There is no doubt that many Singaporeans hold LKY in high regard, especially from the older generation. This is little wonder given that he led Singapore to stellar economic growth during his tenure as PM. As the political climate changes, we also have to ask ourselves whether he is still relevant in today's context as he approaches his 90th Birthday. I should be inclined to think that he outlived his usefulness, and his demise would be good for Singapore as a whole.
He may be a man who brought Singapore up, but at what costs? His policies on NS has led to countless Singaporean youths to waste 2 years of their prime for a cause which is highly regarded as no longer being worthwhile, with the opportunity costs only increasing as workforce competition becomes greater. We can now afford a professional army (but choose to spend funds on scholarships instead) while other countries under greater geo-political threats such as Taiwan/ Turkey have shorter conscription terms.
His legacy can be seen in limiting free speech through tight defamation and detention laws which has given Singaporeans one of the poorest freedom ratings in a modern democracy. His "stop-at-two" policy has made the population so imbalanced that we need to import millions of foreigners while he is open to lavishing scholarships on them even though he concedes they will never stay. Is this the kind of governance we want?
One only need to think about the increasingly controversial stand that he has made in recent times to question his thinking: His comments to female graduates belong to an ancient era of thinking, while his comments about the Malay community are deeply offensive and ironic, especially when he was the man who recognised the need for racial harmony after the strikes of the 1964. For someone who was once an influential school of thought, just look at how the tides have changed when he was mocked by Singaporeans for telling Aljunied voters to repent should they choose WP over PAP.
In his latest book "One Man's View of the World", one particular paragraph on page 85 shows him to be nothing short of a psychopath. It read: "Even given the horrors of September 11, sending troops to Afghanistan was a mistake by the Americans. If I had been in their position, I would bomb the day lights out of Afghanistan so it can no longer be a sanctuary for terrorists."
Not only does this reflects his character as someone who is keen to use whatever power he has without thinking about the consequences, it is also evidence that he has an arbitrary view of the world without understand the American democratic process. The fact that America is still the only superpower in the world means that they have a moral obligation to their allies and stakeholders and this is clearly sending the wrong message across; war is between armies and civilians should in no way be harmed.
He may be regarded by many as a great man, but let's not forget the impact he has on our individual lives. While wishing the old man a Happy Birthday, let's also remember that he has a 16% chance of him not seeing his next birthday and that he has said openly that he would like a quiet death without pain and suffering. Political science scholars have predicted political change as his demise would signal the end of yesterday-leadership and pave the way for a new generation of leaders to take over Singapore's leadership.
A "great" man or progression for our country? We need to decide whether we appreciate an ancient relic or greater advancement for our nation. The choice is clear.
Joseph Kheng-Liang Tan
*Article first appeared on http://www.facebook.com/tan.kheng.liang/posts/162641763929216?notif_t=like