What do you think?
Rate this book
Living with Myths in Singapore
Singapore is a mythic nation, where our ‘reality’ and ‘common sense’ are conditioned by a group of influential myths. Our main myths are examined in this collection of essays and thoughts on the social ramifications of myth-making: The Singapore Story (that our nation has a singular story), From Third World to First (our story of success), Vulnerability and Faultlines (the threats we still face despite success) and A Deficient People (the threats exist because people remain immature).
Myths build social consensus but also marginalise crucial stories, perspectives and possibilities that don’t fit the main narrative. Should we teach our students to be good citizens by telling them one unifying narrative of Singapore, or many varied narratives? Have we always said no to social welfare, or to the casino? Is liberal democracy necessarily a threat to social stability? Have Singaporeans historically been apathetic, ignorant or irrational?
The contributors to this book believe that knowing, and debating, how we live with myths will help us to better understand Singapore today, and to imagine its future. Here they share the robust discussions and debates which took place from 2014 to 2015 even as Singapore celebrated 50 years of full independence.
Myths build social consensus but also marginalise crucial stories, perspectives and possibilities that don’t fit the main narrative. Should we teach our students to be good citizens by telling them one unifying narrative of Singapore, or many varied narratives? Have we always said no to social welfare, or to the casino? Is liberal democracy necessarily a threat to social stability? Have Singaporeans historically been apathetic, ignorant or irrational?
The contributors to this book believe that knowing, and debating, how we live with myths will help us to better understand Singapore today, and to imagine its future. Here they share the robust discussions and debates which took place from 2014 to 2015 even as Singapore celebrated 50 years of full independence.
326 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 2017
26 people are currently reading
327 people want to read
About the author
Loh Kah Seng
10 books3 followersLoh Kah Seng is an Assistant Professor at the Institute for East Asian Studies, Sogang University, South Korea. His research investigates the transnational and social history of Singapore and Southeast Asia after the Second World War. Loh is author or editor of six books, including Squatters into Citizens: The 1961 Bukit Ho Swee Fire and The Making of Modern Singapore (NUS Press & ASAA, 2013).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
March 10, 2020
Edit on 9 March 2020
- I hosted a book discussion on 8 March with two friends and we picked three essays from Living with Myths to discuss: (1) Social Welfare in Singapore: Myth and History, (2) Rethinking Race: Beyond the CMIO Categorisations, and (3) Apathy, or How History is Written by Elites.
Chapter 8 - Social Welfare in Singapore: Myth and History
The essay detailed the metamorphosis of social welfare in Singapore from its historical colonial roots, to the changes made informed by the political decisions of the PAP in the 1960s, up to present day. Lee Kuan Yew famously set out to make Singapore a 'fair, not welfare' state, claiming that welfare made citizens reliant and dependent on the state for handouts, but before him, social welfare post-war was about social justice and equal opportunities.
We discussed the myth of self-reliance and how we are glad that it is increasingly being brought into light. We talked about how insidious and deeply entrenched the idea of self-reliance is - how it makes welfare seem like an undeserved benefit handed out by the benevolent, paternal state, as opposed to a basic human right, and how that further perpetuates inequality. We spoke about how scarily pervasive myths are and how perceptions of an issue can actually make sense within the parameters of the myth. For example, it would logically follow that people who use welfare services are lazy and dependent under the myth of self-reliance.
Chapter 15 - Rethinking Race: Beyond the CMIO Categorisations
This essay talks about how 'race' permeates life in Singapore through national policies and how, through a critical lens, we can see how our understanding and usage of 'race' leads to different issues. 'Race' is ascribed to each resident in Singapore and laws are instituted based on your ascribed 'race', such as in areas of housing and education. The myths are that we are a racially harmonious country and that matters involving race (and religion) is 'sensitive' and justifies heavy state intervention in terms of policies and mediating conversation around 'race', as well as the idea that the state is the sole steward of 'race' categories and other racial matters.
We found it troubling that it is of majority view here that 'race' is rooted in biological or some other sort of fact, as with its stereotypes. The 1964 Race Riots is used to demonstrate what may 'naturally' happen (because of naturally occurring biological and just-as-it-is differences between races) when we try to talk about divisive issues such as race and religion, and such, the state uses it to justify the silencing of discourse and a critical understanding of structural racism. We can't talk about racism if we can't talk about race. Couple times now, government officials have stated that Singapore isn't ready to talk about race while simultaneously erasing civil discourse. Several recent incidences have already occurred where racism from the majority race is dismissed as a non-event while minorities speaking up about racism has been condemned by the state as dredging up 'sensitive issues' and worse, warranted investigations, takedowns, and arrests.
