Lee Kuan Yew: the Man and His Ideas

There is a lot of repeating and duplicated texts. I recommend skipping the text on sides and speech excerpts, since they are in full at the end. But nevertheless, good background on how this magical country got to such a boom. It contains a lot of common sense logic, that if used in other countries, might prove universally useful.

“First is his capacity to learn from experience, and, if necessary, to change his beliefs, even radically, when they do not conform to reality. One radical change happened very early in his political career when he parted company with the socialism of the British Labour Party because he could see that it was not working in Britain, and would not work in Singapore.’’Lee educated in England, one of the brightest stars of Cambridge. However, he also educated himself from what he experienced outside university . . .“He had started off as a student in England believing that wealth generation was a natural product of labour, and that the difference between a good society and a bad one was in how the fruits of that labour were distributed. But when he saw how costly such a system was to maintain, and the practical consequences of subsidising a man for the rest of his life, whether for health care or public housing, he made the switch in Singapore. If a man did not own his home but rented it from the state, why would he look after it properly? If medical service were free, would it not lead to an unsustainable system and a bottomless pit? Soon after assuming office, he made Singaporeans pay for medical prescriptions, even if it was a very small sum to begin with, and the government sold public flats to the people. Whenever he was confronted with theory which did not work in practice, he chose the latter.’’Seeing is not the same as observation.“Practice decided for me, in the final implementation of policies. It was not the theory of capitalism, not Milton Friedman, that decided my policies. But in each instance, we calculated –if that doesn’t work, this wouldn’t work.” Nevertheless, foundational ideas, do control . . .“At the intellectual level, what he could not subscribe to was their belief that it was possible to construct a perfect society from a set of arguments derived from first principles. He explained this to the authors:“I wasn’t at all sure that you could analyse life and society in a scientific way. I mean, everything was about scientific socialism … The word itself, the phrase itself, repels me because there’s no scientific possibilities in managing people’s lives. I did not believe that. But they believed it, they thought that all this would work out like a mathematical formula.’’People have free will, they are made from atoms, but are not atoms.“Whereas we believed that so long as we had equal opportunities, each must be given a free play of his own life. You don’t want to order people’s lives around. If you want to be an artist, well, go ahead and be an artist. And if you want to be a Muslim, so be it. But they will not allow that. They say, ‘Belief in God is nonsense, we must destroy it, we must debunk this superstition.’ That is a certain thoroughness because they believed they had the answer to everything –which makes it suspect to me. “I’m not sure whether there’s a God or there’s no God, I’m not sure whether the world was created by God or by an accident. But don’t go around knocking other people’s gods and other people’s culture.’’Modesty is rare.“Even if there is no God, this group of people have been held together and sustained through all their tragedies and all their sorrows by a belief, by a certain belief that they are all together under one God … therefore they share certain things in common. Why should you go and demolish that? I disagreed with that profoundly.”THE MAKING OF A POLITICIAN1 It Began When My World Collapsed2. Taking on the Communists3. The Union DividedIDEAS THAT MADE A NATION4. The Secret of Good Government5. From Third World to First6. End of History? Asia’s Just Beginning7. The Nature of Human Society8. Culture, the X-factor9. First Order, then Law10. Minding the MediaTHE MAN BEHIND THE IDEAS11. I Did My Best“One of the reasons contributing to Japanese and German recovery was that their … capitalists, managers, executives, engineers and their … workers all suffered defeat and they were fired with a singleness of purpose: to put their country back on its feet. That made the miracle of recovery.’’‘Defeat brought success’!“Over the years, we recognised the limits and the counterproductive effects of subsidies on the incentive to work, and on training and achievement which are necessary for the creation of wealth for everybody. We did not see that in the early stages. Furthermore, we did not see that you can have a system where the white man is not superior, but he competes on equal terms in his production of superior goods and services.’’He changed to what worked. “Today, the new meaning that capitalism has acquired, which means entrepreneurship, raising capital, putting your ideas into practice, testing the market, if the market accepts your service or your goods, you have created wealth for everybody and for yourself. That was not the way I saw capitalism as a young man.”This capacity to switch to the opposite is so. . .so. . .fascinating! Another deep switch . . .