History Blog Topic 6

How far do you agree that the need to set up a Common Market was the most important reason for merger between Singapore and Malaya?

I agree to a certain extent that the need to set up a Common Market was most important because when we merged with Malaya, we will break free from the British that is controlling external defence and internal security of Singapore. Singapore will gain complete independence by joining with Malaya as one. Also, Singapore is a small country and lacks natural resources. If we merge with Malaya, we can use their resources.

A Common Market is also important as trade was declining due to import and export tariffs. With a Common Market, we will not need to pay tariffs and thus, industries can grow and expand easily. When the companies expand, more jobs can be created for the people of Singapore.

In conclusion, setting up a Common Market was not the most important reason for merger as Singapore also wanted to break free from British rule and start independently by using Malaya's resources.

History Blog Topic 5

Singapore's struggle to achieve internal self-government in the period 1945-1959 had its costs. Was it worth it? Give at least two reasons to support your stand.

Yes, it was worth it because Singapore finally gained self-government from the British.

The Maria Hertogh riots proves that the British had not been sensitive towards how the Muslims felt and what they kind of religion they believe in. Since Singapore is a multi-racial country, it proves that the British were not suitable for ruling in Singapore and needed to change into a self-government country, in which the ruler will be sensitive to all the beliefs and feelings of the people.
The Anti-National Service Riots also proves that the British were not sensitive to the feelings of the people that they ruled over. They wanted everyone that was aged 18 to 20 to register for National Service which also included the chinese students. Those who did not register will be either jailed or fined. This made the chinese people very angry and developed more anti-British feelings as their studies were delayed because of the war and also, the Chinese students did not want to defend the colonial government which was not concerned about the Chinese students' interests. Despite the peaceful solution the Chinese students offered, the Government ignored them and chased them away, causing a riot. This shows the Government that many people can be injured and lose their lives because of the lack on sensitivity towards the people.

In conclusion, when Singapore gained self-government, it was worth it as the voted party will understand how the people feel and rule over them properly without the people developing any anti-feelings towards them.

History Blog Topic 4

In your opinion, what could have been prevented the Maria Hertogh riots in the 1950? Give at least two suggestions.


Firstly, the court should have made up their mind as quickly as possible and not to throw Maria Hertogh around between her real parents and her foster parent. They should also be aware about Maria Hertogh's background on where she was grown up and taken care of and what religion she was grown up with. Second, they should also find out what kind of beliefs that Muslims have, in order to be able to place Maria Hertogh in a proper place without angering the Muslims. Example is that they put her in a Catholic convent in Thomson Road to be taken care of. The thing they did not know was that Maria Hertogh was a Muslim and Muslims only believe in one God and worship only one God. So, putting her in a Catholic convent is offending their beliefs and this angered the Muslims. They should also not allow the photographers and reporters to enter the convent to take photos of Maria being held in a convent. Photographs that they took has been put up on newspapers and every Muslim got angered by the action of the British. The Muslims felt that their laws were not being respected.

Reflections

Reflection Topic 3: did the industrial revolution affect the way people lived and worked in the 19th century for the better or the worse? Explain your answer by providing examples.

The Industrial Revolution was a major shift of technological, socioeconomic, and cultural conditions in the late 18th century and early 19th century. It began in Britain and spread throughout the world. During that time, an economy based on manual labour was replaced by one dominated by industry and the manufacture of machinery. It began with the mechanisation of the textile industries, the development of iron-making techniques and the increased use of refined coal. Trade expansion was enabled by the introduction of canals, improved roads and railways. The introduction of steampower (fuelled primarily by coal) and powered machinery (mainly in textile manufacturing) underpinned the dramatic increases in production capacity.The development of all-metal machine-tools in the first two decades of the 19th century facilitated the manufacture of more production machines for manufacturing in other industries.
The first Industrial Revolution merged into the Second industrial revolution around 1850, when technological and economic progress gained momentum with the development of steam-powered ships, railways, and later in the nineteenth century with the internal combustion engine and electrical power generation.

Provided by : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution

Reflection Topic 2

The national museum has decided to erect a statue in front of its entrance. They have to choose between Stamford Raffles and Tan Tock Seng. If you were working for the museum, who would you choose ? and why?

I would choose Sir Stamford Raffles because he was the original founder of Singapore, which makes it sort of perfect to fit the statue outside of the national museum. This may help the people in the museum to know more about Sir Stamford Raffles when they enter the museum and they may also ask the museum people why they have put up that person and why did they put it up. I would not choose Tan Tock Seng, even though he had helped Singapore alot by setting up a hospital to treat and cure the sick for free, burying unclaimed bodies or paid funeral expenses of those who could not afford one, being a leader of the Chinese community and was accorded the title of 'Kapitan' of the Hokkien clan and being the first Asian to be appointed Justice of the Peave and helped settling problems/disputes in the Chinese community, may not be suitable to be erected outside the national museum because he was mainly helping the people in the country as he was caring and helpful. It may be better for him to be put inside the museum instead of infront of the national museum so that people may also recognise him as a very big helper to mould Singapore into what it is today. He may also be recognised as a very kind and compassionate man when people ask more about him and finds out more about him.

Who Really 'Founded' Singapore?

I think that Sir Stamford Raffles was the real founder of Singapore. Without him, William Farquhar would not have even bothered about Singapore until Raffles brought him to the island. I also think that John Crawfurd was not the real founder of Singapore, because did not start a British trading settlement in Singapore, but only helped the British to own Singapore. I think that even without John Crawfurd, the British and the Dutch would have came up with the treaty soon enough and the British would own Singapore. William Farquhar was not a true founder of Singapore, because in my opinion, William Farquhar only helped Sir Starmford Raffles to set up a new settlement, and also he helped to invite people into Singapore to trade. He also started to defend the new settlement and he built guns position and mounted guns facing the sea. I think that all he did was because that Sir Stamford Raffles had gone to another country that is why he was able to do that. So in my opinion, William Farquhar and John Crawfurd are not the real founder but Sir Stamford Raffles was the true founder of Singapore.