Remembering Lee Kuan Yew
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-west-has-it-totally-wrong-on-lee-kuan-yew-10135641.html
Due to selective memory or genuine oversight, the writer had left out Operation Spectrum in 1987. We can't pretend that detention without trial didn't exist even though we enjoy stability and security most of our lives. We tend to reconsider our stance after receiving the short end of the stick.
It is always easy to look at it from a detached standpoint, citing the survival of the nation as the grand objective. However if it was applied to one's parents, siblings, friends, spouses and children, we will likely think otherwise.
I am also not trying to judge whether the Operation was "right" or "wrong". Due to the sensitive nature of the ISA, the key decision makers must have thoroughly explored various options before choosing to sanction the Operation. It was probably a difficult choice on their part.
However this serves to highlight that fundamentally, many countries are not griping about lesser issues like chewing gum or even penal issues like the death penalty. They are calling to account such actions that might be construed as the violation of the basic rights of a citizen.
If we fail to see what they see, we will fail to engage them on a common ground. These "grey areas" require dialogue. A blanket justification will not suffice. Neither will "my country, my way" help in strengthening diplomacy.
On LKY:
Over the past few days, much had been said about Lee Kuan Yew. He was admired, respected, feared, loved, vilified, meme-ed, worshipped and lauded by his fans and critics.
In the outpouring of tributes and diatribes, it dawned upon me that he is a much more complicated person in reality. No amount of public caricatures and stereotypes - messiah, iron man, despot, sage, maverick, statesman, lover- will be sufficient to encapsulate who he truly is. The tributes and diatribes, like twin faces of a coin, merely highlights the different facets of Lee Kuan Yew.
These outlandish displays raises a poignant question: "What will Lee Kuan Yew think if he witnesses all these?"
I cannot say for sure. His motives are his own, and in his own words, "I have nothing to prove." If I may venture a guess, he will approach this event with his signature blend of clinical pragmatism and fiery conviction. Despite decades of contending with the good and the bad, he consistently seeks to remain grounded in reality- the "Hard Truths" to keep Singapore going.
Celebrate the life of a man who contributed much,
but forget not his jagged edges.
Continue his legacy to build a better nation,
but forget not to challenge notions.
On Amos Yee:
Many people were offended by vulgarities and tone expressed by Amos Yee. Some reacted with anger ("ungrateful immature kid", "throw him into jail!", etc). Others took a "serves him right" stance. However if we were to tune out the offensive expressions, some of his points may be worth considering. It will be better if his arguments can be dismantled in a civil manner.
Persecuting him only confirms the intolerance which he rails against, and it is unlikely to convince him to look at things from other angles. As much as we disapprove of his actions, he is a fellow Singaporean- albeit a young man holding raw perspectives. The freedom to express one's opinion should be accompanied with the obligation to tune in to the opinions of others. As members of this society, do we facilitate this fair exchange?
Should we alienate him by evoking arrest warrants, death threats, ridicule, apathy and reverse-trolling? Or should we discuss his views in a calm, rational manner, challenging the assumptions and identifying the lacunas in his arguments?
Perhaps, the way Amos is handled will serve as a test of how our society deals with dissent and alternate viewpoints. Can we have a civil debate of the values and principles we stand for? Or do we choose intolerance in the name of civility?
In the wake of the national mourning, we pledged to build a better Singapore.This is where the rubber meets the road.
Due to selective memory or genuine oversight, the writer had left out Operation Spectrum in 1987. We can't pretend that detention without trial didn't exist even though we enjoy stability and security most of our lives. We tend to reconsider our stance after receiving the short end of the stick.
It is always easy to look at it from a detached standpoint, citing the survival of the nation as the grand objective. However if it was applied to one's parents, siblings, friends, spouses and children, we will likely think otherwise.
I am also not trying to judge whether the Operation was "right" or "wrong". Due to the sensitive nature of the ISA, the key decision makers must have thoroughly explored various options before choosing to sanction the Operation. It was probably a difficult choice on their part.
However this serves to highlight that fundamentally, many countries are not griping about lesser issues like chewing gum or even penal issues like the death penalty. They are calling to account such actions that might be construed as the violation of the basic rights of a citizen.
If we fail to see what they see, we will fail to engage them on a common ground. These "grey areas" require dialogue. A blanket justification will not suffice. Neither will "my country, my way" help in strengthening diplomacy.
On LKY:
Over the past few days, much had been said about Lee Kuan Yew. He was admired, respected, feared, loved, vilified, meme-ed, worshipped and lauded by his fans and critics.
In the outpouring of tributes and diatribes, it dawned upon me that he is a much more complicated person in reality. No amount of public caricatures and stereotypes - messiah, iron man, despot, sage, maverick, statesman, lover- will be sufficient to encapsulate who he truly is. The tributes and diatribes, like twin faces of a coin, merely highlights the different facets of Lee Kuan Yew.
These outlandish displays raises a poignant question: "What will Lee Kuan Yew think if he witnesses all these?"
I cannot say for sure. His motives are his own, and in his own words, "I have nothing to prove." If I may venture a guess, he will approach this event with his signature blend of clinical pragmatism and fiery conviction. Despite decades of contending with the good and the bad, he consistently seeks to remain grounded in reality- the "Hard Truths" to keep Singapore going.
Celebrate the life of a man who contributed much,
but forget not his jagged edges.
Continue his legacy to build a better nation,
but forget not to challenge notions.
On Amos Yee:
Many people were offended by vulgarities and tone expressed by Amos Yee. Some reacted with anger ("ungrateful immature kid", "throw him into jail!", etc). Others took a "serves him right" stance. However if we were to tune out the offensive expressions, some of his points may be worth considering. It will be better if his arguments can be dismantled in a civil manner.
Persecuting him only confirms the intolerance which he rails against, and it is unlikely to convince him to look at things from other angles. As much as we disapprove of his actions, he is a fellow Singaporean- albeit a young man holding raw perspectives. The freedom to express one's opinion should be accompanied with the obligation to tune in to the opinions of others. As members of this society, do we facilitate this fair exchange?
Should we alienate him by evoking arrest warrants, death threats, ridicule, apathy and reverse-trolling? Or should we discuss his views in a calm, rational manner, challenging the assumptions and identifying the lacunas in his arguments?
Perhaps, the way Amos is handled will serve as a test of how our society deals with dissent and alternate viewpoints. Can we have a civil debate of the values and principles we stand for? Or do we choose intolerance in the name of civility?
In the wake of the national mourning, we pledged to build a better Singapore.This is where the rubber meets the road.
Comments
Post a Comment