ view. Bear in mind Singaporeans are pretty educated and are able to read the “right” things elsewhere online.
This is where I am struggling with… You and your people like you have no sense of a balance view of things, and give credit its due. Your views are so slanted and one sided that I am truly amazed you can actually believe them.
Yes, I voted for the PAP, but what is the alternative? Your kind of politics to throw sticks and stones without due regard that you are slapping your own face by demeaning the very special success story that Singapore has become?
My point is simple, the argument, that Sir Stamford is considered our founding father and held in high regard is moot. As I stated many times, his was for a selfish reason. Sir Stamford founded Singapore not for its people, but for his own, the British. And the article appears to champion that, and this is where my problem is. You worship a guy as founding father when his intention for all purpose is a very selfish one.
Fast forward 1965, Singapore was force to be independent, to survive, to earn our own living. History records this struggle. Most of people like you probably wasn’t even born than, that is why history is impt, as it records our roots of how we came about.
I am not arguing who is the founding father, I am asking you guys in 1965 when Singapore became independent as a country, as a nation when our survival is at stake which team took us to where we are? Many of us understands this, I hope you and others do to.
@Albert –
I am not sure who is trying to detract here. But all I see is your opinion, along with a bunch of irrelevant facts, in an attempt to rewrite history.
Are we still debating if LKY was a founding father of modern Singapore? I have provided my Wikipedia reference. Where is yours?
I could go on and on and argue with you on irrelevant facts but I am not going there. Hahaha!
I don’t need Wikipedia when even my 2 sons since primary school knows.
1) Sir Stamford founded Singapore as a British colony, not a country, not a nation.
2) 1965 Singapore became a nation, responsible for its own security, it’s own economy, its own people.
@Paul Lam, you are brainwashed by your own self. If you think so badly above Singapore, maybe East Timor needs you more, they became independent and I hear they are trying to be the next Singapore, maybe you and others like you can help them better.
@Albert,
Your two facts have nothing to do with your assertion that LKY was the founder of modern Singapore. If LKY was still alive, he would “wake up your bloody idea”!
Many Eastern European countries became independent following the collapse of the Soviet Union. But no leader has been credited to be a founder of the state. Not even Lech Walesa who was merely a founder of the Solidarity union.
We are talking about History here. It subscribes to a much higher standard than that of your 153rd.
It must be a depressing week for you and many hardcore PAP supporters – and I was right about you being a PAP supporter! You are being patronizing, not patriotic, in your wild “historical” claim.
Dear Phillip,
Please just leave this argument for another day. Your nitpicking is frivolous in the grand scheme of things. History is not written by you or Tony Tan. It is written as a collective. The people of Singapore have their own thoughts on Lee, and what you just posted is really a pathetic attempt at tainting his legacy. What you label as propaganda is refuted by historians and even foreign leaders, go read more instead of quoting rubbish from TRS.
Lee’s passing has sparked another awakening in Singapore, and I believe it is for the better. Good luck if you were hoping for Singapore to descend in chaos, because Singaporeans will not let it happen.
Please learn to read the news and not insert imaginary words into them.
Thank you for your comments. As you said, history “is written as a collective”. I am a Singaporean. You could disagree with me and vice versa.
Seriously Phillip Ang, your views and many like you shows how uninformed and detached from reality.
The ‘Singapore’ that Sir Stamford discovered was for all purpose a British colony, in other words a property that belongs to the British. Surely, you understand this. Do you also understand the difference between a country and a British colony?
At the time of Sir Stamford, the British were the rulers of Singapore, they took all the taxes send back to England, had a governor that managed singapore. The British as colonial masters were more humane and pragmatic that other colonial masters like the Germans, Portuguese, Dutch etc..
Singapore was never a country until that fateful year 1965 when we were force to be independent. Imagine yourself a little boy, suddenly you got kicked out of your home, you don’t have money, no place to stay… That was how it felt in 1965. Singapore suddenly was by itself.
Your debate about this whole issue and your views shows clearly your lack of depth and understanding. Choosing to believe an article that doesn’t even understand its own history in an effort to distort it for their own devious purpose sickens me.
If you want to convince us, please educate yourself better, and stop hiding behind the argument ‘we agree to disagree’. In this context, it’s not we agree to disagree, it’s you know nothing of our history and do not even understand what it is to be a singaporeon. You do not appreciate how far we have come this 50 years. If you want to disagree please go educate yourself better, people will respect you more.
