Eugenics & Lee Kuan Yew: Mothers! Mothers! There are so many of you crying.
Andrei
>>On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 03:37:34 GMT, and...@sympatico.ca (Andrei) wrote:
>
>>Thank you for the information but I have a couple of questions:
>>
>
>
>On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 02:10:47 GMT, sonny...@rocketmail.com wrote:
>
>>When Lee pronounced his child culture in 1983, it wasn't for the fear
>>for lack of brainy babies but the dwindling fertility rate of the
>>Chinese. At the time Lee broached on the merits of selective breeding
>>and its methods at the National Day Rally in 1983, the fertility rate
>
>Do you remember what "the merits of selective breeding and its methods"
>was all about?
>During the Aug 83 ND Rally, Lee said that some 400 university graduates
>were being "lost" annually. One of the reasons they were not
>reproducing was that grad women failed to marry. The final result:
>grad mothers produced an avg of 1.9 children while their less educated
>counterparts were producing 3.9 children.
>
>Lee said, "If we continue to reproduce ourselves in this lopsided
>manner we will be unable to maintain our present standards. Levels of
>competence will decline, our economy falter, the administration and
>society will eventually suffer. Studies have shown that 80% of how
>well you do depends on nature and only 20% on nurture. **Inherited
>traits were more important to child development than environmental
>conditioning".
>
>Lee was referring to Prof. Eysenck, a world reowned London based
>geneticist's theory that nature determined 80% of a child's
>intelligence. However, this is where the similarity stops and the
>differences begin.
>
>Why Eysenck's theory was based on extensive testing of the IQ levels of
>the offspring and the parents as well; Lee's grand theory was based on
>grad mum's possessing university degrees! :@
>
>>of Singaporeans as a whole was falling sharply. On the whole there
>>were 10,000 fewer babies born that year in 1983. This point could not
>>have escaped Lee.
>>
>>The country was facing a severe baby shortage, yet Lee was busy handing
>>out cash grants to lower educated women to prevent them from having
>
>What do you mean by this sentence?
>Was there a law, campaign or otherwise to distribute cash to "lower educated
>women"? Before or after ND 1983 speech?
>What was the criteria used to determine a "lower educated women"?
>> Do you remember what measures the Gov. took after 1983 regarding the
>> birthrate?
>
>
>Well, Lee seems to have ignored the glaring fact that the reproductions
>level of Singaporeans as a whole were below the 1 for 1 replacement
>levels and had narrowed his findings to grad mums reproducing less. In
>fact, Lee's govt pushed through policies that would discourage lesser
>educated women from reproducing like the small family incentive scheme
>introduced in Jun 84. An official marriage agency, the SDU was also
>setup under the MOF.
>
>Lee's govt and civil service went into prompt action immediately after
>his discovery. Two breeding licence policies and both neither debated
>or approved in parliament were pushed through. One policy, the
>priority scheme, gave grad mums priority in enlisting their children
>born after 1 Jun 84 to primary schools of their choice, and the sceond
>policy, the small-family incentive scheme, awarded a cash grant of
>$10,000 to dissuade lowly educated mothers from having more than two
>children. To qualify for the scheme, the govt announced that mothers
>must be below 30 yrs of age, must have undergone sterilisation on or
>after 1 Jun 84, must not have more than 2 children, neither the wife or
>her husband must have any O level passes, and neither of them should be
>earning more than S$750 each per mth. The cash grant of $10,000 was to
>be credited into the CPF account of the mother.
>
>In proposing the above scheme, the PM's office stated: "Unless we break
>this low-education-large-family cycle, we will have a small significant
>minority of our people permanently trapped in a poverty subculture,
>while the rest of the population will move even further up the economic
>and social ladder. The economic and cultural gap will widen".
>
>Firstly the MOE's priority scheme actively discriminated against the
>children of less-educated mums, less-educated men and even grad men who
>married non-grads. Why should the children of grad mums be given the
>head-start?
