Elitism: A Myth?
“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 fewer bright people to support dumb people in the next generation. That’s a problem.”
-From National Day Rally 1983
Source: http://www.singapore-window.org//sw08/081101ST.HTM
The above quotes are the best I could find. Apparently transcripts from such old National Day Rallies don't exist, since it was behind closed doors, not broadcasted, like how it is currently.
Obviously, the issue of the 'stop-at-two' policy is secondary here. The major point is that our MM Lee meant the birth control policies only for the non-graduates, which he so gracefully termed 'dumb people'. It's grossly reminiscent of something that fits into George Orwell's Animal Farm.
Such courses of actions are an anathema to what Singapore really is about: Meritocracy.
Our leeders have always insisted that Singapore rewards the best of the best, cream of the crop, top of the line. In a way, what MM Lee proposed is to distort the values of meritocracy.
By insisting that the best are offsprings of the best, meritocracy becomes a twisted version of monarchy and nepotism, since the best will inherit the best.
However, a perfect slap to MM Lee's face was when his grandson was born a slightly autistic albino. The child's mother, Wong Ming Yang, allegedly died of heart attack, and the husband, current PM Lee, remarried to current Temasek Holdings CEO Ho Ching. That's the official version.
The word on the street (however untrue it may be) is that Wong Ming Yang committed suicide because MM Lee was unhappy that she gave birth to a son that was obviously not going to be 'the best', and made PM Lee remarry a fast-rising civil servant for power.
Obviously that was a bit of a far-fetched theory, but had it been in a media circus of a place like Taiwan or Hollywood, the investigative journalism may reveal more than meets the eye.
But what is definitely the factual is the elitism that still exists today.
A few good examples would be from a couple of Ang Mo Kio GRC representatives that are strangely similiar.
Comparing both the Wee Shu Min and Li Hongyi public fracas, we can find lots of eery likeness.
Both are children of big shot politicians (one Wee Siew Kim, one PM Lee Hsien Loong)
Both went to the supposedly 'elite' RJC.
One condemned a 'commoner' for crying out about how tough life is, the other bypassed all chains of command, even emailing the Minister of Defence (thanks to Dad's conatcts) just to complain about a CO.
Both got away with a slap on the wrist. Wee Shu Min's father only reprimanded her. Her only loss was to close down her blog. Li Hongyi was "formally charged and administered a reprimand after a summary trial", even though in other states what he did tantamounted to a court-martial case that would have gotten him fired.
Both parents kept decidedly mum about the entire business. Wee Siew Kim later released a statement condoning his daughter's actions and even praised her, saying "As a parent, I may not have inculcated the appropriate level of sensitivity, but she has learnt a lesson, and it's good that she has learnt it at such an early stage in life.'"
And lastly, both Wee Siew Kim & PM Lee's political career won't be affected by their children's action.
Imagine if Sarah Palin's son in Iraq emailed US Defense Secretary Robert Gates over an officer only getting 10 extra duties for punishment. Palin's political career would be as dead as Achmed.
Another issue is the usage of the term 'graduates' as an equivalent to 'bright people' (see quotes from National Day Rally 1983, where female graduates were used as an equivalent to bright people).
This is a stereotype that has gone on until today, where degree almost equates you with cleverness, which is certainly not true. Granted, a lot of them really are clever, but they aren't smart.
They're just servants entrapped into the system, capable of rote learning, but unable to think for themselves or be creative. Much like a human robot.
Personally, I feel that this is nonsensical. A person's future career can only be justified through a degree. Just this slip of paper can give a much higher pay. What if someone who's really smart, but didn't want to waste his money and years of his life getting buried in books in university?
Would that person be less talented than a degree holder? Certainly so, in the current society, where I've seen and heard many such similiar cases when the smarter, more capable person was not accepted, with a degree holder chosen in favour.
Well, having society filled with the results of non-graduates (stupid people, as MM Lee put it) will only be detrimental to our future generations, as there'll be "fewer bright people to support dumb people".
Is it elitism? I rest my case.
“There will be fewer bright people to support dumb people in the next generation. That’s a problem.”
