I have just returned from the protest outside the degree conferring ceremony for Lee Kuan Yew. About 150 protesters (mostly students) welcomed Lee’s arrival with chants of “Lee Kuan Yew - ANU is not for you”; “No doctorates for dictators”; and “Masters for Mugabe.” The occasional “shame, Chubb, shame” was also heard.
Protesters were kept well back from the entrance to the hall by a line of tape and a small contingent of police, security staff and some ANU suits. There seemed to be a strong media presence so this action should get some good coverage.
During the protest additional signatures were collected for a petition to be submitted to ANU Chancellor Allan Hawke. Based on the almost complete silence so far from the ANU leadership, I don’t expect that this will meet with much response.
At the protest there was further informal talk of possible legal action against the decision to give Lee an honorary degree. Apparently there was some discussion of an injunction yesterday, but sufficient evidence could not be put together in time. Options are being considered for further action. Whether or not the ANU actually followed the required procedure for the granting of this degree may well be a key point in any further action. As I have indicated before I have a suspicion that the ANU Honorary Degrees Committee was bypassed in this process, contrary to the provisions of the Honorary Degrees Rules. I have sent a number of emails requesting clarification on this but still no response.
Last night the ANU did emerge from its bunker, briefly, on this issue. Vice Chancellor Ian Chubb stated on ABC television news that the degree reflected the strong relationship between ANU and the National University of Singapore (this is my recollection, I have not been able to find a transcript). No one at ANU would disagree with the importance of good relations with other universities, but is this really a basis for the award of an honorary degree? Incredibly Chubb indicated that he was not completely aware of Lee Kuan Yew’s background when the decision was made. Unbelievable from the head of one of the world’s leading Asian studies universities but all the more reason why due process should be observed and appropriately informed people consulted.
[UPDATE: for other coverage of the protest and recent developments see: Canberra Times; Radio Australia; The Australian; and the Sydney Morning Herald.]
41 responses so far ↓
1 Jennifer Clarke // Mar 28, 2007 at 1:46 pm
It’s kind of fitting, really: Lee didn’t respect the rule of law or democracy, despite his many other achievements. In order to give him an honorary doctorate in a field in which he does not deserve one (as opposed to, say, economics), the ANU Chancellor and Council bypass the institution’s normal procedures and consult none of its Asia or human rights experts!
Still, it’s worth keeping some perspective on Lee. While Singapore’s Internal Security Act (see http://www.asianlii.org/sg/legis/consol_act/isac143235/) still makes Australian terror laws look tame, Lee didn’t write the original - he just abused this colonial legacy. And Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize.
2 Damian Doyle // Mar 28, 2007 at 1:49 pm
“Master for Mugabe”. Nice.
3 Making friends in a uniquely Singapore way | terryjohal.com // Mar 28, 2007 at 6:14 pm
[...] and a write up of the protest at ANU here. It interesting reading the articles in various Australian papers. Read in the following order - [...]
4 Chris Fry // Mar 28, 2007 at 10:13 pm
It’s a fair point if ANU bypassed the appropriate procedures for awarding honorary degrees, but the impression that remains is small mindedness, absence of any kind of historical context and deplorable bad manners.Whatever his faults it is indisputable that Lee Kwan Yew is a statesman of extraordinarily high achievement.Even a paragon like Mandela has his dark side, the championing of Libya for example in its murderous phase and his support for the Lockerbie bombers.
The Australian left,unfairly perhaps, has an international reputation for provincialism and an almost comical dogmatism.This incident tends to reinforce that misleading Pilgerist stereotype.
5 Pig Latin // Mar 28, 2007 at 10:45 pm
Chris Fry, I’ll see you at the next cheese orgy. *wink wink*
6 Jon Fernquest // Mar 29, 2007 at 12:24 am
Don’t let him trick you and get another doctorate for the following legal procedure. He stole the idea from the British. ANU might have to give a doctorate to Sir Raffles himself for this one.