>
>It must be noted that Malays have long been disproportionately
>represented amongst the poorly educated and lower income strata of
>society. If talent and ability is predominantly innate, as suggest by
>self styled eugenicists like Lee Kuan Yew, than the genetic and
>intellectual standing of the socially marginal Malay community must
>also be deficient. Furthermore, the Malay families tend to be larger
>than the average S'porean family with offsprings tending to number 3 or
>more.
>
>If the Chinese were not reproducing enough and plans to encourage them
>does not do so, then the Malay procreation patterns at large, must be
>curtailed. That appears to be the point behind the CPF grant
>disincentive.
>
>The long litany of events and statements in which PAP leaders have
>deprecated other ethnic groups need not be repeated here. The obvious
>explanation is Chinese ethnocentrism, which feeds on the belief that
>the Chinese are a superior race, as evidenced by the apparent fact that
>Chinese have built a prosperous Singapore in a region of less affluent
>Malay people. The rulers of Singapore, and Lee in particular, appear
>to operate a racist society in which one ethnic group is designated as
>the norm, while the othes are protrayed as deviant.
Thanks for your info. It's edifying.
It'll make me so much more vociferous in denouncing the nefarious
influence of that man over a generation of Singaporeans and the
neighbours has to be stopped.
And I hope the more sensible people will continue to speak up too.
Check around the threads and you'll see that the current genera-
tion has no inkling that they were part of Lee's eugenics & racist folly!
That they have no idea of the extent of how racist the Lee regime is.
Hey students!
Reflect for a second if your family might have been subjected to Lee's
folly. These were the criterias used around 1984:
- mothers must be below 30 yrs of age,
- must have undergone sterilisation on or after 1 Jun 84,
- must not have more than 2 children,
- neither the wife or her husband must have any O level passes, and
- neither of them should be earning more than S$750 each per mth.
Now think how successful you are at your current studies... like if (the
of lack of) education of your mother was an impediment to your success.
( Please do not query your mother about this to avoid making her cry.)
Lee Kuan Yew, shame on you!
PS: Please make the effort to print and carefully read the Barr paper
( http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/Deadline/AsianLeaders/Lee%20Kuan%20Yew/articles/Barr.htm )
to understand how evil Lee Kuan Yew and his regime really are.
>
>Sonny Black
>
>PS: Typo error for the Indian figures. Should read 19.4 (19.7) not
>(19.1)
>
>> >Registrar General of Births and Deaths Report 1983
>> >---------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> >Brith rate in 1983 by ethnic proportions per thousand. Figures for
>> >previous year (1982) given in brackets.
>> >
>> > Malay Indian Chinese
>> >20.4 (20.2) 19.4 (19.1) 14.8 (16.1)
>
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
ahxiang
~ at least none, as far as can be observed, grew up like a devious
moron.. using lies and deceptions to call leaders from another
country, 'old bloody faggot'... and like a hypocrite, run and hide
whenever the word 'accountability' surfaces to stare him in the face..
~ if this is the way you were been brought up, i guess your mom must
be crying her eyes out too..
~ since you x-post this to canada.. well, you said the canadian pple
suddenly became 'mature' this year in accepting a minority GG?? you
mean canadian pple weren't 'mature' previously?? and y hasn't there
been a minority PM? what are the chances of a minority been PM in the
next elections??
~ should french paratroopers land in ottawa, will the good chretien
send quebec guys after them?? and y must it be more than 'fifty plus
one'??
~ and wat about your racist remarks tat the javanese are 'more mature'
than the chinese? where were you when your 'more mature' javanese were
torturing, slaughtering, looting and raping the less mature chinese??
~ you also said tat malays in the 1800s here were 'savages'? and the
mightly british colonial masters then were afraid of these 'savages'?
and had to make use of under-fed, over-worked chinese coolies as
'buffer'?? so which history book did you gather these gems??
