Air Disaster - "An Airbus plane operated by Lufthansa's Germanwings budget airline crashed in southern France on Tuesday en route from Barcelona to Duesseldorf, police and aviation officials said. French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said he understood between 142 and 150 people were on board and feared dead. "The cause is at present unknown," he told reporters."
Condolences to the families and friends of the passengers and crews on board this crashed plane. Sad!
"Lee Kuan Yew’s Mixed Legacy in Singapore - New York Times
Mr. Lee did not deny these tactics and, indeed, reveled in them. “Nobody doubts that if you take me on, I will put on knuckle-dusters and catch you in a cul-de-sac,” he said in 1994. And that was after he had ostensibly stepped aside as prime minister to become senior minister, a position from which he continued to exercise significant influence.
People on the receiving end of those dirty tricks like the opposition politicians J.B. Jeyaretnam and Chee Soon Juan were ruined financially after losing defamation suits brought by Mr. Lee and his family.
By the standards of Southeast Asian autocrats, Mr. Lee was hardly a tyrant. He did not brutalize and impoverish his country, unlike military leaders in Myanmar and Cambodia. And he has been far more successful at turning Singapore into a developed nation than other strongmen in neighboring Malaysia and Indonesia.
Nevertheless, he and his protégés in the ruling People’s Action Party — including Lee Hsien Loong, his eldest son and the current prime minister — maintained tight control over politics and speech long after other fast-growing Asian nations like South Korea and Taiwan became competitive democracies, and long after Singapore had achieved the kind of prosperity that Mr. Lee had cited as a reason to limit free expression and multiparty democracy.
If there ever was a moment for Singapore to embrace democratic principles fully, it is at hand. The country’s 5.6 million people appear to be increasingly unhappy with one-party rule and growing income inequality. In an election in 2011, despite formidable obstacles, opposition parties got 40 percent of the vote, though a much smaller share of seats in Parliament. And, in recent years, poorly paid migrant workers from China and South Asia have held protests and, in late 2013, rioted in the streets.
As Singapore reflects on Mr. Lee’s legacy, in seven days of national mourning, many people will focus on the country’s economic growth under his rule. But a leader’s accomplishments should not be measured by material achievements alone. The next generation of leaders should make Singapore a political model, not just an economic one."
Well, NY Times and Mr Lee are no strangers to each other. They had crossed swords a few times and some of NT Times writers/journalists suffered a few black eyes going toe-to-toe with Mr Lee. So, it is not surprising that it has some reservation with ONLY looking at the achievements of Mr Lee.
In time like this, if one wanted to keep a balance perspective, perhaps reading about what the detractors have to say about Mr Lee is useful though every reader STILL has to make up their own mind about how to assess this giant of a man! Notes: some sages had said in the past: what others make of you is NONE of your business! :-)
For me:
1. when his political opponents spouted untruth and libellous comments about him and his family, it is only right that the laws be thrown at them. I feel a bit more sympathetic about Mr JBJ's situation while for Dr CSJ, he was simply consumed with overpowering personal feeling about Mr Lee to make good sense. Though it was good to observe that Dr CSJ seems to have learn to speak 'responsibly' without getting into a libel charge recently!;
2. any fair-minded person would have to agree that the end results of his economic policies and strategies, with the support of his cabinet colleagues and the people of the time in Singapore, are spectacular. A miracle no less given the insurmountable odds stacked against Singapore surviving after its separation from Federation of Malaya, let alone being one of the riches countries in the world! So, credits must go to him for sure;
3. as I am not one who idolise anyone, no matter how great or how dear to me, I do not intend to start with Mr Lee too. Suffice to say that he had done his part for Singapore and it is really for the NEXT generation of Singaporeans, and political leaders, to decide, create and maintain a Singapore that they want. A Singapore that may probably be radical different from the one we have today. Whatever it may be, it is NOT just democracy as defined by the NY Times folks but 'democracy that can guarantee the majority of the people can afford to be thinking about politics, arts and social graces without worrying about bread and butter and roofs over one's head.
i.e. we don't want a democracy where you can find the 1st world, the 2nd world and the 3rd world within a city like New York! Can?
Condolences to the families and friends of the passengers and crews on board this crashed plane. Sad!
