Introduction
Before we can answer whether the status of Indian women had changed for the better because of modernization, we must first define "modernization". Modernization means that people have a greater freedom in every sphere of life. Now, considering the fact that India was a conservative society, there was no doubt that the status of women in India did experience changes to a large extent. We can categorize the changes into different sectors -- education, economic, society.
Education
Modernization did brought about changes in the area of education for women. From 1971 to 1991, there was an indication that female literacy increased. But we can see that most of the educated women came from urban areas. A general assumption would be because of how urban women were brought up. It was most probably that their family were also educated and therefore their mindsets had been "modernized".
And if we compare them with males, only 20 percent of rural women were literate as compared to 50 percent of men. It was also estimated that Primary school enrolment for boys was 99 percent compared to only 66 percent for girls. Though education opportunities were provided (not to a large extent), females were still regarded to be less useful for the society. For example, families supported boys to pursue better education thinking that they will need it to become future earners. Minority would support girls to have the same education as boys. Therefore, although modernization opportunities were served but if people's mindset did not change, the status of women would also remain unprioritized.
Economic
There was also an increase of working women both in rural and urban areas. It was amazing to see that most of the working women lived in rural areas. 46.3% of rural women worked on agriculture as compared to 23% men. We can see that there was an overwork of women working in the fields.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Favourable / Unfavourable?
Did the favourable consequences outweigh the unfavourable consequences of colonial economic policies for the Indian peasantry in the late 19th and early 20th centuries?
Introduction
It was only after the rebellion that took place in 1857 that the British intensified their control over India. Many economic policies in India were implemented. Though it had been argued that most of the policies that British implemented were unfavourable, we cannot deny that some of these policies were also beneficial to the development of India as a modernized state. And as a result of these policies, there was no doubt that India's economy became modernized under colonial rule.
From subsistence to commercialization
It was evident that when the British tightened their control over India, the first thing that they reformed were the economic policies. The British introduced liberal economic policies driven by market economic forces. This was to place India as part of the globalized market and to increase profit for the Mother country. Some of the changes include land and labor as commodities, development of transportation to increase communication and efficiency, and the increase of production of cashcrops instead of food crops. Though all of these led to economic modernization, we must not neglect the fact that the welfare of the Indians were not looked after by the colonial government. For colonial rulers only sought to develop industrial Britain and made their colony as agricultural India. Thus, the development of India itself was not a prime consideration.
The nature of India's ecnomy prior to 1850 was that people were under a subsistent way of life. Lands were in the hands of landlords and peasants used lands to cultivate through feudal relationships. Peasants were required to give a percentage of their harvests as monetary payments to the landlords. With the introduction of land reforms, landlords were supposed to rent lands to earn profits and also pay back the government the lease payment. Without any background of market economic forces, landlords were unable to maximize the use of lands. Thus, leaving both landlords and peasants landless.
With the implementation of new economic forces, the development of transportation system also prevailed. In 1859, there was an estimation of 432 miles of railway tracks and it increased rapidly. And in 1900, the number shot up to 25,000 miles. In addition to it, telgraphic lines also covered an estimation of 20,000 miles. Though the numbers were perhaps exaggerated, there is no doubt that these systems increased connectivity and transportation of goods all over India.
But we must also consider the fact that these systems were only limited to areas where commercialized crops were available. It did not extend to the rural and remote parts of India. Thus, the rural areas did not experience as much advantage. SO, can we still consider the development of transportation system favourable? Yes. It still helped India's economic development but did NOT improve the well-being of people.
It was also because of the connectivity that merchants became more aware of economic situations. And it was also during the period when India experienced famine in the second half of the 19th century. Merchants abused the awareness by increasing the demands, especially in remote places and unreachable areas. They were able to do this because of the free market economic forces (laissez-faire system), a system without government intervention. This was perhaps one of the reasons, besides food shortages and famines, why many died because of starvation.
