Am I surprised at all?

One view from Taiwan: They're good collectively, but individually they're lost. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Apr 23, 2006

SINGAPOREANS are affluent, educated, but are they really survival smart?
In a world of harsher living, this question that never dies has again grabbed the public focus here with a general election less than two weeks away.

At the core of the debate: Without natural resources, the Singaporean increasingly has to depend on his own guile, not only a good education, to survive; has he got it?

It’s not a new debate. In the past decade, the Education Ministry has changed the education system to teach independent thinking and entrepreneurship to correct some fundamental defects in the average worker.

The average Singaporean is good at academic studies and works hard, but falls short on individual initiative and streetwise qualities, relying too much on the government for help.

Revisiting the debate is controversial Taiwan lawmaker Li Ao, who recently ranked Singaporeans rather lower in natural intelligence to the people in Taiwan and Hong Kong.

“Taiwanese are scoundrels, but lovable, Hong Kong people are craftier, (Chinese mainlanders are unfathomable) and Singaporeans are stupider,” he said, adding that it is partially due to genetics.

The original migrants who came here from China were of “poor stock”.

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew once told Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping that the ethnic Chinese in Singapore were descendants of illiterate coolies and farmers from southern Fujian.

This had made them less able than the people of Hong Kong or Taiwan, whose ancestors were mainly businessman or technocrats.

Singaporeans could function well only as a group, not as individuals, Li told a Chinese newspaper. They would never be non-conformist or stand out above the crowd.

“If you ask me, other than Lee Kuan Yew, his son Hsien Loong, politicians aside, I can only think of a cute girl, (pop star) Stephanie Sun, there aren’t many other outstanding people. The impression that I get (of normal Singaporeans) is stupid”.

Singapore’s system, Li said, stemmed from the ancient Chinese political philosophy of legalism, which emphasised on the rule of law.

“Singaporeans do not break rules, but they also do not stand out,” he said in Mandarin.

He said Lee Kuan Yew had wanted to build a British-style democracy but because the people were not up to scratch, they only knew how to toe the line.

His report card on Singapore has shaken up the people at a time when election fever is rising, indirectly touching on a campaign issue – government control on society.

Predictably, Singaporeans have reacted angrily to the terms “stupid” and “poor genes”, dismissing them as a popularity stunt that takes no account of their successful, modern achievements.

This “genetic weakness” doesn’t aptly describe today’s diverse, more mature and worldly-wise generation.

But some critics say there is some truth in what Li said, but insist that the fault lies not in genes, but in years of political and social conditioning by a top-down government.

One writer however, said: “A better word to describe the Singaporean is naïve, which comes about because of a paternalistic and rather efficient government.

"Everything is so structured and laid-out that the people do not need to fight for a living, blunting their ability to compete. They’re lulled into thinking the outside world also behave like Singapore.”

Businessmen from Taiwan and Hong Kong are more alert to opportunities, as well as cheats, compared to even the capable Singaporeans, whose preoccupation is getting a high salary.

They know where to take the short cuts when faced with a problem; Singaporeans will just sit and wait for better days.

Under the Lee Kuan Yew leadership, the collective good comes before the individual, so the republic’s success is a “collective creation”, Li added.

The individual is often lost on his own. It has led some critics to ask whether the Singaporean has an original viewpoint of his own beyond what the government says.

“I won’t say we are stupid. We are just not daring and street-smart,” commented a Singaporean studying abroad.

In his university, other Asian students would walk up to the microphone and talk about some cause, not the Singaporeans, he said.

Li Ao is not alone in his views. Singaporean columnist Wong Lung Hsiang said it reflected what he heard in China that “Taiwanese are shameless, Hong Kongers are heartless, Singaporeans are ignorant”.

In Greater China, law-abiding Singaporeans have long been seen as gullible.

In a commentary in November last year, Wong advised Singaporeans to treasure their own system at home, “but when you are away, you should know how to adapt to others”.

What Chinese Singaporeans have inherited from their grandparents is peasant culture, explained “peasant judge” online.

“Peasants don’t care for much else except a bowl of rice on the table, a roof over their heads, and the chance to go out to the rice fields to do the daily back-breaking chores day in day out.”

Politics, too, is affected. Almost everyone goes to the polls with his rice-bowl in mind.

It occupies the citizen’s mind a lot more than his counterparts in other countries, who are more passionate about issues like justice and equality.

“Just imagine, well-informed Singaporeans advocating a one-party rule, saying it is good for the future. If this is not stupidity, what is?’ asked redbean.

This could be a recipe for future trouble should a foreign predator one day use this character weakness to take over the country.

All he needs to do to retain the people’s compliance is by keeping their stomach full and their mind empty.

(This first appeared in The Sunday Star, Apr 23, 2006).

Gosh, thanks to Li Ao for pointing out the politically incorrect but obvious fact. Singaporeans are naive and stupid. By stupid I do not mean low IQ, but the inability to fend for themselves, independent of the government. Sure, it's normal for people to complain about the government's paternalistic policies, but what have these very people done about that?

Are they willing to risk their livelihood making their voices heard? If not, are they willing to sacrifice their high standard of living, lower their social status and move to a place where they can be free? Yes, some people did that by emigrating to cheaper places or working around limitations, but the majority of them are still grabbing greedily on their current jobs, sitting on their asses, and complaining about the injustice done on them by the government.

I do not believe that anyone can force others to do anything. I also do not believe that people need a lot of money to live, you just need to find a cheaper place. Singaporeans are very rich, spoilt and sheltered, compared to many other people.

People are responsible in living their life, and each person has his preference in the way he lives his life. If you're unhappy, go to a country that jives with your values. But be prepared to be more streetsmart, for other places (aka the real world) are not like your perfect little heaven.

You may see corrupt governments, racial favoritism, unsafe, dirty streets, sucky transportation systems, among other social ills. Oh yeah, you'd also need to think of what you want to do with your life, coz "lowpay, mediocre" governments do not throw money into a certain fields and madly encourage people to do that. They also do not stream your kids into Express, Normal or Technical schools, so you have to choose a school for them on your own. Oh well, generally they do not really intefere with your personal life, you just need to do everything on your own and avoid direct interaction with the government, understand?

Do these scare the shit out of you already? Omg, the real world is so risky and terrifying! There you go, if you are unwilling to part with your wealth, give up the convenience, and learn to adapt to new environments, you've made your choice. Remember, the choice is yours, so stop complaining already!!

But sigh, stomach full, mind empty, isn't that something like robots? Isn't it the beginning of the end if people lose the very essense that makes them human?