Something I learned from the discussion is how CMIO developed throughout history, and how people who are Arabs, Jewish, and Peranakan have had their cultures and communities dissipated through the limiting CMIO categorisation.
Chapter 20 - Apathy, or How History is Written by Elites
This chapter talked about how the state uses the myth of an apathetic population to justify its heavy handedness on the lives of Singaporeans, and naturalised the people's reliance on the state instead of each other and our communities. This was particularly salient in discourse during the period of Singapore's transition from a colony to a nation. Communities living in kampungs were described to be apathetic squatters. I did not even know that squatters, the official term for these communities, was technically not even correct, because they were living legitimately and paying rent, and not squatting on someone else's land. To call these community squatters is yet another disappointing move on the state's part to discredit the voices of these communities and justify their actions.
Politically, this move of squatters to government-approved housing that is paid off in installments through CPF, which one gets through being employed, was key to creating a population of workers.
I find it interesting how these myths creates a sort of conflicting, imbalanced understanding of our relationship with the government and each other. We are used to the government's strong presence in our public and private lives, and we have internalised the message that we are apathetic and reliant on the government, and will always continue to be because we prefer comfort over freedom. Yet we are told to be self-reliant, that welfare breeds laziness, and the Confucius way is to work hard and take care of your elders, not let the state take care of them for you. The myth of meritocracy have us thinking that if you don't succeed it is your fault, because the government has ensured that everyone has a fair starting point. This creates self-blame and stigma when seeking support. But because we are apathetic, it is every person for themselves.
From October 2018:
Great introduction to politics and reflective piece on the unspoken and undiscussed myths in Singapore Society. This is my first foray into politics and I am glad that this book is readable and engaging. It encourages Singaporeans to think about the ideologies that governs the society.
Below are some of my notes and thoughts on certain chapters.
Chapter 13 "Clampdown of the Law Society of Singapore in the 1980s: Myth and Reality"
This chapter is close to my heart because I personally knew one of the lawyers who was passionately involved in championing for the legal rights of the common people. Mr Patrick Seong, my law professor for about a year, initiated the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme in 1984. He also spoke up for laws which he thought would adversely affect the rights of people. In 1984, he proposed to repeal the introduction of minimum sentences for offences and the extension of the length of police investigation from 24 to 48 hours before an accused was charged in court. This was a small part of the political involvements of the Law Society in Singapore back in the 1980s before their activities were clamped down by the government.
He was arrested and detailed without trial under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for alleged involvement in a Marxist Conspiracy.
I never really bothered to be fully involved in class as well. I wasn't a very motivated learner and I regret that, even more so when I'm now, 6 years after my law module, only just learning about the rich political history of Law Society and Mr Patrick.
Chapter 18 "Cosmopolitanism Disposition: Cultivating Affinity Ties"
He warned that this will... threaten the country's longer term sustainability if cosmopolitan Singaporeans treated [Singapore] more like a a 'hotel' and a home to call their own."
I had a revelatory moment when reading this. I remember having conversations with my colleague who was born in Ireland, studied in the UK, and now living in Singapore about which place she identifies with the most, and she said it's simple, she just tells people that she's from Singapore. And again this forces me to examine a very deep and subconscious belief of mine, planted as a seed no doubt by the state and reinforced by my parents, my primary school teachers, and the system, that my home and identity is Singapore. "Don't treat it like a hotel," both PM Goh and my mom would say, but the former about the country, the latter about our family flat.
Some Singaporeans scoff, with some envy and bitterness, fellow citizens who migrate or move away for long, even more so when they come back.
"One of the underlying grouses Singaporeans have towards recent immigrants is they do not remain in Singapore over the long term. In other words, they are not stakeholders in the 'Singapore Story'."
Lots of words have been said about Joseph Schooling, a Singaporean born in Singapore, but spends his whole life in the US and eventually represented Singapore in the Olympics. This clearly shows the Singapore narrative on cosmopolitism. I find the quote above uncomfortably familiar. This is what I'm used to, it having permeated into my life - that we should strive to contribute to the nation, and anyone who doesn't then have no say in the nation.
Not only that, the state tries very hard to keep locals in Singapore. One symbolic example of that is the fact that all Singaporean men have to serve the army by doing reservice once a year until they are about 40-50 years old. You'll be arrested if you don't. And if you're overseas and refuse to come back, you can never step in the country again without being arrested.
