Is Lee Kuan Yew a great first-world leader ?
-
I feel that I have no choice but to educate the people, as humble as I like to be.Originally posted by Ponders:False premise.
Singapore is never considered first-world country officially. Always classified as newly-developed economy.
Since the premise is false,
therefore LKY cannot be a great leader.
Unbeknownst to many,
Almost everyone is a Leader in some way or ways.
For example,
A talk coke king is a leader of talking coke.
But he may not be a Leader of ,say, selfprervation.
He may, however, be a leader in looking for countrys that benefits him financially or work wise and still choose to retain his citizenship.
That is what I would call Leader of opportunity and freedom of choice.
All nice and good.
Another person may only be a clerk. But he can be a leader of social work.
LEADER is a word that, is often MISUNDERSTOOD in its whole context.
EVERYONE is a leader in their own ways.
A leader in business , for all the mudder of all things you know, could turn out to be a follower of ,say his religious leader or his wife's instructions and directions. You never know.
Personally, I am not in awe of the word LEADER or LEADERSHIP.
Everyone is a leader.
Nothing big deal. A leader is a follower of other leaders in other areas - would anyone disagree?
Nothing wrong to be a follower and a leader at the same time.
-
Read malaccan history lah......then you knowOriginally posted by robertteh:Er what were some similarities?
. -
Originally posted by robertteh:Let us respect him for the right reason not by washing of brain cells.
-
I guess my sarcasm was overlooked.Originally posted by robertteh:A great sociologist who believed that graduate mothers will produce more intelligent children !!!
-
Who? His cronies and minions?Originally posted by robertteh:Many people have hailed Lee Kuan Yew as a great first-world leader.
22.9 million people on this planet regard Kim Jong-Il as the son of god too.
-
That man needs to be hauled to the Hague in chains.Originally posted by walesa:Who? His cronies and minions?
22.9 million people on this planet regard Kim Jong-Il as the son of god too. 
-
A great leader is someone who is elected to serve the people in their collective cause be it for economic prosperity or nationhood. The practical test is whether such a leader has been able to bring about the greatest benefit of the greatest number. LKY is aware of such a leadership criteria but he has only paid lip service to such criteria and instead once he was secure in his power he went on the reverse of governing only to serve his own or his party political agendas at the expense of this leadership principle.Originally posted by claudetnt:Robertteh:.
”---Can we compare his greatness to leaders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Churchill, Deng Xiao Peng.---”
Yes, without any doubt we can hail Lee Kuan Yew among the great first-world leaders when compared to the abovementioned leaders.
However, when compared to King Asoka, Matama Gandhi and Nelson Mendala he is far from being a great first-world leader.
Yes he has served the people to fulfill their collective goal of achieving independence and establishing the basic needs in housing, infrastructural and other developments in the initial period 1960s-1970s. For this initial achievement he was (past tense) a great leader.
However since 1970s, secure in his power he became a different person and began to govern for his own interests and agendas to stay in power and tweaked laws and regulations based on false and unproven assumptions of all kinds. Based on assumption about the danger of welfarism he single-minded resorted to taxing and recouping all costs of essential services resulting in ever-rising costs of living and our gradual loss of economic competitiveness.
A people that is so grossly over-taxed by all forms of direct and indirect taxes as posted in another thread simply could not survive.
In addition he became vindictive and went all out to sue his political opponents for so-called libelous speeches made in the heat of election campaigning and even threaten people with lawsuits even for remarks made due to provocation from himself. Is this the sign of greatness at all by any definition?
So everything has gone wrong with the same erstwhile great leader because of self or self-centredness and arrogance.
If he had not let power go to his head from the 1970s we might have gone on to achieve greater economic competitiveness from developing our own mass talents in every sphere of nationhood.
Instead he relied on hypocrisy and justifications to deny problems to no avail even in the face of all the wrong doings as exposed in NKF and subsequent audits of many departments.
Again is this denial syndrome a sign of maturity or greatness of leadership.
So on such record how could he ever compare with any one of the leaders as mentioned,
Singapore could have built a more competitive, more friendly and cooperative and caring society if we had open up and be more broadminded in our leadership. Many assumptions made were simply not as they were made out to be. -
If LKY a great first-world leader, then so is North Korean leader Kim Jong Il.