““God did not make the Russians equal. Lenin and Stalin tried to. You are too long, they chop you down. … They tried it in China; it has failed. They tried it in Vietnam, boat people. In North Korea, total devastation. … Even in the capitalist West where they have tried throwing money at problems … You go down to New York, Broadway. You will see the beggars… Worse than in the ’50s and in the early ’60s, before the Great Society programmes. Why? Why did it get worse after compassion moved a president, motivated with a great vision of a society which was wealthy and cared for, could look after everybody –the blacks, the minorities, the dispossessed, the disadvantaged. There is more unhappiness and more hardship today and more beggars, more muggers. Why is that? Have we not learnt?’’Great question!“Where are the beggars in Singapore? Show me. I take pride in that. Has anybody died of starvation? Anybody without a home left to die in the streets, to be collected as corpses?’’What a rebuttal!“What made Singapore different in the 1960s from most other countries of Southeast Asia was that she had no xenophobic hangover from colonialism. The statue of the founder of Singapore, Sir Stamford Raffles, still stands in the heart of the city to remind Singaporeans of his vision in 1819 of Singapore becoming, on the basis of free competition, the emporium of the East, on the route between India and China. There were then 120 people on the island. They lived by fishing. Within five years of its founding, there were 5,000 traders –British, Arabs, Chinese, Indians, and others drawn in by this principle of free and equal competition, regardless of race, language or religion.’’This awareness of historical causes seems so rare. What else?“Had the Dutch who governed the then Netherlands East Indies accorded these same ground rules to what made Singapore different in trade and commerce in the Indonesian archipelago, Singapore might never have got started. These were our origins. So we have never suffered from any inhibitions in borrowing capital, knowhow, managers, engineers, and marketing capabilities. Far from limiting the entry of foreign managers, engineers, and bankers, we encouraged them to come.’’Opposite of isolation, protection, drawn from insecurity and fear.“Singaporeans were smart enough to recognise those more enterprising than themselves. That was the key to our rapid development.”One astounding story.When a young lawyer, Lee successfully defended four viscous murderers. He won the case and . . .“The judge was thoroughly disgusted. I went home feeling quite sick because I knew I’d discharged my duty as required of me, but I knew I had done wrong. I decided when we became the government, we will not allow this foolish, completely incongruous system which will never take root here, because no juror will take upon himself the onus of saying, ‘Yes, he will go to jail.’ “… The Anglo-Saxon tradition of trial by jury may be good for Anglo-Saxons or the descendants thereof. It never really worked for non Anglo-Saxons. … The French don’t have it. They are Latin. I think the idea of 12 random jurors sitting there and deciding whether you ought to go to jail or not or whether you ought to pay damages or not, it’s completely alien.”Well. . .This work has unusual format. Most text is conversations, comments by Lee. Then authors add explanations or additions. Seemed to work really well.Fast paced, clear and succinct.Reader should be aware that Lee’s social, political, legal, economic, historical ideas are not ‘politically correct’ (to say the least). However, this makes his ideas, beliefs, decisions, so. . .so. . .astounding. They work!Why so much hostility to success? Well . . .Another feature is the abundance of b/w photographs. Adds interest and depth.Extensive index (linked). Great!

So much valuable life lessons. LKY is one fascinating man, he thought of every single details and he has so much foresight. It’s very interesting to see what he talked about decades ago are very relevant today and things he worried about when things are not done the right way are happening now (fake news, etc). This book is a long read but you get so much insight into what makes Singapore so successful. I wish every leaders or would be leaders could read this book.

As difficult as it is to choose one's favorite books on LKY, this makes the short list. You will learn several lessons not in the others. One of few books in the world that can be reread many times.

Such an important observation of our counterpoint of blind acceptance regarding our present display of democracy