@el farto: DUDE! long time no talk shop like this :) but to pick up on your last point, that’s a very, very interesting point, and was only able to see that part coming after I read his reply in full: it’s a pretty devious tactic isn’t it? Rattle the Malaysian cage, let the Malay ultras trot out their little tempers and scare the Singaporean Chinese into ‘realization’ - Harry Lee’s siege mentality returns.

The natural corollary to the above is, as you’ve said, the need for a strong centralized government. Now how do you argue with that? Especially with Malay ultras in Malaysia acting oh-so-predictably. How does one subvert such discourse when we know how easy it is to succumb to fear?

(’boo!’ made contact some months back, btw)

Interesting because, as a member of the predominantly Chinese Singaporean expatriate business community here in JKT, you’d think he’d be happy someone was shedding some light on the discriminatory practices that disadvantage him. But much like a hostage suffering Stockholm Syndrome, this businessman was upset that LKY was stirring up a reaction against the Chinese businessmen who “just want to do business quietly and happily without going back to 1998″.

I don’t think even the most myopic non-Chinese here will dispute Suharto-era politics clearly marginalized the Chinese community in Indonesia. That the Chinese community continued to hold a disproportionate amount of wealth despite these discriminations is besides the point (although it’s a lovely discussion on its own). Want proof of systematic marginalization? Let’s just start with the ban on Chinese surnames.

But what I thought was most annoying about the hullaboo over LKY’s remarks was that all that noise drowned out the most disturbing part of his hypothesis in his speech — the reason why a strong majority government is necessary in Singapore. Not because a strong majority government might provide strong representation of the people, mind, but so we can continue to remain Chinese in front of our neighbours.

Our paths seldom cross nowadays, it’s my loss that I did not try harder!
I agree with your “observation” that “…It’s worrying how the prevalence of blame and pot-calling-the-kettle black sort of counter-arguments seem to have purchase with many people, even my colleagues and friends.”

I think there’s NO RIGHT or WRONG in poilitical pontifications — it’s up to readers to decide if the speaker/thinker’s views are cogent, valid or well-articulated, if yes, why; if no, why not? The RATIONALE, I always urge my ER to give; otherwise, there’s no meaningful dialogue.

I wrote a piece mainly rebutting Paddy Bowie’s Comment in New Sunday Times; I invite thy crossing the bridge to exchange some sabr / sword/ keris? I’d still offer thee Chocolat:)

Malaysia always the same, kinda like wag the dog; you gots problems you can’t deal with, distract the public with more Singapore bashing. I bet LKY, TDM and AAB have a deal of some sort: if either country got problem, make nasty remarks.

Kinda like a cross-straits sorta sandiwara… :p

Sgp will only bend backwards for money. And if they want Sgp to be compliant, they better have the money and clout to do it.