aelf said:
Domen said:
Most (~75%) of Singapore's population are Chinese people, yes. (...)
Lee Kuan Yew has had essentially different views on issues like multiculturalism than Swedish governments.
(...)
Singapore's former prime minister - Lee Kuan Yew - is known as a "race realist".
Whatever you think you're talking about, you probably don't really have any idea.
Really ??? So you claim that I was wrong about Lee Kuan Yew's worldview ???
Let's see:
Lee Kuan Yew on the differences between the Chinese and the Malays, March 24 1965 (the year when Singapore separated from Malaysia):
"One people [the Chinese] is the product of a civilization which has gone through all its ups and downs, of floods and famine and pestilence, breeding a people with very intense culture, with a belief in high performance in sustained effort, in thrift and industry. And the other people [the Malays] - more fortunately endowed by nature, with warm sunshine and bananas and coconuts, and therefore not with the same need to strive so hard. Now, these two societies really move at two different speeds. It's like a difference between a high-revolution engine and a low-revolution engine."
Lee Kuan Yew, "The Search for Talent", 1982:
"Let us not deceive ourselves: our talent profile is nowhere near that of, say, the Jews or the Japanese in America. The exceptional number of Nobel Prize winners who are Jews is no accident. It is also no accident that a high percentage, sometimes 50%, of faculty members in the top American universities on both the east and west coasts are Jews. And the number of high caliber Japanese academics, professionals and business executives is out of all proportion to the percentage of Japanese in the total American population."
Lee Kuan Yew, "The Man and His Ideas", 1998:
"I started off believing all men were equal. I now know that's the most unlikely thing ever to have been, because millions of years have passed over evolution. People have scattered across the face of this earth, been isolated from each other, developed independently, had different intermixtures between races, peoples, climates and soils. I didn't start off with that knowledge. But by observation, reading, watching, arguing, asking, that is the conclusion I've come to. When we were faced with the reality that, in fact, equal opportunities did not bring about more equal results, we were faced with an ideological dilemma. In other words, this bell curve, which Murray and Herrnstein wrote about, became obvious to us by the late '60s. The bell curve is a fact of life. The blacks on average score 85 points on IQ and it is accurate, nothing to do with culture. The whites score on average 100. Asians score more. 'The Bell Curve' authors put it at least 10 points higher. These are realities that, if you do not accept, will lead to frustration because you will be spending money on wrong assumptions and the results cannot follow. Many of the bright young men became Catholic priests and did not marry. Bright priests, celibate, produce no children. And the result of several generations of bright Fathers producing no children? Less bright children in the Catholic world. You read 'A Dream of the Red Chamber' by Hong Lou Meng or you read Jin Ping Mei, and you'll find Chinese society in the 16th, 17th centuries described. The successful Chinese merchant or the mandarin, he gets the pick of all the rich men's daughters and the prettiest village girls and has probably five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten different wives and concubines and many children. And the poor Chinese laborer who's dumb and slow, he's neutered. It's like the lion or the stag that's outside the flock. He has no harems, so he does not pass his genes down. So, in that way, a smarter population emerges."