3 ms·

Singapore is "multi-ethnic" in the sense that it broke off from nearby Malaysia in order to have a Chinese majority city state, and adopted explicit policies to

by rsj_hn 6y ago

Singapore is "multi-ethnic" in the sense that it broke off from nearby Malaysia in order to have a Chinese majority city state, and adopted explicit policies to try to manage the Malay and Indian population in order to ensure that it is an ethnically Chinese run government. You can listen to some of Lee Kuan Yew's speeches to see how multi-ethnic it is, and what he thought of the US approach to diversity -- e.g. "multiculturalism will destroy America." (https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/02/13/singapores-lee-kuan-yew-talks-americas-strangths-and-weaknesses/?sh=6e36af3033d3 https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/02/13/singapores-...) The "integration" policies you refer to are there to limit non-chinese representation -- in the US we would call it a gerrymandering-support policy. Singapore also has an immigration policy meant to attract successful entrepreneurs, with no citizenship path for cheap labor, only temporary work visas. It does not accept any refugees or political asylum seekers. Being born in Singapore doesn't make you a citizen (no soil-based, only blood-based criteria).

Barrin92 6y ago
That's a fair characterization of the workings of the state, which has never really lived up to any democratic norm to be honest, but if you actually walk through Singapore and see how people live, honestly it is a successful multiethnic society. LKY might have a lot of non-PC views, but you wouldn't know it just by visiting the place. And that's I think what matters. And on the humanitarian front, yeah Singapore has a underclass of foreign workers with little chances of citizenship, but then so has the US. Talk to agricultural workers in Cali. The undocumented labour pool is millions of people. Or Eastern Europeans on German fields picking asparagus.
- rsj_hn 6y ago
  > That's a fair characterization of the workings of the state, which has never really lived up to any democratic norm to be honest, but if you actually walk through Singapore and see how people live, honestly it is a successful multiethnic society. Well, this is the LKY argument: In terms of outcomes, people are unequal and there will always be persistent differences between ethnic groups. The ranking isn't necessarily fixed over thousands of years (Greece was once the world leader and now has fallen behind), but at any point in time, there is never equality of outcomes. There will always be some groups ahead and others behind, and these positions change very slowly, and not through any mechanisms that can be controlled by policy. It shouldn't be government (or private sector) policy to try to pretend that they are equal or to try to make them equal, as that only leads to racial resentment, constant race wars and a Handicapper General to equalize everything. The SG approach is to suppress anyone trying to stir up this resentment or trying to advocate for racial equality. Once people learn to accept inequality, mind their own business, and just do the best they can for themselves, then you can have a successful heterogeneous society. But that approach offends the West's moral sensibilities, which is to try to have incredibly heterogeneous societies while insisting on equal outcomes. So the West will destroy itself with a combination of constant lying about race ("we are all equal, differences must be due to some form of oppression") as well as the imposition of a series of ever more tyrannical Handicapper Generals as it vainly tries to make the human nature conform to a delusion. So whereas you make it sound like an accident, that despite permanenent racial inequality SG looks like a nice place "on the ground", LKY would say that it is because of the acceptance of this inequality that people in SG can live in relative peace whereas in the West this is impossible.
arcticbull 6y ago
Fun fact it didn't "break off" from Malaysia, it was kicked out. Singapore is the only country in history, to the best of my knowledge, to gain independence against its own will.
- RugnirViking 6y ago
  Malta, and iirc a couple other island colonies were kicked out of the british empire back in the day. Malta's especially came right after a referendum which voted to remain as part of the UK and actually to integrate closer, but it wasn't popular in the UK as the island was costly to keep and no longer relevant as a naval base due to changing strategic concerns.

by rsj_hn 6y ago

Barrin92 6y ago

That's a fair characterization of the workings of the state, which has never really lived up to any democratic norm to be honest, but if you actually walk through Singapore and see how people live, honestly it is a successful multiethnic society. LKY might have a lot of non-PC views, but you wouldn't know it just by visiting the place. And that's I think what matters. And on the humanitarian front, yeah Singapore has a underclass of foreign workers with little chances of citizenship, but then so has the US. Talk to agricultural workers in Cali. The undocumented labour pool is millions of people. Or Eastern Europeans on German fields picking asparagus.

rsj_hn 6y ago
> That's a fair characterization of the workings of the state, which has never really lived up to any democratic norm to be honest, but if you actually walk through Singapore and see how people live, honestly it is a successful multiethnic society. Well, this is the LKY argument: In terms of outcomes, people are unequal and there will always be persistent differences between ethnic groups. The ranking isn't necessarily fixed over thousands of years (Greece was once the world leader and now has fallen behind), but at any point in time, there is never equality of outcomes. There will always be some groups ahead and others behind, and these positions change very slowly, and not through any mechanisms that can be controlled by policy. It shouldn't be government (or private sector) policy to try to pretend that they are equal or to try to make them equal, as that only leads to racial resentment, constant race wars and a Handicapper General to equalize everything. The SG approach is to suppress anyone trying to stir up this resentment or trying to advocate for racial equality. Once people learn to accept inequality, mind their own business, and just do the best they can for themselves, then you can have a successful heterogeneous society. But that approach offends the West's moral sensibilities, which is to try to have incredibly heterogeneous societies while insisting on equal outcomes. So the West will destroy itself with a combination of constant lying about race ("we are all equal, differences must be due to some form of oppression") as well as the imposition of a series of ever more tyrannical Handicapper Generals as it vainly tries to make the human nature conform to a delusion. So whereas you make it sound like an accident, that despite permanenent racial inequality SG looks like a nice place "on the ground", LKY would say that it is because of the acceptance of this inequality that people in SG can live in relative peace whereas in the West this is impossible.

arcticbull 6y ago

Fun fact it didn't "break off" from Malaysia, it was kicked out. Singapore is the only country in history, to the best of my knowledge, to gain independence against its own will.

RugnirViking 6y ago
Malta, and iirc a couple other island colonies were kicked out of the british empire back in the day. Malta's especially came right after a referendum which voted to remain as part of the UK and actually to integrate closer, but it wasn't popular in the UK as the island was costly to keep and no longer relevant as a naval base due to changing strategic concerns.