Caning in Singapore
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_in_Singapore
“Caning in the city-state of Singapore is used as a form of corporal punishment on men for criminal offences….More than one thousand male criminals are caned in Singapore each year for both violent and non-violent offences such as vandalism, overstaying one’s visa or illegal immigration .”
“The subject to be caned is strapped to a metal frame with the buttocks exposed. The rattan cane has been soaked in water overnight to prevent the cane from splitting and to maximize inflicted pain; the Prisons Department denies that the cane is soaked in brine, but notes that the cane is treated with antiseptic before use. Parts of the prisoner’s body are padded to prevent accidental damaging of the kidneys and the genitals, but the procedure can still leave permanent scars on the subject.”
“Caning is carried out in the presence of a prison officer and a medical officer. The punishment of caning is carried out in a single session, and not by ‘installments’. Thus, a person sentenced to 24 strokes of the cane will have the entire sentence carried out at once. The persons carrying out the caning are specially trained prison officers.”
[The way they cut the hair off of young women from Burma to humiliate them before deporting them (while Than Shwe's grandson is flying in for his daily lessons from Naypyidaw), maybe he invented that one.]
7 anonymous // Mar 29, 2007 at 2:04 am
It is particularly important to establish quickly whether or not the ANU followed its own rules on honorary degrees in this case. I hope that New Mandala will be able to provide definitive information on this point soon.
8 Johpa // Mar 29, 2007 at 1:23 pm
Not being from down under, it is difficult to offer any criticisms of ANU. Although Lee Kwan Yew is not the kind of guy I would like to share a beer with, or even a single moment of my time, I daresay on the larger historical continuum, only naive college students would equate him with a dictator, a term I would reserve for far more egregious despots. He can be vilified with other less odious terms, mainly for creating the single most boring city-state on the planet. But the people of Singapore, dull as they tend to be on average, have never struck me as “les Miserables” of the planet, those living under a true dictatorship. Hey, the man did keep Desker Rd open for many years. But dullness does not equate to dictatorship.
9 Truth about Singapore // Mar 29, 2007 at 2:25 pm
You be the judge for Lee’s Regime
2006
Aug: Prosecuted two Singaporeans and one Chinese for holding a protest calling on the Chinese government to stop persecuting Falungong practitioners. Attempted to deport the 73-year-old Chinese who would face certain torture if she returned to China.
Aug: Pressed for a speedy wrap up of his summary judgement hearing that he took up with his dad against Ms Chee Siok Chin and Dr Chee Soon Juan even though he earlier said that he was willing to be cross-examined.
Aug: Ordered the Far Eastern Economic Review (and four other foreign newspapers) to deposit $200,000 in Singapore before allowing the publications to circulate here.
Jul: Threatened to sue the Far Eastern Economic Review with his dad for publishing an interview the journal did with Dr Chee Soon Juan.
Jul: Continued to drag feet over the cleaning up of money-laundering activities in Singapore, leading a senior fund manager in the region to comment: “Singapore has truly become the global centre for parking ill-gotten gains. The private banking teams are huge and in practice ask almost no questions.”
Jul: Closed down the Mr Brown column on the Today newspaper. Mr Brown had criticized the rising cost of living in Singapore in his article “I’m fed, up with progress!” The ban caused an uproar amongst the Internet community, resulting in 30 people staging a protest at the City Hall MRT station.
Jul: Charged nine people linked to the Falun Gong spiritual group with illegal assembly for allegedly gathering without a permit last year.
Jun: Told Australians when he visited the country: “Endless debates are seldom about achieving a better grasp of the issue but to score political points.” He added that John Howard, the Australian prime minister, “spends all his time dealing with this party politics. The result is you don’t have a lot of time to worry about he long-term future” and concluded that one-party rule is best.l
Jun: Made himself and the rich richer but the poor poorer. Lowest 30 percent of households saw their incomes diminish whereas the incomes of the top 10 percent of households increased by 14.8 percent. Only half of Singaporean households enjoyed any significant improvement in their income over the five-year period between 2000 and 2005. The bottom 10 percent of households reported no or negative income while the 11 to 20 percentile group saw their household incomes plunge nearly 20 percent over the same five year period. These households had an average of $1,180 monthly incomes in 2005 compared to $1,470 in 2000.
