Woken Up

Phew, it's a heck of a long time since I put anything here. As you can see, new year - new template design.

The major event of this year has to be my getting posted to Nanyang Junior College. This is where I will spend two years (hopefully only two) of university preparation. I must say I have no regrets putting this institution as the first choice.

1. Mr Kwek
What better way to start tertiary education than to have the school principal pat your back as you enter the school. Mr Kwek was also the principal of Anderson Secondary School in the early '90s and under his leadership, the school has made a giant leap forward, made obvious by its achievement as the "Best Neighbourhood School" in 1992, awarded by The Straits Times. If I'm not mistaken, it was he who convinced Mrs Chong, my Math teacher in secondary school to get an MSG of 1.0 for Maths, which materialised.

What makes Mr Kwek so adored by many, I think, is through his straightforward-ness and friendly demeanour. We have a strong sense of security being in NY, thanks to his repeated calls to "find him in the General Office if you have no money because nobody should be deprived of education." He is a principal who truly put the interests of his students first. He is one in a million.

2. O.G.
Imagine 900 people from 100 secondary schools converging to bring a school hall down. That's exactly what happened.

Across the causeway

Why is merger and separation removed from the social studies syllabus, I wonder.

However, after reading a few books on the above, it becomes obvious that the above matter is simply too controversial. I am certain that even till today, academics still cannot reach a "net" agreement on why we left or even joined Malaysia.

SEPARATION

We are taught, or if not, have the impression that separation was due to difficult differences, mostly on domestic issues. For one, the promised common market never did happen.

However, this Malay book by Mustapa Mohamed, titled "Kemelut Politik Melayu" said that Tunku Abdul Rahman "sacked" Singapore out of Malaysia in order to protect Malaysia interest. Of course, we do know that Lee Kuan Yew did call for a "Malaysian Malaysia" rather than a "Malay Malaysia".

GOOD VS BAD

Another source of headache is the contention over who was the protagonist or antagonist in this matter. Either  party seem to always be antagonising the other.

Lee Kuan Yew mentioned in his memoirs of the presence of "Malay Ultras" in UMNO and the central government. One of these ultras include former PM Dr Mahathir. Conversely, Malaysian minds tend to think of the PAP as exclusively Chinese and a group of extremists who threaten to make torn the socio-political fabric of Malaysia. 

As a Singaporean, I am the worst person to soberly and objectively make sense of the situation then.

SS
These complications, on the other hand, can actually be made a reason for this topic to be reintroduced in the Social Studies syllabus. We need to let students appreciate these unique, interesting and abstract kinds of relations. Then, we get to groom young openminds to be critical yet objective. Coupled with sensitivity to the world around them, we get to build a generation of youth who are discerning and active in this country's workings.

Piece of my mind

If you do what your peers do, you will get the same results as them. To be better, you need to do more.

However, I believe one can work in a smarter manner, more efficiently - even if this means NOT doing certain "things" which your peers do.

These things include going to the movies, hanging out, etc.

Gene

I recall Mr Kamal's "extra-extra" lesson with the DHS HC team that hard work is in the DNA of Singaporeans. 

Founding

Our forefathers are not from this land. They migrated from all over Asia to Singapore in search of wealth and a spur to start earn livelihood. The Chinese, for example, came from the Southern parts of China, considered the "short Chinese" back in their homeland. While conditions at home were atrocious, the conditions of their journey to Singapore was no better, so as were their early days in Singapore. And so they worked as coolies, Samsui women and such. Some learnt their trades very well to become successful merchants, with the dividends to contribute to their homeland and local community. 

Singapore was never meant to be called home by these peoples. Singapore was merely a place to bag cash and send home, where they belong. However, only time understands love, hence, people become attached to this island. They gave birth to a new generation. 

Occupation

The Japanese Occupation purged the community of anti-Japanese sentiments. This is the period of time where we hear of anecdotes of how families and friends of different origins cooperate harmoniously to resist, or at least, to survive torment. Clearly, to live through severe rule requires strength and courage. In other word, survival of the fittest. 

Merdeka

Singapore was created with little resources given to capitalise on. Here, hard work occurs across all levels of society. As the individual, one had to be sure to be hardworking in order to raise their children, accompanied by sufficient faith to the government to lead them. At the government level, the government had to be adamant to do what others won't and fear in order to serve the people's interest, including allowing the entrance of MNCs. 

21st Century

For new citizens or even PRs, this kind of hereditary characteristic is even more prevalent. In spite of the challenges of living in an expensive city, the fact that one can still procreate and educate them well is very telling of their effort. 

Think about it.

On Geng

I am very disturbed by the surge of cases of aggression between and among secret societies. I ever witnessed a gang riot before, around 50 people beating up one poor chap with guitars, chairs, poles and such. 

It was almost like blitzkrieg, out of the blue, these young people dressed in black came out from the corners of HDB void decks to perform the deed. I believe this was due to an internal difference between the chap and the interests of the society. However, let me tell you the most disturbing part. This incident happened at a very busy time at a very busy T-junction. It was around 7pm, where workers head home from town at a crossing frequently used. It seemed to me that the youth involved were unperturbed by their surroundings! 

Who says a riot can happen only at night in the most secluded of places? In full view of passers-by, this shocking thing happened! I can do nothing but only to punch 999 on my Samsung Corby Pro. (Luckily the touchscreen never break)

This incident brings me to my two-cents worth (whatever this really means): 

1. Are gangs awesome?

My father often tell me how cowardly gang members are today relative to the gangs during the kampong days. Murder was sort of a norm in the Sembawang kampongs. It's members are truly loyal and daring and will contribute with their lives. Each member can act alone and a leader, so to speak, in his own right. This is in contrast with the characteristic of gangsters today who find strength in numbers. 