-From National Day Rally 1983
“We must encourage those who earn less than $200 per month and cannot afford to nurture and educate many children never to have more than two (children),”
“We will regret the time lost if we do not now take the first tentative steps towards correcting a trend which can leave our society with a large number of the physically, intellectually and culturally anaemic.”
-From National Day Rally 1967Source: http://www.singapore-window.org//sw08/081101ST.HTM
The above quotes are the best I could find. Apparently transcripts from such old National Day Rallies don't exist, since it was behind closed doors, not broadcasted, like how it is currently.
Obviously, the issue of the 'stop-at-two' policy is secondary here. The major point is that our MM Lee meant the birth control policies only for the non-graduates, which he so gracefully termed 'dumb people'. It's grossly reminiscent of something that fits into George Orwell's Animal Farm.
Such courses of actions are an anathema to what Singapore really is about: Meritocracy.
Our leeders have always insisted that Singapore rewards the best of the best, cream of the crop, top of the line. In a way, what MM Lee proposed is to distort the values of meritocracy.
By insisting that the best are offsprings of the best, meritocracy becomes a twisted version of monarchy and nepotism, since the best will inherit the best.
However, a perfect slap to MM Lee's face was when his grandson was born a slightly autistic albino. The child's mother, Wong Ming Yang, allegedly died of heart attack, and the husband, current PM Lee, remarried to current Temasek Holdings CEO Ho Ching. That's the official version.
The word on the street (however untrue it may be) is that Wong Ming Yang committed suicide because MM Lee was unhappy that she gave birth to a son that was obviously not going to be 'the best', and made PM Lee remarry a fast-rising civil servant for power.
Obviously that was a bit of a far-fetched theory, but had it been in a media circus of a place like Taiwan or Hollywood, the investigative journalism may reveal more than meets the eye.
But what is definitely the factual is the elitism that still exists today.
A few good examples would be from a couple of Ang Mo Kio GRC representatives that are strangely similiar.
Comparing both the Wee Shu Min and Li Hongyi public fracas, we can find lots of eery likeness.
Both are children of big shot politicians (one Wee Siew Kim, one PM Lee Hsien Loong)
Both went to the supposedly 'elite' RJC.
One condemned a 'commoner' for crying out about how tough life is, the other bypassed all chains of command, even emailing the Minister of Defence (thanks to Dad's conatcts) just to complain about a CO.
Both got away with a slap on the wrist. Wee Shu Min's father only reprimanded her. Her only loss was to close down her blog. Li Hongyi was "formally charged and administered a reprimand after a summary trial", even though in other states what he did tantamounted to a court-martial case that would have gotten him fired.
Both parents kept decidedly mum about the entire business. Wee Siew Kim later released a statement condoning his daughter's actions and even praised her, saying "As a parent, I may not have inculcated the appropriate level of sensitivity, but she has learnt a lesson, and it's good that she has learnt it at such an early stage in life.'"
And lastly, both Wee Siew Kim & PM Lee's political career won't be affected by their children's action.
Imagine if Sarah Palin's son in Iraq emailed US Defense Secretary Robert Gates over an officer only getting 10 extra duties for punishment. Palin's political career would be as dead as Achmed.
Another issue is the usage of the term 'graduates' as an equivalent to 'bright people' (see quotes from National Day Rally 1983, where female graduates were used as an equivalent to bright people).
This is a stereotype that has gone on until today, where degree almost equates you with cleverness, which is certainly not true. Granted, a lot of them really are clever, but they aren't smart.
They're just servants entrapped into the system, capable of rote learning, but unable to think for themselves or be creative. Much like a human robot.
Personally, I feel that this is nonsensical. A person's future career can only be justified through a degree. Just this slip of paper can give a much higher pay. What if someone who's really smart, but didn't want to waste his money and years of his life getting buried in books in university?
Would that person be less talented than a degree holder? Certainly so, in the current society, where I've seen and heard many such similiar cases when the smarter, more capable person was not accepted, with a degree holder chosen in favour.
Well, having society filled with the results of non-graduates (stupid people, as MM Lee put it) will only be detrimental to our future generations, as there'll be "fewer bright people to support dumb people".
Is it elitism? I rest my case.
posted by The Wordsmith at
11:56 pm
9 Comments
