Singapore III

This is the last of three posts on my recollections of visits to Singapore a decade, and more, ago. This last post shares my amateurish attempts to explain the “why” of Singapore. I’ve not given this much thought ever since returning from Asia years ago, but my notes remind me of my puzzlement in seeking to unlock the key(s) to Singapore’s unique success.

The usual platitudes did not do anything for me: tolerance, multiculturalism, strict enforcement of laws, educational excellence, and more. All those characteristics can be found across the world and throughout history; they come and go. And, for all we know, they could also go from Singapore.

What is (or was) the ground from which sprung such invigorating and nourishing fruit?

Attraction

If I had before me the offer of an all-expenses-paid visit to one place in the world, other than the United States and its territories, I’d be hard pressed to choose between England and Spain. As much as I like and am attracted to Singapore, my paternal and maternal roots are in England and Spain and I am ever-drawn to them, despite their decline and forsaking of their own histories.

My attraction to Singapore obviously lies in my childhood where I thrived in the Venezuelan tropical jungles, shorelines, and rivers. Singapore evokes memories that mesmerize me in ways that are difficult to express, let alone explain. And, yet, it is not so much the geography that pulls me to my parental roots; it is the history, the culture, the religion, the home. I am sure the reader understands, whether he grew up in a tropical jungle or in the Alaskan tundra.

So when I was in Singapore, I often thought of Venezuela. Very counterintuitive, I know. About the only thing the two countries have in common is the tropical setting — and not all of Venezuela is tropical!

But I grew up in the tropics and Singapore elicited thoughts of childhood from me.

Culture

Henry Van Til, the early Twentieth Century theologian, famously said, “Culture is religion externalized”. With that frame of reference I sought to better understand as I reflected on my visits to Singapore. 

Singapore’s ancient history does not help us much here. Although academics differ and debate the particulars, they generally agree that in the 14th Century Singapore was a trading port known as Temasek and under the influence of Greater India but also China. However, wars and banditry eventually depopulated the island and not much is known about these dark ages.

Sir Stamford Raffles saw the strategic importance of Singapore’s location and secured control thereof in 1819. This portentous event was not applauded by the British at the time as Raffles’s initiative brought England close to war with the Dutch, who claimed the island as within their sphere of influence.

The dispute was resolved and war avoided by the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824 wherein England ceded certain areas to the Dutch and vice versa. Singapore became a wealthy free port for trade between Europe and Asia. 

A few data about Sir Raffles illustrates the kind of men who walked the earth at that time. He was born on a ship off the coast of Jamaica (the British were everywhere) in 1781. He was a visionary to whom we owe the founding of modern Singapore as a “free port” in 1819. He had great opposition and died in 1826, the day before his 45th birthday. Some say he would have remained unappreciated were it not for his faithful wife who, long after his death, worked hard to make his work known and to correct the slander and calumnies that had been hurled against him. Today Singapore honors him with street names like Raffles Avenue and Raffles Boulevard. There is also a Stamford street somewhere, not to mention the colonial Raffles Hotel.

The 19th Century was England’s world empire era when the sun never set for her. A seldom reported corollary to that era was the Christian missionary activity that followed the empire throughout the earth, including Singapore, which remained an English colony from 1819 to the 1950s. 

Raffles established schools and churches in the native languages and opened the doors to missionaries. He abolished forced labor and slavery and although he did not impose English as the native language, over time that did become in effect the prevalent business language of Singapore. Another “English” characteristic is its traffic: to this day cars are driven on the left.

Finally, Raffles respected and provided for religious freedom, which also permitted Christian schools to be founded throughout that part of the world, including Singapore. 

By the time of his death, Singapore had flourished greatly on British principles, most significantly, “a specific regulation in the constitution called for the multi-ethnic population to remain as they were; and no crimes were entirely based on racial principles.” A crime was defined as a criminal act, not as something one believed or professed.

So Singapore’s culture, although decidedly multi-ethnic, would not have developed that way without genuine Christian tolerance which has persisted well into the modern era.

Today

Although there are many churches in Singapore as well as other places of worship, most would describe the island as pluralistic and secular. Lee Kuan Yew, was the first and longest serving prime minister of Singapore (1959-1990), then Senior Minister (1990-2004), then Minister Mentor (2004-2011).  

After barely surviving the Japanese occupation, Lee was educated in Singapore and in England and gained a reputation as a “left-wing” troublemaker. He distrusted the British because of their failure to defend Singapore against the Japanese conquest. However, in the aftermath of left-wing riots and Communist betrayals, he also turned against the Left for the rest of his life.

I would describe Lee as extremely pragmatic, which led him to avoid throwing out the practical and worthwhile colonial heritage with the colonial bathwater. Under his leadership, Singapore became one of the “Asian Tigers” and still boasts one of the highest per capita incomes in the world. 

