4/04/2018
Post by Concerns of a Heartland Sinkie - Part 4
As mentioned in late 2016 in MSN and (mentioned) again in early 2017, a head and shoulder trend was formed in terms of the tide of globalisation and at least a 70% chance of an unmistakable trend reversal?
1) 911 marked the "left shoulder"?
2) The 2008 GFC the "head"?
3) And Jun 2016 Brexit & Nov 2016 "Brexit+++" marked the right "shoulder"?
The current wave of globalisation that took off massively in the 1970s could be in reverse gear?
However, way back in late 2014 and again in 2015, the warning sirens of possible de-globalisation was sounded (in MSN) but noboLEE paid any heed (to it)?
As mentioned previously (& repeatedly) in 2014 to 2017 (in MSN), the last cycle of internationalisation (aka globalisation) was in even higher gear than the current but the trade wars that started in the 1890s culminated 2 decades later in the WW1 that saw Pax Britannica ceding its preeminent world policeman role and the global hegemon title was left unfilled ......, can any reader recall? (Pls KEE CHIU ...)
Subsequently, the then world order collapsed in a power vacuum and an anarchic world order ensued.
During those inter-war years (1919-1938), the global economy went into a tailspin, wall street collapsed in 1929 and precipitated the first ever global Great Depression?
The late Professor Charles Kindleberger, in his 1973 book "The World in Depression: 1929-1939", expounded his world famous theory of HST (Hegemonic Stability Theory).
The late Professor passed away in 2003 (at the ripe old age of 92) after the 2nd Gulf War broke out.
The fast recovery of Western Europe was to a large extent due to the late Professor spearheading the then Marshall Plan in the post-war reconstruction.
Many policies that the late Professor advocated that are key determinants of a stable world order are now been "thrown into the incinerator" ...?
The immutable MSN wiseman lao hero wrote in his post dated 4/03/2018: "Hundred Flowers Movement Revisited 百花运动" under the final two short but thundering concluding paragraphs:
Quote
"People who did not know history or learn from the mistakes in history would be condemned to make the same mistakes and bury themselves only to verify that history would repeat itself with their folly.
Thank you very much for a precious but painful lesson in history."
Unquote
Given China's latest retaliatory counter protectionist measures announced this afternoon, a full blown trade blows between the world's 2 top most preeminent economic powers and giants seems unavoidable UNLESS the perpetrator who started this potential full scale trade war back down ...?
In 1985, Sg's founding PM went to Capitol Hill, Washington and spoke in the joint US Congress session [see Youtube video: https://youtu.be/X6CZ3C0niPg], arguing against an oncoming trade war then between the Americans and the Japanese which culminated in the 1987 Plaza Accord and an immediate 30% revaluation of the Yen vis-a-vis the major world currencies in particular the USD but which also subsequently led to the "destruction" of the then world #2 economic powerhouse and the subsequent Japanese economic malaise since 1990 ...?
This time unlikely there will be another iconic world leading figure to thwart the US of firing the 1st trade cannon (which already happened) and more importantly there will not be a repeat of the 1987 "Plaza Accord"?
What next?
Kim Jong Un, the statesman extraordinaire
Praises and accolades are pouring in to acknowledge the achievements and
abilities of Kim Jong Un as a maverick statesman to bring North Korea
to where it is today. Under his able leadership, North Korea has stood
up to all the American aggression and traps to bring the country to its
knees. Not only has Kim Jong Un survived the daily military threats of
war, the economic sanctions and the threats of a preemptive strike and
regime change, he has singlehandedly turned North Korea into a nuclear
power, a status that made the Americans hapless and no longer able to
threaten him with war with impunity. The possession of nuclear weapons
that could reach the USA is the sole factor that now offered Kim Jong Un
and his North Korea peace of mind.
With his new stature confirmed, Kim is now on a charm offensive, visiting China and agreeing to meet up with the presidents of South Korea and the USA. Kim has out manoeuvred and out foxed the Americans and gained great respect from leaders around the world. This young man is no easy push around, not even by the mightiest evil Empire. Trump would have to meet him and negotiate with him, no more, no less, on equal terms, on Kim’s terms.
The rise of Kim Jong Un must have taken a hit on the silly unthinking critics that gobbled up all the nonsense and negative remarks fabricated by the Americans to discredit Kim. No longer is anyone going to talk about the rocket man or using other derogatory labels against Kim. The Americans would have to treat him just like another leader of a nation, with respect. Yes, Kim knew how to talk tough with the Americans, not by words, but by the language that the Americans understood, by possessing nuclear weapons, to be able to hit back.