The increase of trade also part of the economic policies that the British implemented in India. India was involved in global trading (with China, Malaya, Europe, Japan), thus making her closer to the outside world. It was such an anomaly, however, that when India experienced famine in the second half of the 19th century, but food supplies were still exported to other parts of the world. There was an estimation of 6.4 million cwt of wheat exported to Europe in 1877 and 1878, a period when India was suffering of starvation. Despite all the developments to increase India's economy, it was evident that the British regarded India only as a revenue of plantation. There was not much done to alleviate the problems of the famine.
During the period of sufferings, there was also a stasis in population growth. So did the colonial economic policies favourable or unfavourable to the Indian peasantries? My stand is yes to the economic development but no to the well-being of its people. In addition to it, these policies did not completely improve the living standards of peasants because all in all they were still living under the hardships and segregation of colonial rule. They were still peasants that worked for the benefits of Europe! In conclusion to the arguments, colonial economic policies mostly brought unfavourable consequences rather than favourable.
Introduction
It was only after the rebellion that took place in 1857 that the British intensified their control over India. Many economic policies in India were implemented. Though it had been argued that most of the policies that British implemented were unfavourable, we cannot deny that some of these policies were also beneficial to the development of India as a modernized state. And as a result of these policies, there was no doubt that India's economy became modernized under colonial rule.
From subsistence to commercialization
It was evident that when the British tightened their control over India, the first thing that they reformed were the economic policies. The British introduced liberal economic policies driven by market economic forces. This was to place India as part of the globalized market and to increase profit for the Mother country. Some of the changes include land and labor as commodities, development of transportation to increase communication and efficiency, and the increase of production of cashcrops instead of food crops. Though all of these led to economic modernization, we must not neglect the fact that the welfare of the Indians were not looked after by the colonial government. For colonial rulers only sought to develop industrial Britain and made their colony as agricultural India. Thus, the development of India itself was not a prime consideration.
The nature of India's ecnomy prior to 1850 was that people were under a subsistent way of life. Lands were in the hands of landlords and peasants used lands to cultivate through feudal relationships. Peasants were required to give a percentage of their harvests as monetary payments to the landlords. With the introduction of land reforms, landlords were supposed to rent lands to earn profits and also pay back the government the lease payment. Without any background of market economic forces, landlords were unable to maximize the use of lands. Thus, leaving both landlords and peasants landless.
With the implementation of new economic forces, the development of transportation system also prevailed. In 1859, there was an estimation of 432 miles of railway tracks and it increased rapidly. And in 1900, the number shot up to 25,000 miles. In addition to it, telgraphic lines also covered an estimation of 20,000 miles. Though the numbers were perhaps exaggerated, there is no doubt that these systems increased connectivity and transportation of goods all over India.
But we must also consider the fact that these systems were only limited to areas where commercialized crops were available. It did not extend to the rural and remote parts of India. Thus, the rural areas did not experience as much advantage. SO, can we still consider the development of transportation system favourable? Yes. It still helped India's economic development but did NOT improve the well-being of people.
It was also because of the connectivity that merchants became more aware of economic situations. And it was also during the period when India experienced famine in the second half of the 19th century. Merchants abused the awareness by increasing the demands, especially in remote places and unreachable areas. They were able to do this because of the free market economic forces (laissez-faire system), a system without government intervention. This was perhaps one of the reasons, besides food shortages and famines, why many died because of starvation.
The increase of trade also part of the economic policies that the British implemented in India. India was involved in global trading (with China, Malaya, Europe, Japan), thus making her closer to the outside world. It was such an anomaly, however, that when India experienced famine in the second half of the 19th century, but food supplies were still exported to other parts of the world. There was an estimation of 6.4 million cwt of wheat exported to Europe in 1877 and 1878, a period when India was suffering of starvation. Despite all the developments to increase India's economy, it was evident that the British regarded India only as a revenue of plantation. There was not much done to alleviate the problems of the famine.
During the period of sufferings, there was also a stasis in population growth. So did the colonial economic policies favourable or unfavourable to the Indian peasantries? My stand is yes to the economic development but no to the well-being of its people. In addition to it, these policies did not completely improve the living standards of peasants because all in all they were still living under the hardships and segregation of colonial rule. They were still peasants that worked for the benefits of Europe! In conclusion to the arguments, colonial economic policies mostly brought unfavourable consequences rather than favourable.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
What impact did the policies of Khmer Rouge have on Kampuchea?