-
My Ass.........
-
He's a capable leader, not great and first - world though.
-
Kim's not just a great leader, he's the Son of God. Or so his regime claims...Originally posted by royston_ang:If LKY a great first-world leader, then so is North Korean leader Kim Jong Il. -
Everyone is afraid of LKy because he's a dictator.
-
First world or not, I cannot be sure, but for whatever he did he is a great leader. The fact that he had perpetuated himself in power for over half a century, outlasting and outmaneuvering(okay maybe he just fvcked his opponents to death) should bear testimony to his ability. Also, he was more intelligent than the other less sophisticated dictators around the region. Oh well somebody should just give him a prize for engineering apathetic and fearful Singaporeans who voted him into power time and again.
He had given himself so much lead that it would be difficult to turn the tables on him. He crafted a military that poses utterly no threat to his regime( take note that most dictatorships fell due to coup). I mean, you gonna give that old fart some credit for his thoroughness and determination. -
he is a realist in politics, he does what it takes to survive thats all,
Sometime we judge every single micro decision look at consequences for immediate justification, and focus on the negative aspect. But we tend to ignore some of the history basic event. The fact that he was Persuasive enough to leaders aboard to recognize Singapore independent. I would call that leadership. Just watch LHL to convince Asean members to sing the same song! It is clear enough some people have it some don't.
i think it is too early to speak of greatness in history. Historian and 2 generation down will Judge him after he is long gone. We are not the right candidates to make that neutral judgement. -
YES!
-
Are you a member of the opposition party?Originally posted by robertteh:Many people have hailed Lee Kuan Yew as a great first-world leader.
How true is this compliment? Can we compare his greatness to leaders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Churchill, Deng Xiao Peng.
Apparently he has succeeded in the initial years in creating basic infrastructure, education and political stability as a base.
Apart from the initial success what else has he achieved ? Has he succeeded in transforming the economy to a resilient economy which can sustain the ups and downs in various other economies?
Is the present economic performance due to general world recovery and property play or IR. If he is a great leader then he must have solved certain problems faced by the people. Has he done so?
Has he succeeded in winning over the people and motivated them to take an active part in nation building to bring the economy to the first world or has he used only his political power over his opponents or critics to get what he wanted for himself or his party?
The above-stated are pertinent questions to be asked and answered if we want to arrive at a logical and objective conclusion.
Now let us start answering some of these questions. Are the people under his leadership over the past 40 years enjoying higher wages and higher standards of living or are they suffering from lower or dropping wages and prospect of losing their basic rights and jobs to foreigners. Are the people enjoying good government and happy.
It appears that from his own admission his starting point has been people are prone to riots, rebellions and needed to be controlled and the media has to come under rigid government control in order to avoid media getting into mischiefs.
It appeared that his solution is to clamp down on dissent by using the power afforded by democracy as machinery to get his way to survive politically and override on people's wishes and needs and to serve his and his own party interests.
He was highly motivated to bring about development at any costs to the people. So he ruled with great determination using all the scholars and elites as his instrument to maintain political control and to stay in power.
To him in order to succeed he has to avoid welfarism so he made all departments to be self-sufficient and resorted to taxing and recouping all costs and profiteering to create surpluses which he regarded as his own success.
The common men are not part of his solution. He would charge the highest fees called affordable fees from housing to transportation to utility and medical care to avoid spending on taxes so taxes get accumulated as surpluses for the state.
Despite making all the sacrifices over the years in paying the highest direct and indirect taxes to support the government which is enjoying all the power and highest rewards at the expense of the people, the wishes and aspirations of the people are often overruled or ignored.
MM Lee has not been able therefore to motivate the people with such a governing philosophy treating people as targets to suppress or tax so many citizens have voted with their feet and migrated to other less stressful countries.
Yet Lee continues to claim success of his brand of leadership which looks rather fragile which lead finally to his having to resort to hypocrisy and justifications to sing his own songs of success.
There is no sign of arrival of a value-adding technology-driven economy talked about for years precisely because of lack of talents, motivation or creativity due to wrong individualistic and egoistic anti-people and anti-teamwork system of governing.