Kim did not get this respect the easy way. Many leaders would have buckled under the daily attacks by the Americans. Saddam and Gaddafi were good examples of leaders that could not stand the pressure of the Americans and could not live to see another day. They were murdered by the Americans. Kim would be around for a long time. Trump and his hawks would quietly be saying to themselves that Kim is a worthy opponent in his own right. Making silly remarks about Kim is not going to be useful anymore.
Kim has gained great stature as a national leader that stood up to the Americans and survived and be respected by the Americans and the world.
With his new stature confirmed, Kim is now on a charm offensive, visiting China and agreeing to meet up with the presidents of South Korea and the USA. Kim has out manoeuvred and out foxed the Americans and gained great respect from leaders around the world. This young man is no easy push around, not even by the mightiest evil Empire. Trump would have to meet him and negotiate with him, no more, no less, on equal terms, on Kim’s terms.
The rise of Kim Jong Un must have taken a hit on the silly unthinking critics that gobbled up all the nonsense and negative remarks fabricated by the Americans to discredit Kim. No longer is anyone going to talk about the rocket man or using other derogatory labels against Kim. The Americans would have to treat him just like another leader of a nation, with respect. Yes, Kim knew how to talk tough with the Americans, not by words, but by the language that the Americans understood, by possessing nuclear weapons, to be able to hit back.
Kim did not get this respect the easy way. Many leaders would have buckled under the daily attacks by the Americans. Saddam and Gaddafi were good examples of leaders that could not stand the pressure of the Americans and could not live to see another day. They were murdered by the Americans. Kim would be around for a long time. Trump and his hawks would quietly be saying to themselves that Kim is a worthy opponent in his own right. Making silly remarks about Kim is not going to be useful anymore.
Kim has gained great stature as a national leader that stood up to the Americans and survived and be respected by the Americans and the world.
4/03/2018
Back to the past
The official launch of the Singapore Premier League (SPL) last Saturday (31 March 2018) at the National Stadium promised to be a new dawn for Singapore football. This was supposed to mark a resurrection from the embers of the failed S-League but alas there were echos of the past even at this embryonic stage of its young life. And I am not even talking about the football. I am merely talking about the administration that goes into a simple match.
On that supposedly auspicious day, as I rushed off bright-eyed and bushy-tailed to attend the season-opening Community Shield match between Albirex Nigata and Tampines Rovers, I decided to “tapow” my dinner with a view to eating it inside the stadium. Bad mistake. At the entrance, I was told that food cannot be brought into the stadium. “No problem”, I said, “I’ll just leave it outside and eat it at half-time”. “No way”, said the authorities, “You cannot leave the stadium at half-time. If you leave, you’ll have to buy another ticket to re-enter. You either eat it now or you eat it after the match”. That really put me in a fix as it was 2 minutes to the game and I had no wish to choke on my food just to make the kick-off. On the other hand, stuffing down cold food wasn’t exactly an appetizing way of crowning a night-out. At this point, a gentleman who had overheard the conversation kindly offered me a complimentary ticket to re-enter the stadium after my meal. Thank god there are still sensible souls around!
Later I learned why food could not be brought into the stadium. There were eateries - no doubt paying ceiling-high rentals - inside the stadium and these obviously needed “help” to ensure a captive clientele. I have no issue with this. But why make it difficult for people to leave the stadium during the half-time break? Surely, 15 minutes is too short to queue, buy and consume outside food all at one go? I came to support Singapore football but left with a sour taste in my mouth. At a time when Singapore football is in dire need of customers, this was a bad piece of public relations. And as I said earlier, I am not even talking about the football.
Hundred Flowers Movement Revisited 百花运动
In 1957, Mao Zedong was so confident in the correctness of his socialist ways encouraged the people to speak out, to criticise the govt, believing that the criticism would lead to more progress and a better govt. Thus the Hundred Flowers Movement was launched with the full backing of Mao himself. Let a hundred flowers bloom. In his own words, Mao said, "Our
society cannot back down, it could only progress... criticism of the
bureaucracy is pushing the government towards the better." The speech indeed was to encourage the people to speak out, vent their
criticisms and frustration as long as they were constructive and not hateful and destructive.
The silent intellectuals, the frustrated intellectuals, and those that opposed the way communism was introduced to run the China honestly believed that Mao was sincere and wanted to hear them, wanted their honest opinions on how best to run a country. They fired away in all honesty and sincerity. Never did they think that the movement was a red herring, a test balloon. The intelligentsia got carried away and the criticisms of the govt went too far and became unbearable.
