My Reflections

♥ Friday, September 28, 2007 // 4:04:00 PM

I agree to a certain extent that the need to set up the Common Market was the most important reason for merger between Singapore and Malaya. Singapore needed to set up a common market due to declining entrepot trade and a lack of resources. As there are tarrifs set when trading between Malaya, Singapore thought that it would be a better idea to set up a Common Market where there's no need for tax paying. Thus, making trade easier. Singapore also had a growing population which needs more job vacancies for the people living in Singapore to have jobs. Thus, creating a Common Market is important for Singapore.
However, there are other reasons linking to the reason for merger. Singapore also wanted to break free from British Control and gain independence. The only way to do so is to merge with Malaya. This way, the British would be convinced enough to left Singapore gain full-independence. Malaya also had its reason for merger. Tunku was afraid that the radicals in the PAP would out-number the moderates in the PAP after Ong Eng Guan defeated the PAP in the Hong-Lim by-election. If this were to happen, the radicals would spread communism through Singapore to Malaya. Hence, Tunku considered to merge and support the PAP.
In conclusion, I felt that setting up a Common Market is an important reason for merger. But, there are also other important reasons for merger.

// 0 Comments .

♥ Wednesday, August 29, 2007 // 8:16:00 PM

Give at least 2 examples to support your answer.

I think that all the struggle during those years was worth it. Even if there were many strikes and riots occuring, Singapore still managed to pull through everything. In my opinion, I think that if these unfortunate events did not occur, Singapore would not be as strong and as humble we are now. Singapore have learnt many things through all these happenings. Although many lives had been sacrifice during this period of time, I don't think Singapore should take the blame as it was their own fault.
Many people in Singapore also wanted to gain self-independance during that period of time. The British was against it at first. But through all the happenings and hard work the people in Singapore had done, the British finally let Singapore gain independance in the end.
In conclusion, I think that what all Singapore had done is all worthwhile. That is what builds Singapore the way we are today.

// 1 Comments .

♥ Friday, July 20, 2007 // 6:48:00 PM

In my opinion, I think that the British should be more responsible in handling this case. They should not just push Maria Hertogh to the family that appealed for her. They could observe which family would treat Maria Hertogh better and which family has a better background for Maria to live in. And not just think that Maria should return to her biological parents. This would make people think that the British were on the Dutch's side, causing a riot to break out. This would also make the Malay family angry because they had brought Maria up for many years and suddenly her biological parents turned up, wanting her back. I think its a little ridiculous.
Next, I think that they should not leave Maria in the convent. She grew up with a Malay background. She probably knew nothing about other religions. So putting Maria into a convent would make her feel uneasy. But Maria was too young to make decisions, hence, she could not decide on what she want. Thus causing her to be pushed here and there. This would also cause Malays to be displeased. The Malays would definitely not want their family to go into a convent. This would also cause the Malays to be unhappy and want to protest against it.
In conclusion, I think that the British did not bother much about this case. They just see things on its surface and did not really check into the problem. From this, I think that the British is very irresponsible. They should really think of Maria's feelings. They should also spare a thought for the Malays. Just because the Dutch family are her biogical parents, it doesn't mean that they should have the custody of Maria. If the Britich were to be more thoughtful, they riots could have been prevented.

// 0 Comments .

♥ Wednesday, April 18, 2007 // 5:03:00 PM

In my opinion, I think it's neutral. There are good and bad consequences.

The Industrial Revolution (1820-1870) was of great importance to the economic development of the United States. However, there were actually two Industrial Revolutions. The first occurred in Great Britain during the late eighteenth century, and the second began during the mid-nineteenth century. The Second Industrial Revolution centered on the United States and Germany.

Living conditions during the Industrial Revolution varied from the splendour of the homes of the owners to the squalor of the lives of the workers.Poor people lived in very small houses in cramped streets. These homes would share toilet facilities, have open sewers and would be at risk of damp. Disease was spread through a contaminated water supply. Conditions did improve during the 19th century as public health acts were introduced covering things such as sewage, hygiene and making some boundaries upon the construction of homes. Not everybody lived in homes like these. The Industrial Revolution created a larger middle class of professionals such as lawyers and doctors. The conditions for the poor improved over the course of the 19th century because of government and local plans which led to cities becoming cleaner places, but life had not been easy for the poor before industrialisation. However, as a result of the Revolution, huge numbers of the working class died due to disease spreading through the cramped living conditions.

As for work, industrial revolution changed patterns of work, transformed the social class structure, and even altered the international balance of political and military power, giving added impetus to on-going Western expansion into non-Western lands. The IR also helped ordinary people gain a higher standard of living as the widespread poverty of the pre-industrial world was gradually reduced.

// 1 Comments .

♥ Saturday, March 3, 2007 // 7:01:00 PM

Question: The National Museum has decided to erect a statue in front of its entrance. They have to choose between Stamford Raffles and Tan Tock Seng. If you were working for the museum, who would you choose and why?

My answer:
If I am working for the museum, I would choose Tan Tock Seng to be erected in front of the museum's entrance. The main reason for this is because he did more helpful work compared to Stamford Raffles. Although Stamford Raffles arrived in Singapore before Tan Tock Seng, he left Singapore after he signed the treaty with Sultan Hussein and the Temenggong and left Farquhar with difficult jobs. Tan Tock Seng also contributed more compared to Raffles.
Tan Tock Seng was one of the richest merchants in Singapore. Although he is rich, he was not selfish and did not keep the money to himself. In fact, he donated liberally to the charity. He also help the Chinese paupers. Whenever there is Chinese paupers who died in the streets and verandahs, he would make it a point to help bury them as he had a passion for the sick and poor at his own expense. He also paid for the funernal expenses of people who couldn't afford one. As a Taoist, he believed that a decent funeral should be conducted for the dead. He also founded a pauper hospital to allow immigrants to seek medical help for low cost or free.
Hence, I can conclude that Tan Tock Seng deserves to be erected in front of the museum's entrance.

// 0 Comments .

♥ Friday, January 26, 2007 // 6:38:00 PM

Many people said that John Crawfurd was the founder or Singapore as he was the one who signed the treaty in August 1824.
In my opinion, I think that Sir Stamford Raffles was the founder of Singapore. Mainly because he was the first to arrive at Singapore and start a port. Although Sang Nila Utama might had been the first one. But there were not must evidence to support that he is the founder. Hence, I think that Sir Stamford Raffles is more likely to be the one who founded Singapore. His first came to Singapore and thought that it was suitable as a port as it has natural advantages such as an excellent harbour and a good supply of drinking water.
Although Farquhar did a lot for Singapore, he still wasn't the founder as he was just doing his part to help Raffles take care of the island. Without Raffles, he wouldn't be taking over Singapore. And Raffles was actually able to take over Singapore but he had to go back to Bencoolen where he was appointed the Lieutenant-Governor. So he had no choice and had to give up Singapore and let Farquhar take over.

// 7 Comments .