Jun: Continued to harass SDP and its supporters by charging Dr Chee Soon Juan, Mr Gandhi Ambalam, and Mr Yap Keng Ho under the Public Entertainment and Meetings Act (PEMA) for “making an address in a public place.” The three men were selling the SDP’s The New Democrat in the run up to the elections in May. This is another way the PAP prevents the opposition from directly and effectively communicating with the people.
Jun: Given the Bad Democrat Award by OpenDemocracy. The citation reads: Lee is keen to be seen as a democrat. He talks like a democrat. He holds elections. But, beneath that thin veneer, he and the party he leads, the People’s Action Party (PAP), have not the faintest inclination to bend to the will of the Singaporean people. His father, Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore’s first prime minister who governed with an iron-fistful of dollars for thirty-one years reproached those who did not vote for the PAP as “ungrateful”.
May: Called for elections but banned podcasting during the election period. Introduced Progress Package where voters were given cash of over one thousand dollars each just a few days before polling. Told voters: “Suppose you had 10, 15, 20 opposition members in Parliament. Instead of spending my time thinking what is the right policy for Singapore, I’m going to spend all my time thinking what’s the right way to fix them, to buy my supporters’ votes.”
May: Sued SDP and its Central Executive Committee members one day after he called for elections for publishing the article ‘The Govt’s Role in the NKF Scandal’ in The New Democrat. Harassed SDP’s printer into not printing SDP’s election material and newspaper. Told the media that he was “more than willing to be cross-examined in the courts of law to prove that Dr Chee Soon Juan’s allegations in the SDP’s newsletter are false and amount to grave defamation.” But after the elections he applied for a summary judgement with his father so that he could avoid being cross-examined in court
Apr: Seized Dr Chee Soon Juan’s passport and prevented him from traveling to Turkey to attend the World Movement for Democracy 4th Assembly. Has not returned Dr Chee his passport since and has repeatedly denied Dr Chee his right to travel.
Mar: Received complaint that foreigners will be allowed to stage protests during the World Bank-IMF meeting in September 2006 in Singapore but not Singaporeans.
Mar: Ruled out giving foreign maids mandatory days off, saying it would be inconvenient. Human Rights Watch pressed Singapore to give foreign maids mandatory days off, saying they deserved the same holiday entitlement as the city-state’s other workers.
2005
Dec: Committed an international gaffe when he failed to halt on the red carpet to bow in front of the German flag as protocol requires during the inspection of the guard-of-honour in Germany with Chancellor Angela Merkel. Merkel halted and bowed but Lee didn’t. A short call to the prime minister apparently went unnoticed as the head of state continued to walk ahead. A protocol officer was finally able to stop the guest-of-honor and the two then continued the passing of the formation.
Dec: High Court Judge V K Rajah dismisses an Originating Motion taken up by Chee Siok Chin, Monica Kumar, and Yap Keng Ho against the Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng and Police Commissioner Khoo Boon Hui that the police acted unlawfully and unconstitutionally when it ordered the protesters to disperse. Mr Rajah said that citizens do not have the right to stage protests against the Government because “domestically as well as internationally, public governance in Singapore has been equated with integrity. To spuriously cast doubt on that would be to improperly undermine both a hard-won national dignity and a reputable international identity.”
Dec: Police called up Chee Siok Chin, Monica Kumar, Tan Teck Wee, Yap Keng Ho, Chee Soon Juan, and Lim Tung Hee for questioning over the protest held outside the CPF Building on 11 August 2005.
Sep: Police called up Internet activist Mr Jacob George for questioning in relationship to Mr Martyn See’s making of the film Singapore Rebel featuring SDP’s Dr Chee Soon Juan. The move is widely seen as an attempt by the Government to intimidate activists who are increasingly critical of the PAP’s control of information flow in Singapore.
