Singaporeans
Stupid - or smart?
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).