The article you posted, is a big disgrace to all Singaporeons, is the article telling us that Singapore should forever be a British colony’s? Since the author claims there is only 1 founding father? What history records are important events, milestone that happened, that has an impact. Debating the point that Mr Lee Kuan Yew is not a foundering father is moot, because in 1965 Singapore was force to be independent! These 50 years who took us from nothing to where we are now, as a singaporeon if you do not understand this simple fact that people from all over the knows. Than you failed, both as a son/daughter of Singapore, and as a singaporeon.
Dear Phillip,
Why not write to Time magazine to ask them to retract their latest article? They just credited LKY as “THE FOUNDING FATHER OF SINGAPORE”.
http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/mr-lee-kuan-yew-featured-time-magazine-cover-20150327
I’ll apologise to you if you can get them to print a retraction.
Cheers!
And if you can’t get them to print a retraction, you AMEND this article and credit Lee properly. Cheers again!!! (This aligns to the standard of owning up to a mistake when it is made)
LSH,
I want to note that this new “founding father” claim was made by PAP supporters only in the past week. Even LKY would have dismissed it. See my previous comment on the founding father of *modern* Singapore.
Please provide refutations by historians here instead of opening your big mouth like Albert and other PAP supporters.
Please see. Oops, did you speak too soon? Time thinks you are wrong and agrees with the “PAP SUPPORTERS” wor. Is TIME a PAP SUPPORTER too? Kekeke.
Why not write to Time magazine to ask them to retract their latest article? They just credited LKY as “THE FOUNDING FATHER OF SINGAPORE”.
http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/mr-lee-kuan-yew-featured-time-magazine-cover-20150327
I’ll apologise to you if you can get them to print a retraction.
LKY is a traitorous scoundrel who had developed a cult of personality through the propaganda from the controlled mainstream media and revisionist history curriculum in schools.
His so-called feats of accomplishment, his contributions to Singapore are mostly exaggerated.
The only noteworthy thing LKY had done was to entrench his family members and his cronies in the government and positions of influence.
It seems like some of you never outgrew that brainwashing from your impressionable years.
Maybe you genuinely enjoy letting a family hijack the country for their own benefit.
Maybe you genuinely enjoy the drivel they are churning out on tv now with fantastically revisionist snippets e.g. LKY’s stint during the Japanese Occupation and Big Bad Tunku Abdul Rahman bullying LKY and kicking Singapore out of Malaysia.
I don’t.
1923-2015. Good riddance to bad rubbish. May his little political dynasty crumble swiftly at the hands of his inept son.
Please see. Opps! Time thinks you are wrong and agrees with so many Singaporeans leh.
Why not write to Time magazine to ask them to retract their latest article? They just credited LKY as “THE FOUNDING FATHER OF SINGAPORE”.
http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/mr-lee-kuan-yew-featured-time-magazine-cover-20150327
I’ll apologise to you if you can get them to print a retraction.
You think it’s exaggerated? you do realise the rest of the world got brains and eyes and can tell what are his accomplishments are right? it wasn’t him alone that achieved so much so Singapore, but to say that “the ONLY note worth thing LKY had done was to entrench his family members and his cronies in the government and positions of influence” just tells me what kind of bullshit you are into. Also it seems like you never outgrew the brainwashing from PAP’s critics.
1965 Singapore became a country, a nation, and Mr. Lee Kuan Yew was the first Prime Minister of The Republic of Singapore. Hence President Obama correctly wrote in this message of condolence when he referred to Mr. Lee as our first founding PM.
Anyway, this is my last post here. I apologies if I have offended anyone here. My intention is not to promote who is the founding fathers or Prime Minister, but to give credit where credit is due.
I an not a blind supporter of the PAP, but with such misinformed and blind views of things I really don’t see any credible opposition to PAP. If you want others to take you seriously, please try to understand what are you fighting for, who are you fighting for? Not, trying to distort or change facts to demean a person’s contribution just because you do not like him or her.
Achieved what?
Tyranny?
Backstabbing those he supported to gain independence from the Brits?
Marginalising the minority community?
LKY did nothing special. He did what any other dictator had done for control and power. Democracy is just a mask so they could please the world to make business easy.
What more allying with the terrorist Zionist state.