 Also, my mother recalled how the gangsters in the past would tell residents in the neighbourhoods in Whampoa, where my late grandmother lived, to shut their doors before a gang fight was to occur. In addition, my father told me that youth involved in criminal activities in the past cause problems only to themselves  and society but never to their own families. 

They did not want to be a headache to their parents and would often leave the household to avoid being an unworthy liability. Needless to say, at least gangsters in the past were more dignified in behaviour and strive to be a problem only to their foes. Unlike today, where young gangsters create problems with everybody, including their family. They still depend on their parents for money, carry out aggression in public places, as seen in Downtown East, disrupting everbody's life. 

To aggravate matters, such occurrences are due to the most mundane of issues, like a "staring incident". Clearly, these people should rethink the meaning of joining a gang.

2. Preventive Measures

It is known that there is a rule that teenagers are not to be found unaccompanied beyond 11pm, or their identification papers would be detained and can only be claimed at the police station after questioning. Apart from the inconvenience such a measure would cause for a very busy teenager like me, I question its effectiveness. As mentioned above, gang aggression happened a number of times in the most public of places. One in very popular Downtown East, the other at a very busy junction. Also, note the timing, there were many, especially, shopkeepers, who witnessed the stabbing, even more prevalent was the Yishun incident at the junction. 

How would stopping teenagers at night alleviate the problem? How would increasing frequency of patrols in secluded hotspots help? These two incidents happened in illumination, in full view of the public. Poor me. It's now so difficult to return home late with peace of mind after hours at school, or after a concert, or after a late-night movie with friends! While I am STUDYING in the DAYTIME, these buggers make curry of some poor fellas... Unfair sia!
 

What we need are smarter solutions to tackle the problem at its root. I wonder if there are intense intelligence systems. Perhaps employing informants? Also, we can get teachers to appreciate the inner workings of secret societies, even if this means working with their students who are members. 

Trial mobile post

woohoo... my first mobile blog post!

The Cuban Missiles and the Truth

Just a little bit of sound bites from my head before I start off…

We must not only thank John F. Kennedy for ensuring our very existence today. We owe our existence today to the people who got him into office. Imagine what it’ll be like if we have a monkey like George Bush governing USA at such a critical moment of the history of mankind. We must thank the Americans who voted for him with wisdom, and his colleagues for adequate lobbying. But such a notion lead me to wonder - since the fate of the world seems to lie in the hands of the one man, why not let the world elect the President of the United States?

I know that such a statement seems naïve, but I think its possibility should not be denied. Let’s look at Thirteen Days.

The Actual:




The Movie:

The parties involved were the USA, USSR, Cuba and their respective allies. How must have the people of Cuba felt? Maybe on the façade depicted by Castro’s government, the Cubans may show anti-America sentiments as a possible invasion was supposedly an invasion of Cuban pride and sovereignty. However I am certain during those moments, they were scared the hell out of their pants. Why don’t we give them a say in American politics? After all, Latin America was an American backyard, where the US can eat, spit and sh**. Ever heard of the power of the people? If the local government wouldn’t grant them security, let’s bring it to their doorstep (literally) and let them cast a vote for the American leadership. They were just LUCKY the Americans voted for the best choice.  In fact, with the RAW power of the people, the world would be peaceful then and today.

Now, finally, I shall move on to making tough decisions.

John Kennedy was in a very interesting position. I vividly remember the scenes of him being in the Oval Office with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Secretary Robert McNamara, Ambassador Adlai Stevenson and Attorney-General Robert Kennedy.

It seemed that all odds were against the practice of his judgement and conscience. More so, when taking into account the presence of the most reliable sources of advice he had, all around him. These people are battle-hardened and heavily decorated on their torso. In contrary, Kennedy was merely a civilian authority who took the oath of office barely four years before. Not only was he viewed as weak by Secretary Khrushchev, his own people had the same inclination to do so. 

After all, the only responsible and sensible thing for a president to do in such a circumstance was to heed the advice of his generals. After all, it would be responsible and heroic of him to avoid “another Munich”. Robert McNamara’s and Adlai Stevenson’s presence was merely one of an auxiliary nature but fortunately, JFK recognised the value of ALL of his people’s ideas. Henceforth, McNamara’s proposal for a naval blockade on Cuba and diplomacy through the UN as put forward by Stevenson was implemented to result in a partial success, I would say. 

This brings me on my idea of truth. What is Truth? To me, it is merely a perception. Say, a pencil is 15cm. Yes, the truth in this statement can be proved using reason. Maybe, we measure by using a ruler. But to what extent can a statement be proved to be the truth. Isn’t it merely by scrutiny, which is by the way, flawed in many ways (because it’s human)? In human talk, the truth is so only when justified by logic and usually, by quantifiable means. Hence, Truth is a perception. NOBODY KNOWS THE TRUTH except the Divine authority.

Poor Kennedy. He has the world’s best military minds at his disposal feeding him with calls for nuclear Armageddon. What made him stop? Was it a deep compassion for mankind? I think so. By logic, Moscow or Cuba should disappear from the world map. But for he is a human who loves another, he saved the nuking.

In other words, Kennedy made his tough decision using his heart! By logic, we all would have disintegrated almost 50 years ago. But because of the heart we didn’t cease to exist.

If only all rulers were like that.