Sep: Police are investigating the case of the eight mysterious white elephants. Someone stuck eight cardboard cut-outs of white elephants in protest against the Government’s refusal to open the Buangkok MRT station because of low traffic volume.
Aug: Riot police, in full battle gear, were sent in to break-up a peaceful protest by four activists who were protesting against the non-transparent nature of the NKF, CPF, GIC and HDB. About 40 police officers were present. They confiscated the protesters T-shirts.
Aug: Police threaten organisers of an anti-death penalty concert that it would not give the license if the photograph of the late Mr Shanmugam was not removed from the concert posters. The police said that they did not want to glorify an executed person. Mr Shanmugam was executed in May 2005 after he was convicted of smuggling marijuana into Singapore despite strong protests from the SDP and civil society.
Jul: Police attend Dr Chee Soon Juan’s book launch on nonviolence, videotapes the proceedings, seizes a CD, and takes down the particulars of the speakers. Investigations on-going.
Jun: Police warn would-be protesters at the Olympic vote held in Singapore that they would be arrested. A group of small businesses have threatened to stage protests against London’s bid for the 2012 Olympics
Jun: Courts seal files relating to the defamation suit brought by Chief Justice Yong Pung How against his former remisier Boon Suan Ban, who has been detained in the Institute of Mental Health at the President’s pleasure since March 2005.
May: Government bans workshop organised by Singaporean activists on non-violence.
May: Immigration authorities prevent Nonviolence International trainer, Mr Yeshua Moser-Puangsuwan, from entering Singapore to conduct non-violence workshop.
May: Student blogger, Mr Chen Jiahao, receives an email from Mr Philip Yeo, a powerful state executive, who threatens to sue Mr Chen because he had made disparaging remarks in his blog about Mr Yeo’s company. The blogger apologised and removed the said article from his website.
May: Two Falungong practitioners imprisoned for handing out DVDs and gathering in public without permits.
Apr: Government bans Amnesty International’s Mr Tim Parritt from speaking at a public forum on the death penalty in Singapore.
Mar: Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam’s application for a march to protest the Government’s decision to allow casinos to be built turned down.
Mar: Police threaten filmmaker Martyn See with prosecution unless See withdrew a film he made about Dr Chee Soon Juan from the Singapore International Film Festival. See withdrew his entry but got a call from the police for questioning anyway. Investigations on-going.
Mar: Chief Justice Yong Pung How sues his former remisier, Mr Boon Suan Ban, for defamation because Mr Boon was apparently pestering the Chief Justice on an outstanding financial matter when Mr Yong was the chairman of a bank. The Attorney-General charges Mr Boon for criminal defamation. The financier was subsequently acquitted because he was of “unsound mind”. But Mr Boon was detained at the Institute of Mental Health, where he remains at the President’s pleasure.
Mar: Police reject an application by a local gay Christian support group to hold a concert because the Media Development Authority said that the show would “promote a homosexual lifestyle.”
Jan: Dr Chee Soon Juan was ordered by the High Court to pay $500,000 in damages plus legal costs to Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Goh Chok Tong.
2004
Dec: Police reject an application by a Hong Kong based gay portal to hold a Christmas party as “the event is likely to be organised as a gay party which is contrary to public interest.”
Dec: Mr Lee Kuan Yew tells the Foreign Correspondents Association: “We are not that daft. We know what is in our interest and we intend to preserve our interests and what we have is working. You are not going to tell us how to run our country.”
Nov: The Court of Appeal upholds a High Court decision to deny the application by Mr J. B. Jeyaratnam to be discharged from bankruptcy for money owed in lawsuits taken by PAP officials.
Sep: Courts proceed with the hearing to assess damages that Dr Chee Soon Juan has to pay Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Goh Chok Tong despite Dr Chee asking for the date to be postponed because he was away in the US.
Sep: The Economist pays $390,000 in damages plus legal costs to Mr Lee Hsien Loong and Mr Lee Kuan Yew for a report on Temasek Holdings, headed by the prime minister’s wife, Ho Ching.