~ you said tat the first MI185 interim report contained 'damning
evidence'?? and tat the prime minister of singapore mr. goh chok tong
should come out from under the desk to answer to your allegations? so
wat happened? you have suddenly changed your tune and said that the
report was submitted 'without conclusion'.. so where is your apology??
or you have no idea how to be civil??
~ and oh ya, you alleged tat the malaysian airways' low-fuel policy
was copied from singapore airlines? you like to state the obvious and
just say you goofed up? or shall i return your kind words you used to
denigrate posters in scs? like : "Hahaha! A vapid bunch of ignorant
Grade 2-level people. Pffft."
~ i'll really like to know if anyone on soc.culture.canada would liken
lee kuan yew to milosevic or hitler like andrei would? and i would
really like to know if any other canadian would go call the prime
minister of another country like singapore a 'old bloody faggot'.. i
would oso very much like to know what would canadians think if i would
to call adrienne clarkson a complete shmuck?
~ thank you..
Andrei
I wish you could answer these questions:
Is forced sterilization of women really admissible in the 1980s with the excuse
of the lack of good ---diploma---?
Hasn't that policy targeted a specific ethnic minority, the Malays?
Was that policy ever discussed in Parliament or passed as law?
Why the sudden silence for the past decade about this sorry eugenic experiment?
Why hasn't Lee Kuan Yew broached this terrible policy (sterilization of poor women
of an ethnic minority) in his memoirs? In fact, why has the whole political class kept
quiet for so long? Why has a whole generation no idea that such experiment were
even conducted in their country?
Isn't such a policy to restrict the population of an ethnic minority while favorizing that
of the ethnic majority the worst form of institutionalized racism?
On Thu, 16 Dec 1999 00:26:27 +0800, "David HL Low" <dl...@singnet.com.sg> wrote:
>Hellooo...resident idiot of scs and ASEAN
>
>Read this slowly & carefully and then...learn by heart:
>
>"Hellooo...resident idiot of scs and ASEAN
>
>The "fools" mentioned in the thread, obviously include you, rushing in.
>
>To criticize properly, one must first be calm, cool and collected. Remember
>this carefully. To assist your scatterbrain, think of this as the 3C's.
>Take this and the rest of the lesson I now teach to heart and you'll be a
>changed cretin...
>
>Now, secondly, it is important not only to criticize the policies of your
>God, but one should (it might not be possible in your case, as you
>singularly lack the kind of brain power) try and put oneself in His place
>and given the situation at the material point in time, to ask oneself - what
>are the options available to sort out a trend - what one might term as - "a
>clear and present danger". (In case you feel flattered that your flatulence
>had created even a hint or semblance of any discomfort in your God, then I
>put it to you that you're stupider than you think you really are). But I
>digress... Let me use a phrase so that it will be indelibly etched into
>your feeble mind - "you must possess all the facts".
>
>Thirdly, in addition to disagreeing or condemning the policies of your God,
>it is rather important to look at the results of those policies mentioned -
>a slew of goodies for graduate mothers; incentive such as a cash grant to
>lowly educated mothers not to bear (now, how did the "bear" get into this
>discussion?) any more children, etc., This implies that you must be
>rigorous in your approach and look at figures and examine if the outcome of
>the aforesaid policies were as desired. To do justice to this exercise,
>one should understand basic statistical analysis, zeroing onto causes and
>effects and correlations. (For someone who cannot even read a balance
>sheet, it comes as no surprise this part of the lesson is a forgone lost
>cause). As is the norm, in a discourse with someone like you, I've reduced
>the essence of this paragraph to one word - analyse. (The test now is
>whether someone who's so obviously anal can analyse...). Pardon, m'sieur...
>ze joke zest came out by itself...