"Lee Kuan Yew’s Mixed Legacy in Singapore - New York Times
Lee Kuan Yew, the founding leader of Singapore who died Monday morning, was a towering figure on the global stage who helped transform his small city-state into an economic powerhouse. President Obama went so far as to describe Mr. Lee as a “true giant of history.”
But praising Mr. Lee, who was 91, for his vision, as many have, would be incomplete. His leadership undoubtedly helped make Singapore one of the richest and least corrupt countries in the world. His “Singapore model” of economic development inspired other leaders, including Deng Xiaoping of China, toward free-market policies.
He was also an autocrat who silenced critics and sent opposition leaders to jail, suppressing dissent and intimidating the press.
He was also an autocrat who silenced critics and sent opposition leaders to jail, suppressing dissent and intimidating the press.
Mr. Lee did not deny these tactics and, indeed, reveled in them. “Nobody doubts that if you take me on, I will put on knuckle-dusters and catch you in a cul-de-sac,” he said in 1994. And that was after he had ostensibly stepped aside as prime minister to become senior minister, a position from which he continued to exercise significant influence.
People on the receiving end of those dirty tricks like the opposition politicians J.B. Jeyaretnam and Chee Soon Juan were ruined financially after losing defamation suits brought by Mr. Lee and his family.
By the standards of Southeast Asian autocrats, Mr. Lee was hardly a tyrant. He did not brutalize and impoverish his country, unlike military leaders in Myanmar and Cambodia. And he has been far more successful at turning Singapore into a developed nation than other strongmen in neighboring Malaysia and Indonesia.
Nevertheless, he and his protégés in the ruling People’s Action Party — including Lee Hsien Loong, his eldest son and the current prime minister — maintained tight control over politics and speech long after other fast-growing Asian nations like South Korea and Taiwan became competitive democracies, and long after Singapore had achieved the kind of prosperity that Mr. Lee had cited as a reason to limit free expression and multiparty democracy.
If there ever was a moment for Singapore to embrace democratic principles fully, it is at hand. The country’s 5.6 million people appear to be increasingly unhappy with one-party rule and growing income inequality. In an election in 2011, despite formidable obstacles, opposition parties got 40 percent of the vote, though a much smaller share of seats in Parliament. And, in recent years, poorly paid migrant workers from China and South Asia have held protests and, in late 2013, rioted in the streets.
As Singapore reflects on Mr. Lee’s legacy, in seven days of national mourning, many people will focus on the country’s economic growth under his rule. But a leader’s accomplishments should not be measured by material achievements alone. The next generation of leaders should make Singapore a political model, not just an economic one."
Well, NY Times and Mr Lee are no strangers to each other. They had crossed swords a few times and some of NT Times writers/journalists suffered a few black eyes going toe-to-toe with Mr Lee. So, it is not surprising that it has some reservation with ONLY looking at the achievements of Mr Lee.
In time like this, if one wanted to keep a balance perspective, perhaps reading about what the detractors have to say about Mr Lee is useful though every reader STILL has to make up their own mind about how to assess this giant of a man! Notes: some sages had said in the past: what others make of you is NONE of your business! :-)
For me:
1. when his political opponents spouted untruth and libellous comments about him and his family, it is only right that the laws be thrown at them. I feel a bit more sympathetic about Mr JBJ's situation while for Dr CSJ, he was simply consumed with overpowering personal feeling about Mr Lee to make good sense. Though it was good to observe that Dr CSJ seems to have learn to speak 'responsibly' without getting into a libel charge recently!;
2. any fair-minded person would have to agree that the end results of his economic policies and strategies, with the support of his cabinet colleagues and the people of the time in Singapore, are spectacular. A miracle no less given the insurmountable odds stacked against Singapore surviving after its separation from Federation of Malaya, let alone being one of the riches countries in the world! So, credits must go to him for sure;
3. as I am not one who idolise anyone, no matter how great or how dear to me, I do not intend to start with Mr Lee too. Suffice to say that he had done his part for Singapore and it is really for the NEXT generation of Singaporeans, and political leaders, to decide, create and maintain a Singapore that they want. A Singapore that may probably be radical different from the one we have today. Whatever it may be, it is NOT just democracy as defined by the NY Times folks but 'democracy that can guarantee the majority of the people can afford to be thinking about politics, arts and social graces without worrying about bread and butter and roofs over one's head.
i.e. we don't want a democracy where you can find the 1st world, the 2nd world and the 3rd world within a city like New York! Can?
No comments:
Post a Comment