I've never thought of moving away, not from my parents nor from the country. And I've been surrounded by plenty of locals who feel the same. But working in an organisation with many who had came from overseas and settled has made me realise that I could do that too. Maybe it's time to shake away that myth.
"In this way, belonging to the nation and national territory is conflated with the idea of birthplace and generational belonging (or autochthony) captured in the phrase, 'local'. Juxtaposed against the image of the local is the figure of the foreigner. Persons considered 'foreign' are to be excluded socially as part of the national community."
Chapter 19 "Myths of Civil Society and its Culture Wars"
"The Singapore government may have been instrumental in transforming the social and cultural fabric of the society. Yet, paradoxically, it consistently strikes to position itself as reflecting what is terms as the 'conservative' community's social values and beliefs... interpreted as 'traditional', 'Asian', and 'family' values which are allegedly timeless, these belief-systems emphasise hierarchy, patriarchy, and heteronormativity. In contrast, the party-state tends to view 'individual rights' as non-Asian, promoted by a small minority of 'Western'-influenced liberals in advocacy groups."
Chapter 23 "Poor people don't like oats either: How Myths about Poverty and Wealth Matter"
"While people who are employed are working outside the home, there are people who are doing housework, running errands, caring for children and the elderly. People doing wage work are highly dependent on people doing unpaid labor. Outside of wage work, a great deal of labor occurs that goes into sustaining meaningful lives and regenerating human societies."
"Dependence is part and parcel of being human."
This chapter is contributed by Teo You Yenn, a great sociologist that taught some of my friends. She recently also published her own book This is What Inequality Looks Like, which I am eager to get my hands on.
Chapter 8 - Social Welfare in Singapore: Myth and History
The essay detailed the metamorphosis of social welfare in Singapore from its historical colonial roots, to the changes made informed by the political decisions of the PAP in the 1960s, up to present day. Lee Kuan Yew famously set out to make Singapore a 'fair, not welfare' state, claiming that welfare made citizens reliant and dependent on the state for handouts, but before him, social welfare post-war was about social justice and equal opportunities.
We discussed the myth of self-reliance and how we are glad that it is increasingly being brought into light. We talked about how insidious and deeply entrenched the idea of self-reliance is - how it makes welfare seem like an undeserved benefit handed out by the benevolent, paternal state, as opposed to a basic human right, and how that further perpetuates inequality. We spoke about how scarily pervasive myths are and how perceptions of an issue can actually make sense within the parameters of the myth. For example, it would logically follow that people who use welfare services are lazy and dependent under the myth of self-reliance.
Chapter 15 - Rethinking Race: Beyond the CMIO Categorisations
This essay talks about how 'race' permeates life in Singapore through national policies and how, through a critical lens, we can see how our understanding and usage of 'race' leads to different issues. 'Race' is ascribed to each resident in Singapore and laws are instituted based on your ascribed 'race', such as in areas of housing and education. The myths are that we are a racially harmonious country and that matters involving race (and religion) is 'sensitive' and justifies heavy state intervention in terms of policies and mediating conversation around 'race', as well as the idea that the state is the sole steward of 'race' categories and other racial matters.
We found it troubling that it is of majority view here that 'race' is rooted in biological or some other sort of fact, as with its stereotypes. The 1964 Race Riots is used to demonstrate what may 'naturally' happen (because of naturally occurring biological and just-as-it-is differences between races) when we try to talk about divisive issues such as race and religion, and such, the state uses it to justify the silencing of discourse and a critical understanding of structural racism. We can't talk about racism if we can't talk about race. Couple times now, government officials have stated that Singapore isn't ready to talk about race while simultaneously erasing civil discourse. Several recent incidences have already occurred where racism from the majority race is dismissed as a non-event while minorities speaking up about racism has been condemned by the state as dredging up 'sensitive issues' and worse, warranted investigations, takedowns, and arrests.
Something I learned from the discussion is how CMIO developed throughout history, and how people who are Arabs, Jewish, and Peranakan have had their cultures and communities dissipated through the limiting CMIO categorisation.
Chapter 20 - Apathy, or How History is Written by Elites
This chapter talked about how the state uses the myth of an apathetic population to justify its heavy handedness on the lives of Singaporeans, and naturalised the people's reliance on the state instead of each other and our communities. This was particularly salient in discourse during the period of Singapore's transition from a colony to a nation. Communities living in kampungs were described to be apathetic squatters. I did not even know that squatters, the official term for these communities, was technically not even correct, because they were living legitimately and paying rent, and not squatting on someone else's land. To call these community squatters is yet another disappointing move on the state's part to discredit the voices of these communities and justify their actions.