>
>Fourthly, one can examine if these policies were popular or unpopular and a
>tenuous (but, perhaps quick & dirty) way of inquiry is to study if the PAP
>government had suffered in the polls held subsequent to the implementation
>of these policies. (Needless to say, if polls were conducted shortly after
>the start of these policies, one could argue a stronger case than if polls
>were held 2-3 years later, as there could be intervening events and policies
>that either mitigated or exacerbated the PAP's popularity). One should also
>not neglect to check if opposition parties had made used of these policies
>in the hustings, thereby making these "elitist" sounding initiatives
>political issues. In other words - what were the downsides, if any, and how
>costly were these in terms of loss of popularity, seen from the votes, seats
>in the Parliament, etc.,
>
>Lastly, the fifth consideration (which is an extension of the third point)
>is to determine if the indigenous human resource stock of Singapore had
>improved or deteriorated and if the causes for such can be attributable to
>those policies that were implemented about 15 years ago. There are certain
>measures and methods to determine the quality of human resource (details are
>not germane to this thread) that are non controversial and free of nuances,
>political or otherwise. This last part is known as "the conclusion", in
>case I've lost you in the bakery...
>
>When you have done all that, feel free to come back to this newsgroup when
>you're good and ready and present your case.
>
>Knee jerks, or plain jerks like you, running around in circles, chasing your
>own tail, or foaming in the mouth - all these are plain diversions, unworthy
>of serious attention (by divine intervention, I now act as your guide) and
>you must refrain from making a spectacle of yourself. All these histrionics
>do no good to your cause, as an obvious outsider, not schooled in the art of
>politics nor good governance and having no experience whatsoever in making
>decisions that affect the lives of anyone, with the possible exception of
>yourself, and yet trying to put on your God's mantle and proclaiming, it not
>only fits, but is too small for a midget minded mama-twisting malevolent and
>melodramatic misfit such as yourself."
>
>ps: Your comments, as usual, are shots aimed at various parts of your own
>body and make mockeries of this subject. And you think you had contributed
>meaningfully to this thread - o' copy & paste bullshit artist?
>
>"Andrei" <and...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>news:385787c...@news1.qc.sympatico.ca...
>
>
sonny...@my-deja.com
>
> PS: Please make the effort to print and carefully read the Barr
> paper ( http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/Deadline/AsianLeaders/Lee%
> 20Kuan%20Yew/articles/Barr.htm ) to understand how evil Lee Kuan Yew
> and his regime really are.
>
thesis where he has attributed some of his own ideas as Toynbee’s worth
noting. In fact Toynbee had “devoted 64 pages of his Study to arguing
that race is not a factor in determining a civilization’s rate of
development.” According to the Barr report, Lee had taken Toynbee’s
views and developed a view of race that was not only much stricter but
was never advocated by Toynbee.
Lee’s distortion is also evident in Eysenck's “nature vs. nurture”
theory. While Eysenck advocated the testing of offspring’s IQ levels
to establish a correlation with parent’s IQ levels, Lee based his on
mothers having university degrees.
There is no doubt whatever Lee’s distortion of literary works might be -
that he’s a firm believer in the superiority of one race over another.
What is of little known fact is Lee’s own bloodlines.
Lee’s paternal great-grandfather, an illiterate, had come to Singapore,
as a coolie soon after Singapore became a British colony. Although he
himself returned for good to his Guangdong province in his old age to
die, he left behind a son and from there the family tree had sprouted.
Lee’s mother’s great-grandfather had married a Malay, and the family
became culturally mixed.
How much of the past ancestry runs in Lee’s own genes?
Sonny Black
Kum Hoe Tung
: Hey students!
: Reflect for a second if your family might have been subjected to Lee's
: folly. These were the criterias used around 1984:
: - mothers must be below 30 yrs of age,
: - must have undergone sterilisation on or after 1 Jun 84,
: - must not have more than 2 children,
: - neither the wife or her husband must have any O level passes, and
: - neither of them should be earning more than S$750 each per mth.
This is the criteria for getting $10000, not punishment of
any sort in case you didn't notice. If the earning is S$750 and
less in the first place, can they take care of more than 2 children
and give them good education ? And note the number, it's 2 children,
good enough for 1 to 1 replacement. So you expect us to hate LKY
because of this ? Try harder.
Anthony
Andrei
>In soc.culture.singapore Andrei <and...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>
>: Hey students!
>: Reflect for a second if your family might have been subjected to Lee's
>: folly. These were the criterias used around 1984:
>: - mothers must be below 30 yrs of age,
>: - must have undergone sterilisation on or after 1 Jun 84,
>: - must not have more than 2 children,
>: - neither the wife or her husband must have any O level passes, and
>: - neither of them should be earning more than S$750 each per mth.
>
> This is the criteria for getting $10000, not punishment of
>any sort in case you didn't notice. If the earning is S$750 and
>less in the first place, can they take care of more than 2 children
>and give them good education ? And note the number, it's 2 children,
>good enough for 1 to 1 replacement. So you expect us to hate LKY
>because of this ? Try harder.
Frankly, I don't care if you love or hate the old bugger.
My point is that Lee Kuan Yew has had a nefarious influence on both
Singaporeans and on the region as a whole that you can barely grasp
at this point in time.
Prepare yourself to learn more about the ugly ---and hidden--- side of
Lee Kuan Yew in the next few months.
As for the Lee eugenic experiment, imagine it was your mother that was
sterilized because of her lack of excellent schooling grades, I wonder
if you would have the same careless attitude.
It was a tragic experiment for the women and for Singapore.
>
>Anthony
Andrei
>and...@sympatico.ca (Andrei) wrote:
>>
>> PS: Please make the effort to print and carefully read the Barr
>> paper ( http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/Deadline/AsianLeaders/Lee%
>> 20Kuan%20Yew/articles/Barr.htm ) to understand how evil Lee Kuan Yew
>> and his regime really are.
>>
>Lee’s prejudice and distortion of Toynbee’s “Challenge and Response”
>thesis where he has attributed some of his own ideas as Toynbee’s worth
>noting. In fact Toynbee had “devoted 64 pages of his Study to arguing
>that race is not a factor in determining a civilization’s rate of
>development.” According to the Barr report, Lee had taken Toynbee’s
>views and developed a view of race that was not only much stricter but
>was never advocated by Toynbee.
>
>Lee’s distortion is also evident in Eysenck's “nature vs. nurture”
>theory. While Eysenck advocated the testing of offspring’s IQ levels
>to establish a correlation with parent’s IQ levels, Lee based his on
>mothers having university degrees.
>
>There is no doubt whatever Lee’s distortion of literary works might be -
>that he’s a firm believer in the superiority of one race over another.
>What is of little known fact is Lee’s own bloodlines.
>
>Lee’s paternal great-grandfather, an illiterate, had come to Singapore,
>as a coolie soon after Singapore became a British colony. Although he
>himself returned for good to his Guangdong province in his old age to
>die, he left behind a son and from there the family tree had sprouted.
>Lee’s mother’s great-grandfather had married a Malay, and the family
>became culturally mixed.
Isn't that the ultimate irony that Lee is trying to pass for the superior Chinaman
while his own lineage is of mixed blood with Malay?
What strikes me most of your comments and the Barr paper is that Lee
seem to have acted on his long held racist impulses only when the Old Guard
slowly disappeared from the political scene.
The young generation owed everything to Lee and was thus malleable,
to the point of silence, about his racist attitude despite ---I presume--- it
being against their own sentiment (I don't think Goh! has the same racist
attitude as Lee yet he has been silent about his mentor racism).
>
>How much of the past ancestry runs in Lee’s own genes?
>
>Sonny Black
>
>
Kum Hoe Tung
: As for the Lee eugenic experiment, imagine it was your mother that was
: sterilized because of her lack of excellent schooling grades, I wonder
: if you would have the same careless attitude.