Sep: The Government will allow certain international NGOs to register in Singapore except those whose activities relate to human rights, gender issues, religion, ethnicity and martial arts.
10 ohplease // Mar 30, 2007 at 7:46 pm
Obviously you do not know enough about Singapore politics. Your references should be credited to Lee Kuan Yew’s son, current Prime Minister Lee (Hsien Loong). If you dug a little deeper and got your facts straight you would no doubt stumble on more interesting material that would at least be attributed to the correct Lee.
11 Singaporean // Mar 31, 2007 at 4:07 am
Its really nice to see people out there who actually care about what is happening here. Hopefully his regime will collapse soon and we can dig out all the skeletons from his closet.
12 yongsi // Mar 31, 2007 at 4:51 am
singapore wouldn’t be what it is today without him. dictatorship? haha. where did these students get that from? the news? i doubt any of them have experienced life here, cause it is far from what they make it out to be. brilliant country, brilliant leader. good enough for me
13 Pig Latin // Mar 31, 2007 at 11:40 am
yongsi, what is Singapore today exactly?
If HDB flats are your thing, then I suppose its heaven!
14 melvin Lim // Mar 31, 2007 at 1:15 pm
i agree with Yongsi. Life in Singapore isn’t as bad as it is portrayed in the news. I think the students and people have a really shrewd perception to Lee Kuan Yew. It is without a doubt, he does certain unjustifiable things to keep PAP intact, however, we Singaporeans are actually aware of them. Correct me if I am wrong, but the only impression I get out of the petition and gatherings is the ‘hipness’ associated with being deviant. Does every single signature = an individul’s aboslute consent that Lee is a dictator? I don’t care if Lee recevies the doctorate or not, more importantly, I hope people start to investigate properly his so called ‘tyrannic’ rule. (At the same time perhaps, we S’poreans ought to question our standard of government as well…)
15 kl // Mar 31, 2007 at 4:10 pm
I’m Singaporean. All I say, I myself would go on protests against LKY and PAP if I could. But that’s just not possible in Singapore. Protesting in Singapore would just get people in jail.
16 Pig Latin // Mar 31, 2007 at 4:54 pm
http://www.flickr.com/photos/t3htarik/244501235/
^ Protesting in Singapore ^
Melvin, if your aware of them and your not doing anything then do you feel any of the guilt of Dr. LKY and son’s actions?
I haven’t said Lee is a dictator, I am saying that he’s a tyrant. It’s not hip at all to attend protests here anymore… Haven’t you been to Australia for a while? We’re just as cosmocratic as Singapore!
17 Pig Latin // Mar 31, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Furthermore, Chee Soon Juan was sacked by NUS for allegedly misappropriating research funds. This ruling quite controversial… What sort of university does the ANU want to associate itself with exactly? One that’s interests are impartial or gahmen driven? Haha…
18 melvin Lim // Mar 31, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Hi Pig Latin, I see your point. Protests, petitions are definitely good mediums to drive certain messages across. I agree with you and kl on that totally. I will not deny our lack of liberty in that aspect, even on blogs! Anyway, this ruling has become more or less a general sentiment ready to explode once PAP screws up something of major importance. I will take what you say into stride for sure. However, I also hope you understand what I meant when I mentioned a kind of ‘focus group polarity’ present in the atmosphere described in the above post. The diverse voices become polarized into an extreme one, spearheaded by certain charismatic leaders. haha … a whole load of theoretical bull huh? Nevertheless, if this is about politics and grabbing headlines etc … then perhaps the above protest is justifiable ..
19 Srithanonchai // Mar 31, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Should be “cosmecratic”.
20 Jason // Apr 1, 2007 at 2:59 am
Life in Singapore is just like George Owell’s “Animal Farm”.
It start good and then the pigs decided that they rule and that their should walk on 2 legs (copy everything western) and the rest of the people are useless scums.
Many Singaporeans just like animals in the animal farm have not realised what’s going on. 60% of the economy is Govt or Govt owned. So, if they or their family have a job related to the govt of any Govt linked companies, they have a ok life.
