Singapore is an immigrant country, so must always be an immigrant country?

Manpower minister Dr Tan See Leng reminded NCMP Mr Leong Mun Wai that both their fathers came from another country, that Singapore is an immigrant society, that he should stop rehashing the “foreigners are stealing our lunch” debate. In short, Dr Tan is implying that if foreigners did not sink roots here, becoming PRs and citizens, where would Singapore be?

Dr Tan has a point, except he forgot that when his father came to Singapore, it was not a country; it was a British colony where people far and wide came to make a living, and indeed, many went back to their country after accumulating some money.

It was only in 1965 that Singapore became a fully independent country, and with it, the process of building a nation began, and citizens had to make big sacrifices and commitments.... TRE

The above is the introductory paragraphs of a post title, Singapore is an immigrant society, by Foong Swee Fong.  It was written in response to Tan See Leng's rebuke to Leong Mun Wai's concern about foreigners stealing our lunch. Tan See Leng's position is that Singapore, being an immigrant society, must be grateful to foreigners and must continue to depend on foreigners to make Singapore great again. 

Singapore should be grateful to the foreigners that were here in our formative years in building up this island state. They sacrificed a lot, living on low wages, not million dollar salaries, to build the foundation for Singapore's success today. And these immigrants are the pioneers of independent Singapore, becoming the first citizens of Singapore. Singapore does not have to be grateful to future foreigners coming here until they have made their contributions. Some may and some will, but some may have ill intent, may sell out Singapore when they sink their roots here. There are going to be good and bad foreigners. It would be tragic to have bad foreigners destroying Singapore's social fabric and selling out Singapore to foreign powers in the future. Do not assume that every foreigner is good, an asset to Singapore.

Look at Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA, all are immigrant countries. Do they simply take in all foreigners unthinkingly? For centuries, they have their white immigrant policies, anti immigrant policies. Today they may be slightly more relax, but only after they have consolidated their power base, as the majority of these stolen lands, to let in a few immigrants but never to be big enough to remove them from power.

The convicts, the invaders, would not brag about their past as descendants of convicts or invaders. They would not allow convicts or invaders to their stolen lands. They would not blindly be grateful to new convicts and invaders and welcoming every Tom, Dick and Harry into the lands built by their predecessors. They would not sell out their stolen lands to newcomers freely, for newcomers to take over their lands.

Can Singapore learn something from the white gods in USA, Australia, Canada and New Zealand when welcoming new immigrants to the island? Fong Swee Fong made a pertinent point about Singapore not being an independent state, a colony of the British Empire when foreigners were brought in freely as cheap labour. Singapore then was like a no man's land, no ownership but a piece of loot of the Brits.

Singapore today belongs to Singaporeans, to the descendants of the pioneers, and some are still very alive today. Do not be confused between a non country and a nation state with responsibility to the real owners of the land. Bringing in immigrants profusely, is like giving the foreigners a share of the land and wealth of the country. Hypothetically, theoretically, if foreigners are let in continuously, and become a majority of the island state, it is as good as giving away our land and wealth to the foreigners.

Is this what we want? Is this fair to the descendants of the pioneers that fought for Singapore's independence and built it to what it is today? Don't forget, the reserves of the island state were built from the savings and blood, sweat and tears of the pioneers and the subsequent generations, NOT for new immigrants and future immigrants.

What do you think? Should Singapore be forever a migrant society, without roots and identity, without ownership? Would a convict country like Australia be proud to brag about its convict origins and want to be forever a convict country? Australia is a continent size island but they would not bring in foreigners in large numbers just to boost their economy. The consequence of losing their stolen land to the foreigners is very real. Same as in New Zealand, Canada and the USA.

Singapore is a nation state, NOT a hotel.