Would we be what we are now without LKY?

Just posted another comment on the 10 reasons thread, in response to a poster (breaky) who asked : would we be what we are now without LKY? (see below)

When I think about the question, the first parallel that comes to my mind is Liu Bei of the three Kingdoms. Never mind LKY's personality seems more suited to be Cao Cao, but Liu Bei stands out in response to the question because his success is more the result of a superb team than a single omnipotent leader. He have superb planners and strategists foremost of which is the peerless Zhuge Liang, fearless warriors to carry out the strategies in the form of the Five Tiger Generals (Guan Yu, Zhang Fei, Zhao Yun etc).

In the earlier part of his career, he thrived in the role of a charismatic leader that recruited many capable man, and won the heart of the general populace. By drawing on the impressive talents of his team he created a strong kingdom that was prosperous and strong enough to resist the aggression of his neighbors.

But Liu Bei ended tragically when he attacked Wu against the advice of Zhuge and Zhaoyun to avenge the death of Guan Yu who was captured and executed when Wu retook the Jing province.

In this battle, Liu won several skirmish in the beginning, but failed to heed the advise of the advisor Ma Liang by moving his troops into the forest to escape the summer heat. The Wu general Lu Xun counter attacked by setting the dry forest on fire and ambushing the Shu troop's as they first sought water, then retreat. The Shu army was decimated, and Liu Bei became a broken man that died soon after of disease.

What's the moral of the story, one might ask?

A team's success comes from the strengths and contributions of many - if a leader mistake the team's ability as his own and overestimate his ability, he is due for a fall.

If the people mistake the work of many able men as the contribution of a singular charismatic leader, then they are due for a big disappointment.


Going back to the question that is this posting's title - it would be more apt to ask if we would be what we are now without our founding fathers... who seems to share very little in common with our current leaders beyond being affiliated to the same political party. More on this if the opportunity arises.


------------------

@breaky

The Singapore we have today is definitely not the result of the efforts of a single man. The success of early Singapore is the result of a charismatic leader with a superb team. The architect behind the economic growth was Goh Keng Swee, the man behind the HDB story is Lim Kim San, and the man working the ground and casting the key vote that made LKY into the PM for the first time is Toh Chin Chye. In according proper respect to each contributor, we must also realize that the Elder Lee is not quite as all knowing and all capable as he is often made out to be.

I think that there are no other political party that I can trust to lead Singapore now. But the issue at hand is not the casting down of the PAP, but the voting of more opposition into the parliament to curb the arrogance and monitor the investments made with our precious reserves.

Just because we are doing better than our neighbors is no excuse for complacency – we should be asking ourselves : are we in a better position than we are 10-20 years ago? Reports have shown the middle and lower income families facing wage stagnation and regression while our leaders’ pay eclipse the highest paid leaders of the first world.

A extended monopoly of power breeds stagnation and decay – history stands testimony to this stark truth. For the sake of Singapore, for the sake of Singaporeans, and for the sake of the PAP even, we need to get more opposition into the Parliament.