Those that realised and try to do something were put to shame and at least more than 100K of them migrated to Australia over the last 10 yrs.
It’s really unfolding like animal farm. Some animals escaped and they just import more indians & chinese to dilute the votes.
21 ANU is not for Yew" « BothSidesOfTheJohorStraits // Apr 1, 2007 at 7:49 pm
[...] the protest against Lee Kuan Yew was done in Australian National Uni in Canberra (see http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/2007/03/28/lee-kuan-yew-anu-is-not-for-you/ for the source of this photo, and others). ANU was conferring an honorary doctorate to LKY, and [...]
22 roan // Apr 1, 2007 at 9:47 pm
jason: i can’t believe you would say something like it.
Singapore is someone’s home, and it is just a particular type of structure of living. What LKY did is more than good enough for people who grew up in his generation and the later one. I’m not too sure about this particular generation we are in though. That’s why we do have new blood in the government, people more and more readily exposed to alternatives, whether taking them up or not is another matter outside of this. It all takes time.
I see an aboslute danger in sinking into a certain western mindframe backuped that defined itself w certain levels of democracy and trying to judge every country based on that criteria. When actually we all come from different starting points, and relatively speaking, LKY did do an extraoridinary amount of work.
I’ve been out of Singapore for a few years now and have felt the effects of LKY’s governing in my conditioning over most of my life. There is alot of deal with, de injected fear, repression, attitude/mentality and all. but each culture has their own way of doing things, and in 40years, that was very impressive. Now it’s time to move on and explore how my generation and later generations can deal with this new problem. I don’t care if LKY gets de doctorate, all this discussion in a way is juz mental mensturbation. I’m not even sure if it’s intellectual and reasonable. The reason why I manage to spend a few years out of Singapore was because of governmental funding.
It’s easy to get hateful, but let’s move on.
23 Singaporean // Apr 2, 2007 at 1:05 am
Yes! Lets move ! Move out of the dictatorship! Vote with your feet!
24 ANU Singaporean Graduate // Apr 2, 2007 at 4:09 am
Personally i think that the comments about LKY as a dictator/tyrant is really unjust, shallow and immature.
Like some said, the people in sg are aware of whats happening, but majority still vote for PAP. Why? i don’t believe it was out of fear for PAP, but rather fear of how sg economy will turn out if the opposition won.
I’ve got colleagues from all over the world. Australian, Americans, Indians, philipinos, Canadians, Brits, you name it. The one answer when asked how they found singapore, was that it is a safe and clean country.
I’ve been in Australia for 3 years and if you wonder the streets of Sydney, i don’t think you’ll feel as safe or clean as if you are in sg.
Lets not even talk about Sydney, take Canberra for e.g, known for being a boring state to be in. I’ve even had encounters where Aussies shout racist comments right across the street. Worse when they’re high on beer.
One shouldn’t compare the governing of one country to another. The obvious reason is because we’re dealing with different kinda people/culture/mindset.
Yes, LKY is a democrat, but running a country aint’ just following instructions of a manual, he has his own variations of his democracy which had proved to work.
My take is that LKY and his PAP had lead singapore well. If the opposition think they are better than PAP, then the opposition would have won the elections long time ago.
Yes you may add that because of PAP “tyrany” the opposition doesn’t stand a chance. But then again, if PAP was able to beat its predecessor party, it implies that it is not impossible to beat PAP. The only question is, are the oppositions capable enough to beat PAP?
25 Pig Latin // Apr 2, 2007 at 10:26 am
ANUSG, I’ve wandered through Singapore and been called a “bloody ang moh”. I think they were all high on $$$…
Maybe I’m prejudiced, shallow and immature, but I found it amusing you spelt Philippino without a capital. Are those colleagues your “house helpers?”
This is all culturally acceptable right? And it was culturally acceptable for the Brits to go off on colonising jaunts! And ausAid is not an extension of that same principle?!
Jolly good show!
