Thoughts on "In Defence of Lim Chong Yah"

Saw the title of this article in ST whilst at sk's place, and took back the papers to read this article. For two main reasons:

Firstly, I have a high regard for Prof Lim Chong Yah, whom I remembered as being the one who was instrumental in steering our economy through the NWC. Honestly, as a teacher, whose pay was really so low in the 1980s, I always looked forward to the NWC recommendations. It also included paycuts, payfreeze in the difficult days of 1986-1987. But I respected their proposals. 

Economics has always been my favourite subject, which I majored in Uni. Prof Lim's textbook guided us through A levels. I have the utmost respect for him. Because things were turbulent in the 1970s-1980s, nothing was taken for granted. There was trouble in practically every neigbouring country and things were unrestful, and economy far from being stable then. I was acutely aware because whether I could continue education depended on economy and stability.

It had been a very long time (to me) since I heard about Prof Lim since he retired from NWC. When he put forth his 'shock therapy' earlier this year, honestly,  I didnt know how to react to it, nor to the responses that came from different quarters. I noted that it was not well received. Recently, in observing what i had over the course of the year, I thought of his proposal again....

I also have the highest regard for Prof Tommy Koh. It took me by surprise that he would publicly support Prof Lim's proposal which did not seem to be taken favourably.

I highly recommend every thinking Singaporean to read this defence. Whether you agree or not, we all need to consider our role in community. Not just what you have, or do not have.

I quote his final two paragraphs:

"In conclusion, I wish to thank Prof Lim for being our moral conscience. He has reminded us that our mission is to achieve growth with equity. Our ambition is to build a fair an prosperous Singapore. What we have achieved so far is a prosperous and unfair society.

Prof Lim has warned us that we have deviated from our original path and that we are dangerously close to a point when our inequality could adversely affect our cohesion and harmony."
=====================================

I think the words speak for itself. Reading the article, I decided to post the notes I had made (below) a few days ago, that I had kept as a draft......pondering
======================================

Communal and Individual

i thought of the very wide gap between the academic able, and less able, both within a school, and across the nation. What would that translate into a few years down the road?

i realised that whilst idealist may advocate teaching to learners' ability and readiness, this itself will most likely lead to widening the gap. i also realised that no single panacea can address disparities.

If i have to suggest a panacea, it is that those with more must be willing to sacrifice and those with less need to be given support and they must be willing to go the extra mile to work harder. This will help to ease the inequality somewhat. i half wonder if this is not a shadow of Prof Lee CY's shock therapy for the economy. I respect him. But how to work that out?

In a way, i now understand how communism could have come about, to attempt to address the gap. But, in doing so, individualism is lost.  How to balance the two requires alot more than 'national conversation'. Communal care  is not 'organised' conversations. It is a delicate balance that can only be achieved if there is a commonality. That is, if one in the first place, truly embrace communality.

Communalism is however not communism. Enforcing equality slays individuality and is in itself an unfairness. Everyone is responsible for themselves ultimately. If you have less, live with less. Communalism however does require those with more, not to clamour for more; to make sacrifices to wait a little for the less to catch up. Community work is not communalism.

The inequality gap is widening at such an increasing, almost alarming rate. At the lunch with buddies a couple of weeks ago, when we exchanged views, I did raise what i observe of the widening disparity, that begins with 'education' and the societal discord that will inevitably result....i really dont wish to see that in my lifetime....

National Examination

Seriously, without a national examination setting a common standard, where would the standard be? Just like competitions, it does provide the impetus to get the kids to be really be serious. One sees most effort toward the end.... there is this goalpost that help spur them on....

And in national examinations, teachers are the mentors of students, guiding them toward the goal post.  There is an objectivity, a common learning goal. Here teachers are not the examiners. There is alot of difference in this.

But that said, the process must be valued more than the product. But what is the process that one would want to reach the final goalpost?  Sometimes, I wonder what went wrong.... .

Yet, I somehow feel, at the end of the day, it is the lack of vision that run down the line.....