Introduction
Khmer Rouge, also known as Democratic Kampuchea (DK), was better known for its 4-year terror regime. Under their regime, almost a quarter of Cambodia's population lost their lives due to poverty, starvation, malnutrition, hard labour, and execution. Pol Pot, the leader of the party, and his followers aimed to transform Cambodia into a self-reliance socialist state. They adopted Communism and theirs was a mixture of influences from Soviet Union and China. They believed that collectivization of agriculture and industrial production will result greater benefits rather than profit-oriented individuals. Thus, the population in the urban areas declined, as most of them were evacuated to the rural areas within two months.
Impacts
Khmer Rouge executed all oppositions, whether they were real oppositions or even suspected. Pol Pot did not want any revolutionaries to take over his regime. He also banished intellectuals and educators. Educators were regarded as threats to the regime. Some of the intellectuals escaped to nearby countries. Until now, they were negligent to return. Thus, leaving Cambodia as a state without any education. And we know, that without education, a country cannot develop because of the lack of skilled labourers or businessmen.
Furthermore, KR also banished businessmen. They believed that previously, before KR came to power, businessmen suppressed the poor. As a socialist state, KR emphasized on "equal" status throughout the whole population. The rich were stripped of their status and were forced to work as farmers in rural areas. \
KR also rejected foreign aid and investors. They believed that Cambodia is self-sufficient and did not need any humanitarian aid, although Cambodia was rather poor at that state because of the constant civil war previously. As a result of the regime's policies, many died of poverty and the country was regarded as most backward as compared to other Southeast Asian countries.
The regime adopted this motto: "Keeping them is no gain. Losing them is no loss" (Chandler 1993). Businessmen, educators, intellectuals were also banished.
Khmer Rouge, also known as Democratic Kampuchea (DK), was better known for its 4-year terror regime. Under their regime, almost a quarter of Cambodia's population lost their lives due to poverty, starvation, malnutrition, hard labour, and execution. Pol Pot, the leader of the party, and his followers aimed to transform Cambodia into a self-reliance socialist state. They adopted Communism and theirs was a mixture of influences from Soviet Union and China. They believed that collectivization of agriculture and industrial production will result greater benefits rather than profit-oriented individuals. Thus, the population in the urban areas declined, as most of them were evacuated to the rural areas within two months.
Impacts
Khmer Rouge executed all oppositions, whether they were real oppositions or even suspected. Pol Pot did not want any revolutionaries to take over his regime. He also banished intellectuals and educators. Educators were regarded as threats to the regime. Some of the intellectuals escaped to nearby countries. Until now, they were negligent to return. Thus, leaving Cambodia as a state without any education. And we know, that without education, a country cannot develop because of the lack of skilled labourers or businessmen.
Furthermore, KR also banished businessmen. They believed that previously, before KR came to power, businessmen suppressed the poor. As a socialist state, KR emphasized on "equal" status throughout the whole population. The rich were stripped of their status and were forced to work as farmers in rural areas. \
KR also rejected foreign aid and investors. They believed that Cambodia is self-sufficient and did not need any humanitarian aid, although Cambodia was rather poor at that state because of the constant civil war previously. As a result of the regime's policies, many died of poverty and the country was regarded as most backward as compared to other Southeast Asian countries.
The regime adopted this motto: "Keeping them is no gain. Losing them is no loss" (Chandler 1993). Businessmen, educators, intellectuals were also banished.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Explain the ways in which different parts of Southeast Asia came under colonial hegemony in the nineteenth century?
Qn. 1 -- Explain the ways in which different parts of Southeast Asia came under colonial hegemony in the nineteenth century?
Introduction
The increasing European influence in Southeast Asia grew in a faster rate after 1750. Colonial hegemony in terms of political and economic powers only came to prevail after 1815. By the end of 19th century, most of Southeast Asia were under colonial rule.
How did colonial rule come to prevail?
Southeast Asian states came under foreign power in different mechanisms and time. Some states signed treatites. Others had open conflicts that led to pacification and occupation. And another was because of economic forces that led to the intervention.
