Hi everyone,
I would like to reply to the post of the one who started the thread.
I can understand your stand, but how do you think Singapore can stand on it's own two feets in the modern world, and have every western country pointing at them in their cold economist fashion saying "Oh, since you do not have -Insert some high GDP technical term- and you have a severe shortage of undeveloped - insert some technological advancement of western origin made in the 80s and 90s - you do not qualify to be a first world country. "
"Therefore, you are classified as a third/second world country."
Who created that kind of hierarchy? It's stifling to treaded down upon just because you follow your own values. Any country could stubbornly stick to it's kampong/past/hut/mudhut traditions of the past, but who will be the ones who gain anything? No one. It will miss out on important world issues, important world decisions and lose its standing in the world.
Ultimately, when a country develops and makes something out of itself, who gains? The government and the people.
And what if another nation attacks in context of any reason possible to gain control of any certain resources, or just to expand its grasp in the world?
Would the kampong men run out with spears and the women hide in the huts?
I know it sounds unreasonable to a degree but the example I'm giving is to say that Singapore must sacrifice something valuable in order to make way for its 'traditons' or it's so-called 'heritage'.
I understand that many foreigners, especially from the western countries, get tired from the hum-drum hustle and bustle of their harrowed lives in a statistic-run and political-driven country where money/scandals/publicity really talks, and would like to retreat into a country that is
o free from advancement.
o free from the clockwork schedule of technologically advanced societies such as U.S, Japan, Singapore.
o free from social responsibilities.
And then the high western dollar will be able to purchase triple or quadriple the amt they can buy in that country.
But think of the people in the country they are visiting.
In a kampong community, yes, there is neighbourly concern and close community bonding. But it is usually also simplistic and ignorant.
Who would want to live in an age of kampongs and ice-cream sellers without licenses (because one would argue, the ice-ball man concept would become commercialised should the requirement for them to be licensed materialise.) when the world is speeding into an age of invisible suits (Japan) and see-thru wall radar technology (Iserael)?
Maybe I missed your point, that you mean that you should see at least a community of kampongs living hand-in-hand with technology (imagine a kampong equipped with TV and a running air-conditioner. Ludicrous!), or maybe a country like Malaysia where poverty and rural villages remain as kampongs which is their cultural flavour.
Let's face reality. Even India is turning into a land of technology, modern buildings. The only place I can think of that matches their cultural flavour with technology is Dubai, and that's only because they have the pleasure of billions of oil money as a start up boost (that countries like Thailand, Myanmar or Nepal does not have) to develop, plan and make such extravagant large scale cultural icons.
A country that has cultural flavour is usually an impoverished country a western country has labelled as 'third world' because of no 'development' (razing down of trees and land to erect concrete jungles in checkered styled maps), 'low pay' (the people's earnings compared to a western concept of earning in western dollars and a standardised rate to compare it with) and all the other mumbo jumbo associated with that country!
I think countries like Singapore and China at the very least preserve their heritage.
I don't want to compare, and I do know I'm justifying Singapore's actions that might not necessarily be correct in another's point of view.
But America had a culture of gunslinging west, cowboys, gold mine rushes and what nots, but today itself has created a jungle of buildings.
I don't think you expect a country like china to build a 'non'western style building, and instead, decide to create 'chinese' style buildings in the shape of pagodas. That takes a lot of research, unnecessary money and that does not even guarantee it will be as effecient as a modern day building, would it?
Singapore, from my point of view, yes, is rampant with the 'big brother' syndrome even western countries like America and Britain is stricken with, but in bigger secrecy, but it is doing its part to ensure
Singapore is up there on the world stage as a competant, technologically-advanced country not stricken with violence, immense large-scale, poverty, infesting crime, homelessness on a mass scale.
While doing that, of course, it needs to ensure that it's heritage is protected and preserved, as well as upheld.
It's not that I don't have my grievences of Singapore as much as you do, but I do feel that perhaps you have mistaken Singapore.
Do correct me if I'm wrong,
thanks.
------------------
Lucia Yeo
[This message has been edited by LuciaYeo (edited 30-07-2004).]