26 roan // Apr 2, 2007 at 10:27 pm
de reasons because u’re called a ‘bloody ang moh’ are more complicated than juz being high on money. bloody grow up. people are people, no one’s perfect, we can only count on values and principles to guide us.
27 Average Singaporean. The Real Stuff. // Apr 2, 2007 at 10:37 pm
I don’t give a damm whether that guy won an Honourable PHD for all I care. Just another bloody piece of paper he gonna hang in his closet.
28 Robert Teh // Apr 3, 2007 at 12:57 am
Singapore could only boast of a system of taxing and recovering all costs which drive up citizens’ costs of living to the roof and its middle class to economy slavery.
The incomes of the middle class have been dropping since the 1980s with many in their late 30s and early 40s joining the rank of unemployed despite all the education.
The economy has been languishing since then and during all the past three deep recessions the government ministers are despairing with no solutions to problems.
Yet, believing that the ministers are the talents and against people’s objections, they continue to raise taxes and recover all possible expenses by charging higher fees from medical to education and health raising the costs of living, forcing the closures of many domestic businesses.
The government is only able to boast its success only after finally the economy recovers from world recovery.
While the rich is getting richer and the ministers and civil servants are getting their higher salaries the people are getting poorer and owing more debts caused by past policy errors on asset enhancements etc.
The people’s rage can be seen in the way they reacted to NKF wrong doings supported by ministers and higher authorities.
Canberra does not know enough of such facts when it decided to award the mm of the honorable degree.
The University should have done more researches by reading postings in sgforums and youngpap forums.
29 anon // Apr 3, 2007 at 7:45 am
Making a country safe and clean and prosperous is only one part of the job description of a nation’s leaders. They must also make their nation free and open.
As long as Singapore is still under an oppressive system, the advances that Singaporean has made over the past decades must be ignored.
30 nganadeeleg // Apr 3, 2007 at 10:38 am
Anon said: “Making a country safe and clean and prosperous is only one part of the job description of a nation’s leaders. They must also make their nation free and open.”
Sometimes there is a trade off (especially between safe, and free & open).
One of the ways I rate countries is to consider the chances of ordinary citizens being discrminated against & wrongly jailed - particularly minorities and people of a lower socia-economic status (not necessary political activists).
The Singapore incarceration rates are high by asian standards, but are still just over half that of the leader of the “free” world.
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/rel/icps/world-prison-population-list-2005.pdf
Also note that both countries carry out executions.
31 Casserole of my life » Why I still like it here in Singgieland // Apr 3, 2007 at 12:55 pm
[...] I received a tag from Esperance about the one thing I like about my country. Interesting because I have been thinking about this the past few days and this morning in particular, especially after reading about how some people are saying that life in Singapore is just like George Owell’s “Animal Farm” here. [...]
32 Chin Sheng // Apr 3, 2007 at 1:39 pm
You might as well as ignore everything.
Singapore in the 50’s or 60’s could be said to be free and open. But it is also the time when we had violent riots, political instability and our livelihood is a problem as well. We had no resources except for manpower and a good geographical location. Even then, Malaysia or Indonesia have much more manpower and possess the same good location as we do. So to me, it is quite a feat for Singapore to progress to what it is today. I think most of Singapore success is due to Lee Kuan Yew and I respect him for that. But of course, it would be a different story about him getting a doctorate in ANU.
33 Edwin LEE // Apr 13, 2007 at 2:51 pm
I think LEE Kuan Yew is one of the greatest political leader to be respected in the whole world. Just look at the leaders of other countries. They all involved in some kind of corruption, sex scandals, cruelty etc, Lee Kuan Yew is the only one who can stand tall among them. I love LEE Kuan Yew! He is great! He deserves more than a Doctorate Degree from the world!
34 Young Labor Left » Blog Archive » YLL in the media // Apr 15, 2007 at 5:04 pm
[...] this event and kicking up a fuss over this issue such as Andrew Walker of RSPAS (great pics on his blog). Thanks also to the Singapore Democratic Party and Singabloodypore for putting the word out in [...]