A government that keeps secrets from its people isn’t one that actually exists for its people. Rather, the people exists for the sake of supporting the existence of the ruling class.
Philip,
I definitely respect the views you have towards Singapore governance and I do recognise that there is still room for improvement for our government system. However, I would really appreciate it if you could show some respect and sensitivity to people who are truly devastated for the loss of our very first Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew.
I understand that Singapore was founded physically by Sir Stamford Raffles in 1819. Even so, do take note that this “founding” is the physical context where Sir Stamford Raffles literally just founded a plot of island for the British to expand their trade route. I’m very certain that what President Tony Tan meant when he said that Mr Lee was our founding father was that he was the one who had founded modern day Singapore. Without him, we would not have what we have thus far. As I mention this, I’m not referring just to physical buildings and structures (HDBs, NEWater, etc.) but a country where we are able to live with each other in racial harmony, not having to be that fearful of any countries trying to undermine our survival and a society, where we can walk home even at 3am feeling safe.
Just think of countries with real corrupted government, constant unrest, riots, famine and having majority of the countries having to face poverty, and then think of Singapore. We did not begin with all these. It was Mr Lee and his team, that brought all of us up here. Perhaps it is true that there are absurd charges (such as GST and COE) and CPF could be rather controversial, but think with the end in mind. What are all these policies for? Is it just for the government themselves? Was it because they are so obsessed with wealth such that they came up with this policies to “suck” our money or misdirect our funds? OR was it because they have a vision for Singapore to have a better future? Look at what we were in the 1950s. Look at what we are right now. Look around you – do we not have enough?
Hi Sam
I may be wrong but I am guessing you are writing from a position of comfort.
How could there be any room for improvement if the PAP has been refusing to listen since decades ago? Toh Chin Chye had anticipated our current CPF issues in 1984. PAP did not listen. Now that we have only ‘yes’ MPs, it’s a stretch of the imagination to think the system can improve.
PAP is very careful with its speeches and did leave out ‘modern’ intentionally. This is how propaganda works – many are now calling LKY our founding father!
What the government needs is a revamp. We can no longer afford to tweak an already unstable system.
I did consider not posting till 30 March but when is the ‘right’ time? Why are people close to LKY capitalising on his demise to score political points through the mainstream media? Why are TV programmes on LKY shown continuously for 7 days?
After some consideration, I decided there would never be a ‘right’ time.
Yes, LKY’s contributions are undeniable but they have already been repeated ad nauseum. Alternative media provide some balance to the mainstream media.
The end does not justify the means. Imprisoning dissenters to foist one’s grand theory on governing is wrong. What about using CPF monies to finance infrastructures at mandated low interest rates? Is this means right when it leads to retirement shortfall for the majority of members? Is it right for the PAP to subsequently privatise national assets which had been funded in large part with CPF monies without returning dividends to members?
When one makes a comparison, it has to be with another similar country. LKY cannot replicate his ‘success’ in any other country.
PAP policies are not for the people but themselves. Can you imagine a government forgetting to construct sufficient housing when it controls both the demand and supply? Why was the number of hospital beds reduced despite PAP’s intention to increasing the population, drastically? These screw ups are not honest mistakes. PAP was focused on the bottom line. Does such a government have any vision when it has to be told what to do?
Earlier leaders like Goh Keng Swee, Rajaratnam, etc. they sure did a good job and had a vision for Singapore. But the current crop in our cabinet??
Do ‘we’ not have enough? That depends on who the question is directed at.
If you sit down and work out the sums to sustain a family, put aside some savings for retirement, some for a rainy day ie retrenchment, medical contingencies, etc you will know many people do not have sufficient funds.
Are we a successful country? The fair answer is we don’t really know. I find it strange that citizens are not demanding answers to very important questions pertaining to hundreds of billions of dollars in our reserves.
What if PAP falls and skeletons start to fall out after its books are opened for the first time in 5 decades?
A parliament which is silent on issues concerning ordinary citizens coupled with a greedy, non transparent and unaccountable government, what kind of vision does such a government have?
Thanks for your comments.
And I’m guessing this comment would require your permission before it can be posted, but my intention wasn’t to share this with the public – it was a message for you so it is up to you whether you would want to post the comment.
@Phillip:
I salute you. and to @xmen too. These few days ib are out in full force and there are also many instant “converts”. It is really like a cult where they literally worship lky and fiercely defend his “legacy” with no regards to logic and facts