Mao ordered a crackdown that ran for several years and all those that spoke out were arrested and sent to labour camps to reflect and to correct their errorneous thoughts. Many died in the process. Many were condemned for life.
In all honesty, Mao was sincere when he launched the Movement, confident that he was right and the criticisms would lead to more progress and a better govt. He did not set a trap from the start to lure the innocent intelligentsia to speak out and exposed themselves to be arrested. He did so only when the attack became too damaging to his govt and his authority to rule.
The moral of the story is that when a dictator encouraged the masses to speak out, the masses must speak out but must also know what to speak out and what not to speak out. Say what the dictator wants to hear, not what they want the dictator to hear. They must also know the difference between an honest campaign inviting suggestions and a test balloon to trick them stand up and give themselves away for prosecution and arrest and hard labour. The intelligentsia then were just too naive and were taken in.
People who did not know history or learn from the mistakes in history would be condemned to make the same mistakes and bury themselves only to verify that history would repeat itself with their folly.
Thank you very much for a precious but painful lesson in history.
The silent intellectuals, the frustrated intellectuals, and those that opposed the way communism was introduced to run the China honestly believed that Mao was sincere and wanted to hear them, wanted their honest opinions on how best to run a country. They fired away in all honesty and sincerity. Never did they think that the movement was a red herring, a test balloon. The intelligentsia got carried away and the criticisms of the govt went too far and became unbearable.
Mao ordered a crackdown that ran for several years and all those that spoke out were arrested and sent to labour camps to reflect and to correct their errorneous thoughts. Many died in the process. Many were condemned for life.
In all honesty, Mao was sincere when he launched the Movement, confident that he was right and the criticisms would lead to more progress and a better govt. He did not set a trap from the start to lure the innocent intelligentsia to speak out and exposed themselves to be arrested. He did so only when the attack became too damaging to his govt and his authority to rule.
The moral of the story is that when a dictator encouraged the masses to speak out, the masses must speak out but must also know what to speak out and what not to speak out. Say what the dictator wants to hear, not what they want the dictator to hear. They must also know the difference between an honest campaign inviting suggestions and a test balloon to trick them stand up and give themselves away for prosecution and arrest and hard labour. The intelligentsia then were just too naive and were taken in.
People who did not know history or learn from the mistakes in history would be condemned to make the same mistakes and bury themselves only to verify that history would repeat itself with their folly.
Thank you very much for a precious but painful lesson in history.
4/02/2018
The Singapore Syndrome - The ironies of history a consequence of human stupidity
I happened to flip the switch and watch a forum titled 'Japan and Asean Relations' in Channel News Asia with four speakers, two Japanese and two bananas. The Japanese were not hiding anything. Their main agenda were to discredit China, sowed doubts and disinformation about the BRI and the AIIB and to tell Asean countries to militarise and to support Japan's militarisation to be the leader of Asean to confront China. The two bananas wholeheartedly agreed with the Japanese proposition and praised Japan as the most peaceful and trusted nation by the stupid Asean leaders. I make a distinction between leaders, people and bananas.
Japan is the most trusted country according to a survey conducted by one of the bananas among his peers. I must agree with him as the survey would be just another echoing chamber of like minded bananas. But it is not as simple as that. I thought about it and found a common thread among the South East Asian countries that believed in Japan as the most trusted country. All these countries were invaded, plundered and conquered by Japan during the invasion of Asia and SE Asia by the Japanese Imperial Armies. All were part of the Japanese Empire, their treasuries raided, countries looted, their people massacred, women raped, children bayoneted.
This link to love your conquerors is not unique just to Japan or to SE Asia. The Taiwanese also loved the Japanese after being conquered and ruled for more than 50 years, much longer than all the SE Asian countries but did not suffered as much as the SE Asian countries. The point is this, the more vicious and ruthless the invaders, the more loved and trusted they would be by the conquered leaders of the SE Asian countries. The people would be different as they were the ones that bore the brunt of the cruelties and atrocities of the Japanese/invaders, not the elite or leaders.
Take the same line of thinking to Vietnam, the Philippines and Japan. They were victims of the worst destructive forces of the American military might. The Philippines were conquered and ruled by the Americans for several decades, with many massacres. The Vietnamese almost went that way, suffered the most devastating bombings in human history, second to the atomic bombs in Japan. The fact is that they all loved their conquerors/invaders, the Americans. The Indonesians are also very fond of the Dutch, their colonial masters. No need to say more about the Malaysians and Singaporeans. they often reminisced about the good times under their colonial masters.