Politically, this move of squatters to government-approved housing that is paid off in installments through CPF, which one gets through being employed, was key to creating a population of workers.
I find it interesting how these myths creates a sort of conflicting, imbalanced understanding of our relationship with the government and each other. We are used to the government's strong presence in our public and private lives, and we have internalised the message that we are apathetic and reliant on the government, and will always continue to be because we prefer comfort over freedom. Yet we are told to be self-reliant, that welfare breeds laziness, and the Confucius way is to work hard and take care of your elders, not let the state take care of them for you. The myth of meritocracy have us thinking that if you don't succeed it is your fault, because the government has ensured that everyone has a fair starting point. This creates self-blame and stigma when seeking support. But because we are apathetic, it is every person for themselves.
From October 2018:
Great introduction to politics and reflective piece on the unspoken and undiscussed myths in Singapore Society. This is my first foray into politics and I am glad that this book is readable and engaging. It encourages Singaporeans to think about the ideologies that governs the society.
Below are some of my notes and thoughts on certain chapters.
Chapter 13 "Clampdown of the Law Society of Singapore in the 1980s: Myth and Reality"
This chapter is close to my heart because I personally knew one of the lawyers who was passionately involved in championing for the legal rights of the common people. Mr Patrick Seong, my law professor for about a year, initiated the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme in 1984. He also spoke up for laws which he thought would adversely affect the rights of people. In 1984, he proposed to repeal the introduction of minimum sentences for offences and the extension of the length of police investigation from 24 to 48 hours before an accused was charged in court. This was a small part of the political involvements of the Law Society in Singapore back in the 1980s before their activities were clamped down by the government.
He was arrested and detailed without trial under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for alleged involvement in a Marxist Conspiracy.
I never really bothered to be fully involved in class as well. I wasn't a very motivated learner and I regret that, even more so when I'm now, 6 years after my law module, only just learning about the rich political history of Law Society and Mr Patrick.
Chapter 18 "Cosmopolitanism Disposition: Cultivating Affinity Ties"
He warned that this will... threaten the country's longer term sustainability if cosmopolitan Singaporeans treated [Singapore] more like a a 'hotel' and a home to call their own."
I had a revelatory moment when reading this. I remember having conversations with my colleague who was born in Ireland, studied in the UK, and now living in Singapore about which place she identifies with the most, and she said it's simple, she just tells people that she's from Singapore. And again this forces me to examine a very deep and subconscious belief of mine, planted as a seed no doubt by the state and reinforced by my parents, my primary school teachers, and the system, that my home and identity is Singapore. "Don't treat it like a hotel," both PM Goh and my mom would say, but the former about the country, the latter about our family flat.
Some Singaporeans scoff, with some envy and bitterness, fellow citizens who migrate or move away for long, even more so when they come back.
"One of the underlying grouses Singaporeans have towards recent immigrants is they do not remain in Singapore over the long term. In other words, they are not stakeholders in the 'Singapore Story'."
Lots of words have been said about Joseph Schooling, a Singaporean born in Singapore, but spends his whole life in the US and eventually represented Singapore in the Olympics. This clearly shows the Singapore narrative on cosmopolitism. I find the quote above uncomfortably familiar. This is what I'm used to, it having permeated into my life - that we should strive to contribute to the nation, and anyone who doesn't then have no say in the nation.
Not only that, the state tries very hard to keep locals in Singapore. One symbolic example of that is the fact that all Singaporean men have to serve the army by doing reservice once a year until they are about 40-50 years old. You'll be arrested if you don't. And if you're overseas and refuse to come back, you can never step in the country again without being arrested.
I've never thought of moving away, not from my parents nor from the country. And I've been surrounded by plenty of locals who feel the same. But working in an organisation with many who had came from overseas and settled has made me realise that I could do that too. Maybe it's time to shake away that myth.
"In this way, belonging to the nation and national territory is conflated with the idea of birthplace and generational belonging (or autochthony) captured in the phrase, 'local'. Juxtaposed against the image of the local is the figure of the foreigner. Persons considered 'foreign' are to be excluded socially as part of the national community."