Evidently, areas such as Java and the Philippines had been under European control prior to 1800s. Other Indonesian islands besides Java, Vietnam, Burma, and the Malay Peninsula, came under colonial rule in the course of 19th century. Some countries such as Thailand, in the 19th century, did not come under colonial rule directly.
The Spread of Colonial Rule
(1) Colonial powers used the signing of treaties in order to gain its powers over states such as Singapore and Cambodia.
Local rulers in Singapore signed two treaties. The first treaty was through Sir Stamford Raffles manipulation of the succession dispute in the Johor-Riau Empire. The second treaty was the Anglo-Dutch treaty in 1824. The British, however, had already exerted power even before the second treaty was signed. Therefore, the Anglo-Dutch treaty provided legitimacy of foreign dominion over the Settlement.
Colonial hegemony in Cambodia also came to existence through diplomacy. In 1884, King Norodom was forced to sign a treaty which will allow Cambodia to become a French protectorate.
(2) Open conflicts between Southeast Asians and Europeans also provided opportunities for colonial powers to exert its full control over local's political, economic, and social aspects.
Such was the case in Java between 1825-1830. In trying to put Java under Dutch hegemony by building railroads, the Dutch encountered oppositions from peasants and aristrocatic families. This led to the Java War. Eventually, locals did not win the war. And the war concludes that Java will be under an intense Dutch hegemony until the next century.
In the case of Vietnam, there was a phase whereby French missionaries came to preach and covert locals to Christians. The existing monarchy, however, was against such movement. They then persecuted these missionaries. The problem of the Vietnamese rulers was that they were too rigid that they were not exposed to western cultures, unlike Thailand. They were too confined with Confucian ideas that they were not ready for changes, given the fact that many had already coverted as Christians. Because of the weak administration, it was easy for the French to come and take dominion over Vietnam.
(3) Pacification by spread of religion can also be classified as one of the mechanisms that colonial rulers used to bring states under colonial subject.
This occurred in the Philippines whereby the Spanish came to indoctrinate the people and control them in the latter part. Since the 16th century, Spanish missionaries came to the northern part of Philippines to spread Catholicism by setting up schools and educating the locals their culture and language. Thus, the beginnings of 19th century, when colonization was still in its infancy stage in most parts of Southeast Asia, almost all of the Philippines (except the south) was already under colonial hegemony.
SO, was the spread of colonial rule a result of deliberate policy?
We can't say that all European countries at the beginning of the 19th century had fixed policies to spread colonialism. But we know that there was a period of time when demands for raw materials due to industrialization in Europe increased. There was also a greater degree of self-assurance and arrogance among European nations after Napoleonic wars.
The idea of exploiting colonial territories for the benefit of the mother country appealed policy makers and also some European civilians who directly or indirectly benefit from colonial possessions. These civilians who were present in Southeast Asia also played an important role in promoting colonial rule.
Conclusion
Therefore the ways in which different parts of Southeast Asia came under colonial hegemony in the 19th century cannot be generalized that it had a fixed mean. Southeast Asian states came under colonial rule in different manners and timings. Also, the expansion of colonial rule was largely inspired by economic demands.
Introduction
The increasing European influence in Southeast Asia grew in a faster rate after 1750. Colonial hegemony in terms of political and economic powers only came to prevail after 1815. By the end of 19th century, most of Southeast Asia were under colonial rule.
How did colonial rule come to prevail?
Southeast Asian states came under foreign power in different mechanisms and time. Some states signed treatites. Others had open conflicts that led to pacification and occupation. And another was because of economic forces that led to the intervention.
Evidently, areas such as Java and the Philippines had been under European control prior to 1800s. Other Indonesian islands besides Java, Vietnam, Burma, and the Malay Peninsula, came under colonial rule in the course of 19th century. Some countries such as Thailand, in the 19th century, did not come under colonial rule directly.
The Spread of Colonial Rule
(1) Colonial powers used the signing of treaties in order to gain its powers over states such as Singapore and Cambodia.
Local rulers in Singapore signed two treaties. The first treaty was through Sir Stamford Raffles manipulation of the succession dispute in the Johor-Riau Empire. The second treaty was the Anglo-Dutch treaty in 1824. The British, however, had already exerted power even before the second treaty was signed. Therefore, the Anglo-Dutch treaty provided legitimacy of foreign dominion over the Settlement.
