"How far do you agree that the need to set up the Common Market was the most important reason for merger between Singapore and Malaya."
I agree slightly to it as there are other factors other than setting up a Common Market that led to the merger.
One of the reasons is that Singapore could gain full self-independence by merging with Malaya and break free from the British.The other reasons is that Malaya was afraid that the PAP could not control the communists after the PAP candidate was defeated in the Hong Lim by-election by Ong Eng Guan. The Tunku was concerned that the split would weaken the moderates within the PAP and allow the radicals to gain control of the party. If the radicals captured power from the PAP, they would form a Communist government in Singapore and use Singapore as a base to spread Communism in Malaya.
However,i think that the most important reason is to set up a Common Market.As Singapore lack natural resources and faced a declining entrepot trade and a growing population, a Common Market meant that traders in Singapore can sell their goods to Malaya without paying any tax and this would rapidly improve Singapore's economy.With an improved economy, more jobs would be created to provide enough jobs for the people in Singapore.Therefore, it will make lives of the people in Singapore easier.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
28/08/07
Singapore's stuggle to achieve internal self-government in the period 1945-1959 had its costs.Was it worth it?Give at least 2 reasons to support your stand.
Yes, it was worth it because they managed to gain internal self-government in year 1959, although the riot causes many death, injuries and damaged to the people of Singapore. The british did not really care about the people in Singapore as they wanted things to be done that profit them.David Marshall failed to gain internal self-government for Singapore in 1956 because the British government sees that David Marshall's government could not protect their interests and prevent Singapore from falling into the Communist hands in the Hock Lee Bus Riot during the first Merdaka talk. Lim Yew Hock gained internal self-government for Singapore in the second Merdeka talk in 1957 after the Students Riot in 1956 where he had the police to arrest almost all the union leaders to stop all communist activities and this shows that the british are selfish.In conclusion, i think that it was absolutely worthy to gained internal self-government as because of that,Singapore became an advanced country and if we are still under the british today, i do not think that we will achieve all this.
Yes, it was worth it because they managed to gain internal self-government in year 1959, although the riot causes many death, injuries and damaged to the people of Singapore. The british did not really care about the people in Singapore as they wanted things to be done that profit them.David Marshall failed to gain internal self-government for Singapore in 1956 because the British government sees that David Marshall's government could not protect their interests and prevent Singapore from falling into the Communist hands in the Hock Lee Bus Riot during the first Merdaka talk. Lim Yew Hock gained internal self-government for Singapore in the second Merdeka talk in 1957 after the Students Riot in 1956 where he had the police to arrest almost all the union leaders to stop all communist activities and this shows that the british are selfish.In conclusion, i think that it was absolutely worthy to gained internal self-government as because of that,Singapore became an advanced country and if we are still under the british today, i do not think that we will achieve all this.
Friday, July 20, 2007
Friday July 20 2007
Topic: In your opinion, what could have prevented the Maria Hertogh riots in 1950?
Actually, there are a number of ways that the british can do to prevent the riot that took place in 1950. Firstly, while the case was still not closed, the british should not have placed maria Hertogh in a convent as she was raised as a Muslim and the muslim are very sensitive to that because they believed that in this world, there is only one god. They should have placed her in a Mosque or any other places but not the convent.
Secondly, the british was very indecisive towards the case. At first, they gave the custody of Maria Hertogh to her naturally parents but after Che Aminah appealed, they gave the custody to her. Afterwards, they then gave the custody back to the natural parents.They should have been more adamant towards their decision and not change it often.
Thirdly, on the day when the final decision is about to be announced, the british government should have not let so many people to crowd outside the court. They should have ordered them to dispersed.
So, in my opinion, i believe the british did not take much precaution to prevent the riot.
Actually, there are a number of ways that the british can do to prevent the riot that took place in 1950. Firstly, while the case was still not closed, the british should not have placed maria Hertogh in a convent as she was raised as a Muslim and the muslim are very sensitive to that because they believed that in this world, there is only one god. They should have placed her in a Mosque or any other places but not the convent.
Secondly, the british was very indecisive towards the case. At first, they gave the custody of Maria Hertogh to her naturally parents but after Che Aminah appealed, they gave the custody to her. Afterwards, they then gave the custody back to the natural parents.They should have been more adamant towards their decision and not change it often.