Chapter 19 "Myths of Civil Society and its Culture Wars"
"The Singapore government may have been instrumental in transforming the social and cultural fabric of the society. Yet, paradoxically, it consistently strikes to position itself as reflecting what is terms as the 'conservative' community's social values and beliefs... interpreted as 'traditional', 'Asian', and 'family' values which are allegedly timeless, these belief-systems emphasise hierarchy, patriarchy, and heteronormativity. In contrast, the party-state tends to view 'individual rights' as non-Asian, promoted by a small minority of 'Western'-influenced liberals in advocacy groups."
Chapter 23 "Poor people don't like oats either: How Myths about Poverty and Wealth Matter"
"While people who are employed are working outside the home, there are people who are doing housework, running errands, caring for children and the elderly. People doing wage work are highly dependent on people doing unpaid labor. Outside of wage work, a great deal of labor occurs that goes into sustaining meaningful lives and regenerating human societies."
"Dependence is part and parcel of being human."
This chapter is contributed by Teo You Yenn, a great sociologist that taught some of my friends. She recently also published her own book This is What Inequality Looks Like, which I am eager to get my hands on.
January 11, 2019
I loved the idea of the book, but the essays often either left me wanting more or felt like they lost touch with the 'myth' focus and drifted off to tried and tested critiques of SG sociopolitics. Love the intro, the idea and the opening bits of many of the essays. Just not a book that had essays I'd go back to, and one I'm glad I borrowed rather than bought.
September 13, 2018
Singapore is one of the few nations that has been ruled by a single political party for over 5 decades. The incumbent has managed to neatly and carefully craft a singular narrative that has provided us with a manageable and clean account of the past. While at the same time instilling unfounded fears of being a ‘vulnerable’ nation that lacks the historical maturity nor resources to confront contentious issues or the mythical ‘racial riots’ that were in fact disputed by numerous academics. While this book aims to challenge the half-truths or myths that we grew up to believe, I must emphasize that it does not attempt to impose an ‘alternative’ tale. Nonetheless, it is important to challenge the tales we were taught, in order to see which were written and told for political control and reasons. Like Orwell said, “who controls the past controls the future”. Essays range from the myth of poverty, “asian values”, “third world to first”, and many more! 💕
.
On the other hand, one thing that I found disappointing was the lack of diversity in the ethnicity of the writers, there were only 3 writers who were POC. And the essay touching on the myth of multiculturalism, or diversity was written by a Chinese (the majority ethnic group) person whose writing fell incredibly short. It was essentially a cop out that hardly tackled the failures of multiculturalism that we experience here. Nor did the person call out those who continuously and unconsciously perpetuate the inherent and systemic racism that minorities face every day. For context, since most of my followers are not Singaporeans, the majority racial group here is Chinese and they do enjoy privilege that is often unquestioned, unchallenged and unacknowledged (think white privilege). Minorities comprise about 30% of the population. It was incredibly disappointing and I suggest skipping the essay, read Budi Kritik instead for a more thorough discussion on race and Chinese privilege.
.
On the other hand, one thing that I found disappointing was the lack of diversity in the ethnicity of the writers, there were only 3 writers who were POC. And the essay touching on the myth of multiculturalism, or diversity was written by a Chinese (the majority ethnic group) person whose writing fell incredibly short. It was essentially a cop out that hardly tackled the failures of multiculturalism that we experience here. Nor did the person call out those who continuously and unconsciously perpetuate the inherent and systemic racism that minorities face every day. For context, since most of my followers are not Singaporeans, the majority racial group here is Chinese and they do enjoy privilege that is often unquestioned, unchallenged and unacknowledged (think white privilege). Minorities comprise about 30% of the population. It was incredibly disappointing and I suggest skipping the essay, read Budi Kritik instead for a more thorough discussion on race and Chinese privilege.
June 10, 2019
As a collection of essays based on a series of lectures, the book suffers from the inevitable unevenness in research & writing quality of the different contributors. The (short) essay/lecture format also results in a lack of depth in each subject matter it touches on. However, that said, it does provides a good introduction and overview to a varied topics of interest to the country's recent past and current political and social/cultural landscape.
May 30, 2020
Pleasantly surprised by how much I’ve enjoyed this book, because of how much I had learnt from it. Self identifying as politically apathetic (because I fear trouble), the various essays in this one had shown me the critical perspectives of a wide breadth of aspects of my Singaporean life and how legacies, ideologies and myths contribute to the experiences and realities I go through. Government decisions and stances also make a lot of sense to me now, having given a glimpse of the thoughts that go into the histories behind them.
This is book is a short collection of essays, quick discourses, by various academics. Though some of them fell flat for me in terms of the development of their arguments (had doubts and questions), some of them stood out to me.