Colonial hegemony in Cambodia also came to existence through diplomacy. In 1884, King Norodom was forced to sign a treaty which will allow Cambodia to become a French protectorate.
(2) Open conflicts between Southeast Asians and Europeans also provided opportunities for colonial powers to exert its full control over local's political, economic, and social aspects.
Such was the case in Java between 1825-1830. In trying to put Java under Dutch hegemony by building railroads, the Dutch encountered oppositions from peasants and aristrocatic families. This led to the Java War. Eventually, locals did not win the war. And the war concludes that Java will be under an intense Dutch hegemony until the next century.
In the case of Vietnam, there was a phase whereby French missionaries came to preach and covert locals to Christians. The existing monarchy, however, was against such movement. They then persecuted these missionaries. The problem of the Vietnamese rulers was that they were too rigid that they were not exposed to western cultures, unlike Thailand. They were too confined with Confucian ideas that they were not ready for changes, given the fact that many had already coverted as Christians. Because of the weak administration, it was easy for the French to come and take dominion over Vietnam.
(3) Pacification by spread of religion can also be classified as one of the mechanisms that colonial rulers used to bring states under colonial subject.
This occurred in the Philippines whereby the Spanish came to indoctrinate the people and control them in the latter part. Since the 16th century, Spanish missionaries came to the northern part of Philippines to spread Catholicism by setting up schools and educating the locals their culture and language. Thus, the beginnings of 19th century, when colonization was still in its infancy stage in most parts of Southeast Asia, almost all of the Philippines (except the south) was already under colonial hegemony.
SO, was the spread of colonial rule a result of deliberate policy?
We can't say that all European countries at the beginning of the 19th century had fixed policies to spread colonialism. But we know that there was a period of time when demands for raw materials due to industrialization in Europe increased. There was also a greater degree of self-assurance and arrogance among European nations after Napoleonic wars.
The idea of exploiting colonial territories for the benefit of the mother country appealed policy makers and also some European civilians who directly or indirectly benefit from colonial possessions. These civilians who were present in Southeast Asia also played an important role in promoting colonial rule.
Conclusion
Therefore the ways in which different parts of Southeast Asia came under colonial hegemony in the 19th century cannot be generalized that it had a fixed mean. Southeast Asian states came under colonial rule in different manners and timings. Also, the expansion of colonial rule was largely inspired by economic demands.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Indus Valley
EXPLAIN THE FEATURES OF URBAN PLANNING IN THE INDUS VALLEY CITIES WITH REFERENCE TO THE NEW ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE.
The buried cities of Indus civilizations showed a unique sense of urban planning. The Indus civilizations were notably found in the areas of Mohenjo-Daro, Harappa, Daro, and Lothal. These civilizations had the similar features in their town-planning. Although the Indus civilizations were of antiquity, they were very much advanced as compared to contemporaneous civilizations.
Their urban planning includes the general layout, categorization of space, and basic necessities. The systematic and meticulous planning led to the comfort of its inhabitants; whereby, there were evidence of extensive drainage and sewage system. The Indus cities were concerned of the comfort and sanitation rather than artistic features. This can be seen by the similar features of the buildings which were mostly squares and rectangular in shape.
General Layout
The layout of the city can be seen through the orientation of the buildings and streets. They were built according to the cardinal directions of east, west, north, and south. The streets intersected at exactly ninety degrees dividing the cities into squares and rectangle blocks. There were also high architectural skills. This can be shown through the straight and well-aligned streets.
Unique town planning was also shown in the division of areas between the commercial activities and residential dwellings. They were divided to Upper Town, consisted of the Citadel and other eminent buildings, and Lower Town, which were mostly residential area. This indicates that the working area was separated from the living area.
The Indus cities were also outlined by brick walls. Majumdar suggested that it may be a sign of defense. In addition to it, archaeological evidence showed several weapons and skeletons in the area itself. Another historian suggested that it may be a mean to control commercial activities because it was evident that there were only two entry points. The purposes were not justified, yet, we may conclude that the Indus civilizations used advanced technologies to make bricks to build the fortification.