There is another common thread here. Besides being loved and trusted by the victims of invasion, the opposite is that countries that did not invade, plunder, loot, rape or massacre people of other countries would be distrusted and even hated by the countries they did not invade or conquer. China is a perfect example of this love hate relationship. China did not invade or conquer any of the SE Asian countries but is hated and distrusted by them.
My conclusion, China would have been loved and trusted by the SE Asian countries if it had invaded them, conquered and ruled them, conducted atrocities against these little weak countries. Maybe China should learn from the Americans and the European powers, and Japan, invade and conquer all these silly countries if it wants to be loved and trusted by them, like Japan and the USA. This is the failure of China for not harbouring the thought of colonising these countries.
This theory is quite similar to the Stockholm Syndrome where the victims fell in love with their captors that held them hostage. Maybe I shall called this the Singapore Syndrome or SE Asia Syndrome. I thought about calling it the Asean Syndrome or the Banana Syndrome. After thinking it over, the Singapore Syndrome is most appropriate as the greatest admirers of Japan, the brutal invaders, are from Singapore.
Come to think of it, the choice of Syonan as the name to remember fondly of the Japanese Invasion was not surprising. If that idea was not stopped, the next thing would be the demolishing of the War Memorial to remember the hundreds of thousands massacred by the Japanese during the Occupation, and probably another shrine to be built in its place to remember the heroic Japanese Imperial Army and the Kempeitai. They loved them and trusted them dearly. You have the most pristine display of the Singapore Syndrome here in this island.
Japan is the most trusted country according to a survey conducted by one of the bananas among his peers. I must agree with him as the survey would be just another echoing chamber of like minded bananas. But it is not as simple as that. I thought about it and found a common thread among the South East Asian countries that believed in Japan as the most trusted country. All these countries were invaded, plundered and conquered by Japan during the invasion of Asia and SE Asia by the Japanese Imperial Armies. All were part of the Japanese Empire, their treasuries raided, countries looted, their people massacred, women raped, children bayoneted.
This link to love your conquerors is not unique just to Japan or to SE Asia. The Taiwanese also loved the Japanese after being conquered and ruled for more than 50 years, much longer than all the SE Asian countries but did not suffered as much as the SE Asian countries. The point is this, the more vicious and ruthless the invaders, the more loved and trusted they would be by the conquered leaders of the SE Asian countries. The people would be different as they were the ones that bore the brunt of the cruelties and atrocities of the Japanese/invaders, not the elite or leaders.
Take the same line of thinking to Vietnam, the Philippines and Japan. They were victims of the worst destructive forces of the American military might. The Philippines were conquered and ruled by the Americans for several decades, with many massacres. The Vietnamese almost went that way, suffered the most devastating bombings in human history, second to the atomic bombs in Japan. The fact is that they all loved their conquerors/invaders, the Americans. The Indonesians are also very fond of the Dutch, their colonial masters. No need to say more about the Malaysians and Singaporeans. they often reminisced about the good times under their colonial masters.
There is another common thread here. Besides being loved and trusted by the victims of invasion, the opposite is that countries that did not invade, plunder, loot, rape or massacre people of other countries would be distrusted and even hated by the countries they did not invade or conquer. China is a perfect example of this love hate relationship. China did not invade or conquer any of the SE Asian countries but is hated and distrusted by them.
My conclusion, China would have been loved and trusted by the SE Asian countries if it had invaded them, conquered and ruled them, conducted atrocities against these little weak countries. Maybe China should learn from the Americans and the European powers, and Japan, invade and conquer all these silly countries if it wants to be loved and trusted by them, like Japan and the USA. This is the failure of China for not harbouring the thought of colonising these countries.
This theory is quite similar to the Stockholm Syndrome where the victims fell in love with their captors that held them hostage. Maybe I shall called this the Singapore Syndrome or SE Asia Syndrome. I thought about calling it the Asean Syndrome or the Banana Syndrome. After thinking it over, the Singapore Syndrome is most appropriate as the greatest admirers of Japan, the brutal invaders, are from Singapore.
Come to think of it, the choice of Syonan as the name to remember fondly of the Japanese Invasion was not surprising. If that idea was not stopped, the next thing would be the demolishing of the War Memorial to remember the hundreds of thousands massacred by the Japanese during the Occupation, and probably another shrine to be built in its place to remember the heroic Japanese Imperial Army and the Kempeitai. They loved them and trusted them dearly. You have the most pristine display of the Singapore Syndrome here in this island.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)