He was able to get his way all because as a trained lawyer he was able play with legalistic wrangling of laws to stay in power but people essentially are suffering due to lack of motivation to participate in greater entrepreneurship or value venture to maximise their potential.
For one who claimed to be successful to use power to get what he wants we do not know whether he can be really be judged to be that successful or great.
If not I suggest you forward this article to them than they can make a big hoo ha at the next election
-
ask drawer
-
Kim Jong Il dares to take on the USA.
I respect this type of attitude.
I also admire the way he engineered the nuclear crisis to take advantage of USA's weakness in Iraq.
Here are some pro-DPRK articles that praises Kim Jong Il; to neutralise the anti-DPRK propaganda:
Marshal Kim Jong Il's War Plan
http://www.kimsoft.com/korea/kim-war.htm
Kim Jong Il's perspective on the nuclear standoff
http://www.asianresearch.org/articles/1717.html
DPRK has every legitimate right to keep and increase its nuclear arsenal
http://www.asianresearch.org/articles/2163.html
Kim Jong-il's military-first policy
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/IG11Dg01.html
North Korea's only talking head loves the USA
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/GA19Dg01.html
Korea: Forgotten Nuclear Threats
http://www.nautilus.org/fora/security/0503A_Cumings.html
North Korea's War Strategy of Massive Retaliations against USA Attacks
http://www.kimsoft.com/2003/nk-war-han.htm -
Nope I am not a member of any political party. I am posting here like many others independently of any political parties' views. From my own perception, our political parties do not really work with forumers or websites for their input and they have their own in-house advisors. So I do not think they will post consider our views or opinions as helpful.Originally posted by yimkim:Are you a member of the opposition party?
If not I suggest you forward this article to them than they can make a big hoo ha at the next election
If you or any one here think otherwise they have my blessing to use my views on this matter. Thanks. -
I agee with you .. he is a capable leader.. a very smart man.. a very far-sighted man.. a very political man ...Originally posted by LazerLordz:He's a capable leader, not great and first - world though.
I am not sure what exactly constitutes a great world leader, but I beleive many many Singaporeans are not satisifed by the style, performance and way of doing things by the party created by LKY.. but then we can only hear complaints and see no actions .. (but then .. how to change .. ?) -
There is LITTLE or NO avenues for ANYONE, to try and change things...Originally posted by happieman:I agee with you .. he is a capable leader.. a very smart man.. a very far-sighted man.. a very political man ...
I am not sure what exactly constitutes a great world leader, but I beleive many many Singaporeans are not satisifed by the style, performance and way of doing things by the party created by LKY.. but then we can only hear complaints and see no actions .. (but then .. how to change .. ?)
... prohibition of Freedom of Speech & Assembly, along with every avenue to voice one's objections are blocked tight....
the only way things can change, is when everything & everyone come to a head; ...a revolt or meltdown of sorts if you will, throwing the entire economy & political stability helter skelter....
...only then, and not even without lives lost, can we see the light of change...
The political climate here, is akin to a pressure cooker, manufactured without a pressure release valve.... a catastrophic explosion is inevitable, I'll say.... -
robertteh:
i wished you had some others as references of Great leaders. unfortunately, the list of Great leaders you have highlighted, too, have their imperfections. Let me highlight some:
A) George Washington
1) GW killed many as he led the army on many occassions before becoming one of the major founding fathers of the nation, as well as president, Washington. He fought with the British, the Indians and later the French. In 1794, he invoked the Militia Law of 1792 to summon the militias of Pennsylvania, Virginia and several other states, he used the strong military force to exert authority over the states and citizens.
2) He was a slave owner with 317 slaves at the time of his death. He never criticized slavery.
B) Deng Xiao Peng.
1) Although DXP was in the "second generation" Communist Party leadership he was nevertheless a veteran of the Long March, with Mao Zedoong where millions lost their lives. Again, in 1948, Deng led the final assault and killed thousands of chiang kai shekÂ’s KMT forces.
C ) Abraham Lincoln
1) AL during the Civil War, Lincoln appropriated powers no previous President had wielded: he used his war powers to proclaim a blockade suspended the writ of habeas corpus, spent money without congressional authorization, and imprisoned 18,000 suspected Confederate sympathizers without trial.