: It was a tragic experiment for the women and for Singapore.
:
My mother CHOOSE to go through the sterilization and as a result, my
parent provide excellent education for me and my sister. You got a problem
with that ?
Anthony
sonny...@my-deja.com
>
> What strikes me most of your comments and the Barr paper is that Lee
> seem to have acted on his long held racist impulses only when the Old
> Guard slowly disappeared from the political scene.
Many of the govt's actions which have been justified by eugenics were
more prominent from the 1980s onwards. Dressed up with
pseudoscientific principles of intelligence levels (IQ) and eugenics,
the PAP ideology has legitimated class hatred and racism in Singapore.
But Lee has acted on his impulses earlier on in his career. In Lee's
words:
"Free education and subsidised housing lead to a situation where the
less economically productive people in the community are reproducing
themselves at rates higher than the rest. This will increase the total
population of less productive people.
Our problem is how to devise a system of disincentives, so that the
irresponsible, the social deliquents, do not believe that all they have
to do is to produce their children and the government then owes them
and their children sufficient food, medicin, housing, education and
jobs ... Until such time when moral inhibitions disappear and
legislative or administrative measures can be taken to regulate the
size of families, we must try to induce people to limit their
families ...
One of the curcial yardsticks by which we shall have to judge the
results of the new abortion law combined with voluntary sterilisation
law will be whether it tends to raise or lower the total quality of our
population. We must encourage those who earn less than two hundred
dollars per month and cannot afford to nurture and educate many
children **never to have more than two. Wewwill regret the time lost
if we do not now take the first tentative steps towards correcting a
trend which can leave our society with a large number of the
physically, intellectually, and culturally anaemic." (Abortion Bill,
3rd reading, 29 December 1969, Select Committee Report, pp. 321-3)
The reality that the social control mechanisms of the education system,
together with socio-economic conditions, actively discriminated
agfainst the educational achievement of the working class and minority
races, had been ideologically concealed. Meritocracy was the
formalised ideology for the institutionalisation of class hatred and
racism. The above Bill translates itself into one of Singapore's first
national campaigns - "The Two is Enough" family policy in 1970.
Lee Kuan Yew's ideological position has a disturbing affinity to that
of a previous political leader:
"Since the inferior always outnumber the superior, the former would
always increase more rapidly if they possessed the same capacities for
survival and for the procreation of their kind; and the final
consequence would be that the best in quality would be forced to recede
into the background. Therefore a corrective measure in favour of the
better quality must intervene." (Adolf Hitler, 1942)
Sonny Black
Kum Hoe Tung
..sniped ***
: "Since the inferior always outnumber the superior, the former would
: always increase more rapidly if they possessed the same capacities for
: survival and for the procreation of their kind; and the final
: consequence would be that the best in quality would be forced to recede
: into the background. Therefore a corrective measure in favour of the
: better quality must intervene." (Adolf Hitler, 1942)
and of course you failed to mentioned that one start to pay money
to people who volunteer and the other one start to kill.
Anthony
sonny...@my-deja.com
Well when the Abortion Bill was passed in 1969, Lee wasn't paying cash
to anyone for abortion as far as I recall. Lee's desperation only
started in 83/84 with the small family scheme incentive.
On a side note, when you have arbitary detention without trial, your
problems disappear very quickly; no need to kill anyone really.
Sonny Black
Kum Hoe Tung
: Well when the Abortion Bill was passed in 1969, Lee wasn't paying cash
: to anyone for abortion as far as I recall. Lee's desperation only
: started in 83/84 with the small family scheme incentive.
and "no money" is not equal to "kill people"
: On a side note, when you have arbitary detention without trial, your
: problems disappear very quickly; no need to kill anyone really.
so are people being detained because they have more than 2 children ?
don't mixed up the issue.
Anthony