In a sense, Singapore reflects much of Lee’s cultural and philosophic makeup: pragmatic, practical, and secular. This is true despite a growing but still small Christian community. 

Some of its major laws proceed from the Christian heritage. For example, divorce requires grounds — there is no “no fault divorce” in Singapore (although there have been and are efforts to change that). As for care for the elderly, children are required to care for their parents when the need arises. Ironically, based on my limited conversations with Singaporeans, I don’t think they “need” such a law, as the family is very strong. Thus far.

But secularization is also very strong and, in the West, such has always worked to obscure if not erase the Christian heritage. For example, in several photos from the early 20th Century, the caption referred to “Western Women”. They were actually Christian missionaries. Yes, they were “Western”; however, the caption did not accurately portray who they were in reality and the labors they wrought in Singapore. Such dishonesty prevails in much of the West today.

When one visits the Chijmes, one sees a shopping mall; however, it was once a convent which for decades would accept baby girls brought there by Chinese mothers who were being pressured to either abort or abandon them. These mothers knew that the Christian missionaries would care for their infant daughters and give them a chance in life. This history, although very real, is hidden today.

The Fullerton properties belong to a company founded by Ng Teng Fong (1928-2010). A plaque in the Fullerton Building quotes his favorite Bible verse: “I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever (Psalm 23:6)”. At the time of his death, he was the richest man in Singapore. Yet he was known as a humble man who did much for his town. 

“He went on to develop innovative homes, build the first shopping malls in Orchard Road, and pioneer the development of vibrant waterfront retail and commercial centre en Tsim Sha Tsui East, Hong Kong. [His companies] have built more than 1,000 developments in Singapore, Hong Kong, China, and Malaysia, attesting to the entrepreneurial energy and vision of our founder. To God be the Glory.”

“He considered himself to be an ‘ordinary working man’ with a dream to satisfy a desire for homes among Singaporeans.” He was the eldest of 11 children. He and his wife had 8 children, very much “against the grain” in modern Singapore which for a time had a “2 is enough” public campaign.

Conclusion

Much more can be written about Singapore, including stories of incredible courage, heroism, and fidelity during the Japanese occupation. Also, the accomplishments of men such as Sir Thomas Raffles, Lee Kuan Yew, Ng Teng Fong, not to mention heroic nurses and soldiers during the Japanese occupation can keep one engrossed for hours and days.

I wish all the best for that beautiful city and island state. However, if she forgets or neglects or otherwise does not acknowledge the heritage that produced her success, she will see that her success will become as dust and ashes. I do not wish that for her; quite the contrary. So I do hope her sons and daughters are encouraged to learn that heritage and to keep it alive.

Boat Quay, circa 1900

Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles (1781-1826). He was not only a great visionary, he also loved the peoples of Southeast Asia

Lee Kwan Yew (1923-2015) — First and also longest serving prime minister of Singapore

The Fullerton Hotel, which used to be the Singapore Post Office. 

View of the Marina Bay Sands, Singapore. One of countless striking views of modern Singapore

A Nasty Business

As a matter of historical fact the legal systems of all the nations that are heirs to the Western legal tradition have been rooted in certain beliefs or postulates [which] have presupposed the validity of those beliefs. Today those beliefs or postulates — such as the structural integrity of law, its ongoingness, its religious roots, its transcendent qualities — are rapidly disappearing ….

The law is becoming more fragmented, more subjective, geared more to expediency and less to morality, concerned more with immediate consequences and less with consistency or continuity.

Thus the historical soil of the Western legal tradition is being washed away in the twentieth century, and the tradition itself is threatened with collapse. — Harold J. Berman, Law and Revolution, Harvard University Press (1983)

To destroy a people, you must first sever their roots. — Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Disrespecting, disregarding, dishonoring, distorting, or otherwise dismissing objective Truth in history, is a nasty business whose sequel is violence, tyranny, and death (cf, The Black Book of CommunismThe Theme is FreedomEarthly PowersRobespierre, The Secret Six for historical proof; see 1984Brave New WorldThe Hidden StrengthThe Possessed, for philosophical reasoning behind the certainty of such a sequel).

In recent posts, we’ve documented very real consequences of godless philosophies and also the phenomenon of seeing the same atheistic ideologies foisted on and by our academics, our politics, our commerce, our medicine, and more as if we by some magic can escape the repercussions such beliefs have engendered throughout history on any people who have indulged in such foolishness.

This blog is entitled “The Pull of The Land” in agreement with Whittaker Chambers who said, “No land has a pull on a man as the land of his childhood.” That is certainly true for this writer. I yearn for a day, should the Lord grant it, in which I can once again see Venezuela a freer country and a happier people such as I remember in my childhood and youth. I also long to see this country — its 50 states and outlying territories — a freer and happier country such as I knew in yesteryear, a country which my own children and grandchildren can enjoy as I did.

But Chambers’ aphorism runs even beyond the land of one’s birth. I have been very fortunate in that I have been able to visit, and in some cases live in, lands on all sides of the globe. My heart holds a keen appreciation for such lands. However, eerily, should you offer me a free trip to only one of them, I’d be very hard pressed to choose between Spain and England. Why? Because they both are strongly linked to the place of my birth: an American mining camp in Venezuela. My forebears on my father’s side came to Massachussets from England, and from my mother’s side, to Venezuela from Spain.

The pull is very strong and as much as I’d like to see Singapore or Croatia or New Zealand or Iguazú or any other land once again, it is Spain or England I’d choose if my choices were limited to one or two.

The pull is very strong and as much as I’d like to see Singapore or Croatia or New Zealand or Iguazú or any other land once again, it is Spain or England I’d choose if my choices were limited to one or two.

It is that special love and appreciation which impels us to understand what has happened; to understand in order to be able to address the question, especially for the sake of our children and grandchildren.

We must return to Truth. Not my subjective truth or your subjective truth. Rather, the Objective Truth. 

And this is very difficult because we are all “men of our times” and our times are characterized by constant, endless propaganda which insists on living subjectively and questioning anyone or anything which claims to know the Truth. 

Regardless, we must press on as best we can, knowing that liberty cannot survive on subjectivity. It requires objective truth, which is the most powerful means we have at our disposal in order to push back on those who would transmogrify us into something we never agreed to or otherwise intended to be.

The late Professor Berman said that our legal systems “have been rooted in certain beliefs or postulates [which] have presupposed the validity of those beliefs.” 

As we see elites and mobs tear down statues of men we have historically admired, we must ask whether the presuppositions we formerly believed and acted upon were actually true. By their actions for two or three generations now the destroyers and their abetters in media, academia, entertainment, and more, have been forcefully asserting that all our presuppositions have been lies at best, evil at worst.

What is their basis for their insisting upon their infallibility? Are they speaking and writing truthfully?

A major hint that they speak lies is very easy to see: they work overtime to silence anyone who dares to challenge them on the basis of historical fact or Truth.

That should encourage us. It appears we still have a leg up on them.

But we will lose that advantage unless we get a firm grasp on Truth. 

In future posts, we hope to look at a few pivotal epochs or events in our history and seek to understand the deleterious effects the deliberate distortion of such episodes has had on the course of our history down to the present. 

Girona, Spain

English countryside

San Francisco in the 50s

San Francisco today

Caracas in the 50s

Caracas today

“Are They Natural?” — Charles Lindbergh in Venezuela

On May 21, 1927, not far from Paris, France, the first modern traffic jam developed.

Colonel Charles Lindbergh, having flown for 33 hours and 30 minutes, and not having slept for 55 hours, touched down and  was instantly swarmed by tens of thousands (some estimates range up to a million) of men, women, and children, all seeking to see, touch, embrace, and take mementos from the man and his plane. Incredibly, only 10 people were hospitalized. Parisians feted Mr. Lindbergh like no one else before. By the end of the week, millions (no debate on this estimate) had seen or greeted him as he was driven from ceremonies, to banquets, to historical sites, such as the Champs-Élysées. Throughout, the twenty-five-year-old pilot behaved with modest aplomb and his speeches were gems of diplomacy.

The adulation and joy followed Mr. Lindbergh to Brussels and London, where the behavior and lionization exhibited by the phlegmatic British could not be distinguished from that of the exuberant French.

By mid-June, Charles Lindbergh was back in his own country, where New York City feted him with a ticker tape parade in which several millions joined in the celebration.

President Coolidge, whose July 4th, 1926 speech on the 150th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence (see here) evinced a disquietude with the spiritual reality of the country, and who urged a return to eternal verities, apparently saw in the young pilot something of a personification of what he had in mind. Below is the transcript of President Coolidge’s welcome and Charles Lindbergh’s response before a large crowd in Washington, D.C.:

Calvin Coolidge: On behalf of his own people, who have a deep affection for him, and have been thrilled by his splendid achievements, and as President of the United States, I bestow the distinguished Flying Cross, as a symbol of appreciation for what he is and what he has done, upon Colonel Charles A. Lindbergh.

[Applause]

Intelligent, industrious, energetic, dependable, purposeful, alert, quick of reaction, serious, deliberate, stable, efficient, kind, modest, congenial, a man of good moral habits and regular in his business transactions.

[Applause]

Charles Lindbergh: When I landed at le Bourget, a few weeks ago, I landed with the expectancy, and the hope, of being able to see Europe. [Laughter and applause]. It was the first time I had ever been abroad [Laughter], and I wasn’t in any hurry to get back [Laughter and applause]. And I was informed, that while it wasn’t an order to come back home [laughter], that there’d be a battleship waiting for me next week. [Laughter and applause].

President Coolidge requested Lindbergh, who the world saw as an embodiment of America, to fly to South America as a goodwill ambassador for the United States. Lindbergh did so, taking off on December 1, 1927, on the famed Spirit of St. Louis, the same plane he flew across the Atlantic Ocean. His itinerary took him to Mexico City, Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador, Tegucigalpa, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panamá, Cartagena, Bogota, and Maracay (Venezuela), where he touched ground on January 29, 1928.

Although Caracas was the capital of Venezuela, the president, General Juan Vicente Gómez (see here and here) had made his home in Maracay, about 75 miles west. And that is where Lindbergh landed and where he was met by Gómez. But, first, he had flown over the capital city where enormous crowds had gathered in plazas, streets, and balconies, cheering loudly and waving frantically. In this, Venezuelans behaved like Parisians, Londoners, and New Yorkers.

Along with the crowds from Maracay and multitudes from Valencia, Puerto Cabello, and Caracas, innumerable automobiles invaded the roads converging towards the airport, creating Venezuela’s first massive traffic jam, immovable since the early afternoon. Many of the cars’ hoods displayed the national colors of Venezuela and the United States. By the time the plane landed, the airport was encircled by vast and loud multitudes, who gave the Águila Solitaria (Lone Eagle) an apotheotic reception.

The president himself walked to the hangars urging the crowds to give distance to the plane. Colonel Lindbergh had stayed a few minutes in the hangar, checking his plane’s fuselage and engine. The president’s entourage, seeking favor (a common phenomenon in all countries), expressed “concern” to the chief of staff that the American was being rude. But the chief brushed them aside, reminding them that President Gómez respected a man who “first took care of his horse”. This was true of Gómez. He was known to enjoy and to converse and seek good counsel on ranching and cattle breeding.

Two of Gómez’s daughters came forward and handed a magnificent bouquet of tropical flowers to the the famous aviator. “Are they natural?”, he asked. The president replied, “Yes, they are, but they are recognized and come from good families.” 

This anecdote quickly made the rounds throughout the country, as the president had 74 children from numerous concubines. Lindbergh was referring to the flowers; however, depending on context, natural also refers to the status of children, in which case the word alludes to offspring of an unmarried couple. These become “legitimate” once the couple marries. It was in this sense that Gómez had understood the question, and he wanted to make clear that he “recognized” his daughters, having given them his name. But Gómez genuinely liked Lindbergh and no offense was taken, as none was intended.

The next day had been declared a national holiday, with Lindbergh being feted and honored in Maracay and Caracas,  where he laid flowers adorned with Venezuelan and US flags at Simon Bolivar’s grave. Upon exiting the National Pantheon, he was instantly greeted with deafening ovations by the thousands who had gathered to see the American hero. The festivities culminated in a sumptuous banquet and dance in Caracas. Lindbergh did not dance, but, as in Paris and London, he was a gracious guest.

On January 31, 1928, the third day after having arrived, he took flight again and, after visits to St. Thomas, Puerto Rico, Santo Domingo, Port-au-Prince, Havana, he flew back to St. Louis.

Upon Lindbergh’s departure, Presidents Coolidge and Gómez exchanged warm greetings by diplomatic cable and Lindbergh himself wrote the following farewell:

I wish to give my thanks to President Gómez, to the officials of the army, to the functionaries of the government, and to the people of Venezuela, for the heartfelt reception they have so graciously given me during my visit and I also wish to express my gratitude to the press for their cooperation.

I am very impressed with the efficient manner in which the Corps of Venezuelan Aviation prepared the landing field and for the warm manners and gracious behavior of the people of Venezuela towards me.

Colonel Lindbergh returned to Venezuela in September of 1929, inaugurating the first experimental flight of Pan American Airways on a Sikorsky S-38.

The Spirit of St. Louis was donated by Charles Lindbergh and is displayed in the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C. The aluminum exterior of the plane reflects the national ensigns of all the countries visited by the young man. Among those ensigns is the flag of Venezuela.

With the President of Venezuela, General Juan Vicente Gómez, January 29, 1928
Charles A. Lindbergh, 1902-1974
North of Paris, May 21, 1927
Arriving in England, 1927
Charles A. Lindbergh posing with the Spirit of St. Louis
Pan American Airways, Sikorsky S-38