2) The sexuality of AL distant relationship with women stood in contrast to his more warm relations with a number of men in his life and that two of those relationships had arguable homosexual overtones.
D) W. Churchill
1) WD expressed contempt for a number of popular ideas, in particular creating a system of national public health care and improving public education. Immediately following the close of the war in Europe. Partly as a result of this Churchill was defeated in the 1945 election by Clement Attlee.
Therefore, LKY is paled when compared to these "Leaders"! -
If u say so, I believed u think so.
If u have been enjoying stable , secured and peaceful life, he is the best. -
I think almost 50 years of one party rule and constant bombardment of state propaganda, combined with censorship, ISD and defamation lawsuits has dealt a death blow to the intellectual and political climate in Singapore.
We must restore the intellectual and political climate in Singapore before changes can come.
Exiled dissident Tan Wah Piow on Singapore:
Do you think they are experimenting with political liberalism?
I can't say they are exactly the same as the Lee Kuan Yew's regime, they are experimenting a slightly more liberal agenda but the party politics is still under very much direct control and monitoring.
They will never cease using the Internal Security Department (ISD) to monitor the opposition. I think once an instrument of the state is used to monitor the opposition to serve the ruling party, and not for national security, you can't call such a system democratic...
http://singaporerebel.blogspot.com/search?q=sterile -
I have to agree with you on this one - no leader is perfect.Originally posted by claudetnt:robertteh:
i wished you had some others as references of Great leaders. unfortunately, the list of Great leaders you have highlighted, too, have their imperfections. Let me highlight some:
A) George Washington
1) GW killed many as he led the army on many occassions before becoming one of the major founding fathers of the nation, as well as president, Washington. He fought with the British, the Indians and later the French. In 1794, he invoked the Militia Law of 1792 to summon the militias of Pennsylvania, Virginia and several other states, he used the strong military force to exert authority over the states and citizens.
2) He was a slave owner with 317 slaves at the time of his death. He never criticized slavery.
B) Deng Xiao Peng.
1) Although DXP was in the "second generation" Communist Party leadership he was nevertheless a veteran of the Long March, with Mao Zedoong where millions lost their lives. Again, in 1948, Deng led the final assault and killed thousands of chiang kai shekÂ’s KMT forces.
C ) Abraham Lincoln
1) AL during the Civil War, Lincoln appropriated powers no previous President had wielded: he used his war powers to proclaim a blockade suspended the writ of habeas corpus, spent money without congressional authorization, and imprisoned 18,000 suspected Confederate sympathizers without trial.
2) The sexuality of AL distant relationship with women stood in contrast to his more warm relations with a number of men in his life and that two of those relationships had arguable homosexual overtones.
D) W. Churchill
1) WD expressed contempt for a number of popular ideas, in particular creating a system of national public health care and improving public education. Immediately following the close of the war in Europe. Partly as a result of this Churchill was defeated in the 1945 election by Clement Attlee.
Therefore, LKY is paled when compared to these "Leaders"!
Great leaders are people who have accomplished great deeds or goals against all odds relative to their circumstances to fulfill the specific expectations of their people.
In our case in the circumstances back in 1960s we needed and had LKY who possessed the right passions and determination to maneuver over many distracting forces to win or help win independence from the colonial master and went on build up the basic infrastructures and certain basic needs for the people.
To that extent up to 1970s, LKY has been a great leader period.
From 1970s he was a changed man as I have elaborated. He let power go to his head and became arrogant always trying to talk about his leadership and his past glory instead of focusing in solving many problems.
So to me because of such self-glorifications and self-interests he had sacrifice the larger good of society and our economy stagnated for many years.
Now with the recent world recovery he seized the opportunity quickly to talk about his past success again and again being too self-centred and protectionistic of his own gains and positions.
This kind of leadership to me is not great at all. He should just retire and let Singaporeans throw up their own new-age leaders without interference from behind the scene. We do have many potential good leaders who are much more passionate and capable than him who understand the needs of the people and who will no doubt given the opportunity win over the people to develop and nurture mass participation and practical knowledge application of all citizens (not just limited to scholars) to serve the greatest benefits of the greatest number.
People must use their keen perception to spot such new leaders who could serve them not necessarily people who are so-called scholars or high-flyers.