Categorization of Space
As mentioned earlier, the Indus cities consist of the Upper and Lower Town. In the Upper Town area, which was also known as the Citadel, historians suggested that it served as an administration area. Eminent buildings such as the Great Bath, Granary, and Collegiate Buildings were located at the Citadel. Several barracks were also seen in this area. This also suggested that the Citadel was perhaps an industrial area.
An organized administration of the Indus civilizations can be seen in the stratification of residential dwellings. Unlike the Citadel, the residential area varied in sizes yet materials and style of construction remained similar.
Basic Necessities
The urban planning of the Indus civilizations was designed for practicality and comfort. As ancient as it may sound, the Indus civilizations had already thought of latrines, shower, drainage and sewage system. Private latrines were located on the second storey of the houses. Although these civilizations may be dated back to four millenniums away, the thought of gravity became a part of this unique feature of sanitation.
Water was an important necessity for the people. Their architectural skills can be shown by the elevation level of the wells and houses. This was to prevent mixing of waste water from the sewage and drains.
Although people of the Indus civilizations lived close-by with each other, there was also evidence of housing privacy. Houses in an area shared a common patio where all the windows and doors faced. Hallways were surrounded by walls.
Conclusion
Indus Valley cities may be ancient yet their urban planning was an evidence of advanced and meticulous civilizations. They were ingenious. The systematic town planning may not be possible without a coordinate, organized maintenance of its administration. Therefore, even in 3000 B.C., there was already advanced civilizations with contemporary thoughts in urban planning.
The buried cities of Indus civilizations showed a unique sense of urban planning. The Indus civilizations were notably found in the areas of Mohenjo-Daro, Harappa, Daro, and Lothal. These civilizations had the similar features in their town-planning. Although the Indus civilizations were of antiquity, they were very much advanced as compared to contemporaneous civilizations.
Their urban planning includes the general layout, categorization of space, and basic necessities. The systematic and meticulous planning led to the comfort of its inhabitants; whereby, there were evidence of extensive drainage and sewage system. The Indus cities were concerned of the comfort and sanitation rather than artistic features. This can be seen by the similar features of the buildings which were mostly squares and rectangular in shape.
General Layout
The layout of the city can be seen through the orientation of the buildings and streets. They were built according to the cardinal directions of east, west, north, and south. The streets intersected at exactly ninety degrees dividing the cities into squares and rectangle blocks. There were also high architectural skills. This can be shown through the straight and well-aligned streets.
Unique town planning was also shown in the division of areas between the commercial activities and residential dwellings. They were divided to Upper Town, consisted of the Citadel and other eminent buildings, and Lower Town, which were mostly residential area. This indicates that the working area was separated from the living area.
The Indus cities were also outlined by brick walls. Majumdar suggested that it may be a sign of defense. In addition to it, archaeological evidence showed several weapons and skeletons in the area itself. Another historian suggested that it may be a mean to control commercial activities because it was evident that there were only two entry points. The purposes were not justified, yet, we may conclude that the Indus civilizations used advanced technologies to make bricks to build the fortification.
Categorization of Space
As mentioned earlier, the Indus cities consist of the Upper and Lower Town. In the Upper Town area, which was also known as the Citadel, historians suggested that it served as an administration area. Eminent buildings such as the Great Bath, Granary, and Collegiate Buildings were located at the Citadel. Several barracks were also seen in this area. This also suggested that the Citadel was perhaps an industrial area.
An organized administration of the Indus civilizations can be seen in the stratification of residential dwellings. Unlike the Citadel, the residential area varied in sizes yet materials and style of construction remained similar.
Basic Necessities
The urban planning of the Indus civilizations was designed for practicality and comfort. As ancient as it may sound, the Indus civilizations had already thought of latrines, shower, drainage and sewage system. Private latrines were located on the second storey of the houses. Although these civilizations may be dated back to four millenniums away, the thought of gravity became a part of this unique feature of sanitation.
Water was an important necessity for the people. Their architectural skills can be shown by the elevation level of the wells and houses. This was to prevent mixing of waste water from the sewage and drains.