35 sg gal // Apr 20, 2007 at 2:43 am
well, i saw the news and it was really shocking…
please allow me to explain why LKY was a “tyrant”. During his regime, Singapore was NOT A SAFE COUNTRY.. there are riots (malaysia + singapore), strike, communism threat, british control, starvation, economy unrest, etc etc… in order for this country to survive, the only way out is to have a well organized government… there is NO democracy at that point of time… do you want a communism country or a strict ruler who can lead well? and furthermore, he does not really rule singapore as prime minister for so many years, he should not be blamed primarily for the current affairs of singapore..
protests in singapore is against the law.
also, we voted for PAP not because that he forces us, but there is no competitive opposition TEAM. pardon me for saying… because PAP had be active for so long and maintained a good record.. some opposition members are good too and PAP does not object to that.
Chee, has far as i can remember, uses oppose PAP tactics only, I don’t even know what are his plans for future singapore at all..
36 Gavin Staples // Jun 20, 2007 at 6:27 am
This rabble are just complete low life.
perhaps they ought to look at some history books and see how Lee Kuan YeW saved Singapore from becoming the Cuba of South East Asia.
If Singapore had gone like Cuba then most of this protesting rabble would not even be in higher education.
As to the Singaporean overseas students - that lot would be in factories and not enjoying a nice well funded higher education.
Isn’t it just typical that the economic strength of Singapore is not even acknowledged by this type of low life rabble.
37 freelancer // Jul 8, 2007 at 9:57 pm
Hi, I had been to the SG few time. It is a more like a big shopping Mall. It is amazing how the country had developed. Maybe Lee Kuan did a good job in building the country.
It is obvious that the people in SG are quite backward even though their country had paced in development - ppl in their are total aliens to the human race, lack of humor, do not know how to continue a decent communication … more like robots pre-programmed, compared to the japanese, which i found more social.
It is noticeable that the middle class are not very much satisfied, the cab drivers often are dissatisfied and talk about unable to cope up with the high prices and taxes.
Overall i think SG is a good place to do business, no the best place to have fun.
38 is this necessary? // Aug 8, 2007 at 12:16 pm
this is still on-going?? goodness…we all know how well each of the 2 countries are, racists, democratic or otherwise & if we are well-travelled between the 2 countries.
all i have to say is, singaporeans are not as laid back as the aussies. nothing bad about that but i certainly do not like to be called laid back aka lazy, slow poke etc etc for nothing. haha!
39 Forgethis // Oct 1, 2007 at 7:37 pm
Take a look at Mentalley for a take on the recent IHT interview with LKY
40 por2fino // Nov 8, 2007 at 7:20 pm
Here’s something nice about Singapore!
http://thislittlereddot.blogspot.com/2005/09/guess-who-watches-over-us-citizens.html
41 Singaporean2008 // Mar 5, 2008 at 1:33 pm
The way some comments decribe Lee is somewhat the language used on true dictors in the world we live in such as Fidel Castro, Kim jong il and propably the late Marcos of Phillipines. Please…. some of the most commonly argued topics in Singapore is the obesity of our children and the stress they get from their over emphasised education.
As for the middle class Singaporeans, taxi drivers n such, $$ will never be enough, no matter which society that adopts capitalism. Look at the UK, governement welfare schemes proved to be unsustainable even with the rich wealth inherited through to the great Victorian age, and needed the iron lady Margret Thatcher to save them. Wait… but while saving them she created a huge gap in the economy of the UK. I see Rolls Royce zooming pass the streets of London, with beggars (British citizens) staring blankly as it goes by. Gladly we dont have that in Singapore and why? Thanks to Lee and his old guards.
Well, not awarding him an honory award is creditable if the Dons and directors of ANU feel that he doesnt deserve it, Margret and Tony Blair were refused honory from their own University Oxford. Oh wait… Cambridge did not reject LEe…. ANU is better in human rights research and Asian political science than Cambridge???
Leave a Comment