Thirdly, on the day when the final decision is about to be announced, the british government should have not let so many people to crowd outside the court. They should have ordered them to dispersed.
So, in my opinion, i believe the british did not take much precaution to prevent the riot.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Reflection 3
Topic: Did the Industrial Revolution affected the way people lived and worked in the 19th century for the better or worse? Give examples from the textbook to support your answers.
The Industrial Revolution in the 19th century has caused a great improvement of the technology.There were also an increase in employment in the mills and factories. During that time, important inventions like spinnng machine, steam-engine, railway trains& steamships were invented.The steamships allow the Europeans to sail to the east to obtain raw materials such as tin, and find markets to sell their goods.The spinning machine also changed the way goods were produced and also shortened the production time greatly.
Without Industrail Revolution,the lives of the people would be alot harder compared to now as the amount of things they produced were small but yet took a long time.As for travellers or traders,their markets would be very small and they would waste alot of time finding raw materials as they would take a long time to travel from one place to another.
The Industrial Revolution in the 19th century has caused a great improvement of the technology.There were also an increase in employment in the mills and factories. During that time, important inventions like spinnng machine, steam-engine, railway trains& steamships were invented.The steamships allow the Europeans to sail to the east to obtain raw materials such as tin, and find markets to sell their goods.The spinning machine also changed the way goods were produced and also shortened the production time greatly.
Without Industrail Revolution,the lives of the people would be alot harder compared to now as the amount of things they produced were small but yet took a long time.As for travellers or traders,their markets would be very small and they would waste alot of time finding raw materials as they would take a long time to travel from one place to another.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Reflection 2
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?Why?
I would choose to erect a statue of Tan Tock Seng because there are already statues of Stamford Raffles.
Tan Tock Seng had contrbuted a lot by setting up a hospital for those who were poor and by doing that,he saved a lot of people at that time as most of them were poor and had no money to see doctor.He also used his own money to pay for the funeral expenses of unclaimed bodies lying on the streets.By erecting a statue of Tan Tock Seng,more younger generations will be interested in knowing more about him instead of Raffles.
So, i would choose to erect a statue of Tan Tock Seng.
I would choose to erect a statue of Tan Tock Seng because there are already statues of Stamford Raffles.
Tan Tock Seng had contrbuted a lot by setting up a hospital for those who were poor and by doing that,he saved a lot of people at that time as most of them were poor and had no money to see doctor.He also used his own money to pay for the funeral expenses of unclaimed bodies lying on the streets.By erecting a statue of Tan Tock Seng,more younger generations will be interested in knowing more about him instead of Raffles.
So, i would choose to erect a statue of Tan Tock Seng.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Who Really 'founded' Singapore
Base on what I know, I think that it was Sir Stamford Raffles who found Singapore.
Raffles was the one leading Farquhar and his assistants in the hunt for a new trading settlement as their ports at Penang and Bencoolen were far away from the main tradind area in the Malay Archipelago. Raffles spotted Singapore and were convinced that it would be an ideal place as a port. He then signed a treaty with Tengku Hussein whom he recognized as the real Sultan. It was also because of Raffles persistence that allowed the British to keep Singapore and established it to become one of the world’s busiest port.
Although Farquhar solved many problems such as attracting people to come to Singapore and sell their food, started a small police force to keep law and order but there were too few policemen, inviting new settlers to come to Singapore and also paid people to kill rats and centipedes. All these were important but his contribution was still smaller compared to Raffles’.
What John Crawfurd did was to sign a treaty and thus I do not think that he was the one who founded Singapore.
Raffles was the one leading Farquhar and his assistants in the hunt for a new trading settlement as their ports at Penang and Bencoolen were far away from the main tradind area in the Malay Archipelago. Raffles spotted Singapore and were convinced that it would be an ideal place as a port. He then signed a treaty with Tengku Hussein whom he recognized as the real Sultan. It was also because of Raffles persistence that allowed the British to keep Singapore and established it to become one of the world’s busiest port.
Although Farquhar solved many problems such as attracting people to come to Singapore and sell their food, started a small police force to keep law and order but there were too few policemen, inviting new settlers to come to Singapore and also paid people to kill rats and centipedes. All these were important but his contribution was still smaller compared to Raffles’.
What John Crawfurd did was to sign a treaty and thus I do not think that he was the one who founded Singapore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)