Although people of the Indus civilizations lived close-by with each other, there was also evidence of housing privacy. Houses in an area shared a common patio where all the windows and doors faced. Hallways were surrounded by walls.
Conclusion
Indus Valley cities may be ancient yet their urban planning was an evidence of advanced and meticulous civilizations. They were ingenious. The systematic town planning may not be possible without a coordinate, organized maintenance of its administration. Therefore, even in 3000 B.C., there was already advanced civilizations with contemporary thoughts in urban planning.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
February 15 Commemoration
Singapore History
What was significant about February 15?
Why do Singaporeans made February 15 an eventful day?
There had been debates about this day because this was when Singapore fell to the Japanese. But the question is ... Isn't it suppose to be a mourning day? That was exactly what MCP (Malayan Communist Party) tried to do before 1967. They made campaigns to mourn over the loss of Singapore to the Japanese. However, this act made the British very upset. To the British, mourning meant an attempt to embarass them because the British lost over the Japanese.
It was not until 1967, after Singapore's independence, that the real meaning of February 15 was revived. As part of the nation-building, the message spread across on February 15 were:
1. Don't rely on others for protection
>> Here is when Singapore realized that they can neither trust the British nor the Japanese. Singapore is a country of itself, and she can defend her own country by her own people. It had been a while since Singapore was under the British colonial rule. In my opinion, the Japanese Occupation made the people realized that they were actually weak as Singaporeans. So if there was a debate on whether the Japanese Occupation was actually a nightmare period for Singapore, I would say "Not really." Of course, the fact of being "occupied" was always unpleasant, especially when you were treated harshly and segragated. But, without the Japanese Occupation, Singapore would not have realized that she was always living under British shadows. Even in the Japanese Occupation itself, it was not as bad as other South-East Asian countries such as Indonesia, because the Japanese Occupation only lasted for 3 years. The Occupation actually guided Singapore to the sense of national identity. Without an identity, Singapore will not be as what it is today.
2. Racial divide is a fatal flaw in defence
>> Since Singapore had always been of diverse people (of different races), people had often feared discordance, especially the authorities. Up until now, we see how the government made campaigns to promote racial harmony in order to keep the four races united. Memorials such as the Civilian War Memorial, better known as "the four chopsticks", commemorated the sufferings that Singapore civilians (all four races) had to go through.
What was significant about February 15?
Why do Singaporeans made February 15 an eventful day?
There had been debates about this day because this was when Singapore fell to the Japanese. But the question is ... Isn't it suppose to be a mourning day? That was exactly what MCP (Malayan Communist Party) tried to do before 1967. They made campaigns to mourn over the loss of Singapore to the Japanese. However, this act made the British very upset. To the British, mourning meant an attempt to embarass them because the British lost over the Japanese.
It was not until 1967, after Singapore's independence, that the real meaning of February 15 was revived. As part of the nation-building, the message spread across on February 15 were:
1. Don't rely on others for protection
>> Here is when Singapore realized that they can neither trust the British nor the Japanese. Singapore is a country of itself, and she can defend her own country by her own people. It had been a while since Singapore was under the British colonial rule. In my opinion, the Japanese Occupation made the people realized that they were actually weak as Singaporeans. So if there was a debate on whether the Japanese Occupation was actually a nightmare period for Singapore, I would say "Not really." Of course, the fact of being "occupied" was always unpleasant, especially when you were treated harshly and segragated. But, without the Japanese Occupation, Singapore would not have realized that she was always living under British shadows. Even in the Japanese Occupation itself, it was not as bad as other South-East Asian countries such as Indonesia, because the Japanese Occupation only lasted for 3 years. The Occupation actually guided Singapore to the sense of national identity. Without an identity, Singapore will not be as what it is today.
2. Racial divide is a fatal flaw in defence
>> Since Singapore had always been of diverse people (of different races), people had often feared discordance, especially the authorities. Up until now, we see how the government made campaigns to promote racial harmony in order to keep the four races united. Memorials such as the Civilian War Memorial, better known as "the four chopsticks", commemorated the sufferings that Singapore civilians (all four races) had to go through.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)