Particularly these ones:
1. Trade Unions, Decolonisation and the Myth of ‘Anti-Nationalism’ by Gareth Curless
I learnt so much about the labour movement and the government’s attitude towards communism and why things are the way they are today.
2. Clampdown of the Law Society of Singapore in the 1980s: Myth & Reality by Teo Soh Ling
Really opened my eyes to the history and passion that I never knew existed - Salute the lawyers of SG
3. Poor people don’t like oats either: How Myths about Poverty and Wealth Matter by Teo You Yenn
This chapter put what I had felt about social work into such coherent paragraphs!! The systematic issues in the system that does not encourage social activism or advocacy to bring about long lasting change. Me when I decided to abandon my dreams of being a social worker. I also love the way it is written and am excited to read more from him/her.
Took my time with this book. Recommend it as a quick start to learning more about Singapore and being more informed.
This is book is a short collection of essays, quick discourses, by various academics. Though some of them fell flat for me in terms of the development of their arguments (had doubts and questions), some of them stood out to me.
Particularly these ones:
1. Trade Unions, Decolonisation and the Myth of ‘Anti-Nationalism’ by Gareth Curless
I learnt so much about the labour movement and the government’s attitude towards communism and why things are the way they are today.
2. Clampdown of the Law Society of Singapore in the 1980s: Myth & Reality by Teo Soh Ling
Really opened my eyes to the history and passion that I never knew existed - Salute the lawyers of SG
3. Poor people don’t like oats either: How Myths about Poverty and Wealth Matter by Teo You Yenn
This chapter put what I had felt about social work into such coherent paragraphs!! The systematic issues in the system that does not encourage social activism or advocacy to bring about long lasting change. Me when I decided to abandon my dreams of being a social worker. I also love the way it is written and am excited to read more from him/her.
Took my time with this book. Recommend it as a quick start to learning more about Singapore and being more informed.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 6, 2017
Myths are branding of facts in a certain manner, that disseminates a certain preferred type of message across. What messages have we been bombarded with and why? It's time to examine them, and only then are we able to discuss how to proceed.
August 30, 2018
Excellent and thought provoking book. It’s worth spending some time exploring further on the accompanying website. http://livingwithmyths.wixsite.com/li...
December 1, 2020
A good introduction to the breakdown of several Singaporean myths, and claims are backed up by historical facts. I also appreciated the wide variety of topics discussed. Prose can be very dense at times, but overall, an interesting read that broadens the average Singaporean's awareness on our history.
August 2, 2020
This book tries to bust the 'official narratives' of Singapore's history and development Victors have always written history and set directions; to be fair, to rally the population also necessitated reducing complex considerations whether in race relations, political maneuvering by various parties, education, foreign workers into simpler constructs. Yet these constructs also become problematic when the population accepts them as absolute - for example, the book explore the CMIO classifications of race and how this impacts race relations historically, and in the context of liberal immigration policy where intra race relations became problematic. I thought the book was a reminder that the world is a complex place, and not to succumb to the seductively simple constructs esp in complex human society. However, I would have appreciated practical solutions proposed to highlighted issues, instead of what I felt was ideological pontifications on the shortcomings of the existing system. Neither was this collection of essays easy reading.
July 15, 2022
NGL some parts were really dry but i do think i learnt quite a bit from the book, maybe because i didn’t know much about sg history to start with. e.g., about the merlion being a symbol created by STB, singapore never really being a “fishing village”, about many people donating oats in food drives (i don’t agree that oats are disgusting btw). i also knew absolutely nothing about the casino drama and the intelligent island plan?? what a bad name btw lol. i really appreciate the one covering korea and taiwan too cos it’s quite a good way to show that the amount of regulation in sg is really just nottttt necessary. it’s quite funny cos i went to watch a play on kwa geok choo after reading this book and you realise really how sterilised the version of history presented to the public really is…
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 17, 2020
An excellent book that inspires Singaporeans to question "common sense" beliefs
November 2, 2019
"Economics is about getting rid of poverty; it's not about making people richer. "
"Intelligence as a collective or individual attribute was beyond social or political censure. The ruling party ruled because it was smart, the other parties lost because they were not, and the school system ensured that in every successive generation the smart would be found, nurtured, credentialed and shepherded along their path to the top."
"Intelligence as a collective or individual attribute was beyond social or political censure. The ruling party ruled because it was smart, the other parties lost because they were not, and the school system ensured that in every successive generation the smart would be found, nurtured, credentialed and shepherded along their path to the top."
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews