Thanks for the video! As someone who has lived in Singapore for upwards of a decade and in the UK, this analysis you illustrate especially points out the different, yet equally valid approaches to government. The BBC and many of the western media and journalists prefer the simplistic, broad stroke approach to global issues, and ends up either coming off as condescending or outright accusatory. Anyway, it was an excellent lesson on staying cool.
So true. That interviewer Steven Sanker is known for his aggressive condescending way of questioning his guests. Good for Mr Shanmugaratnam to handle that kind of "interviewing" so smoothly and getting his points through so effectively.
The interviewer is playing devils advocate, asking questions that opponents and doubters might want to ask. That's why he was hired. The real quality of that style is that the person being interviewed can take these questions and show how wrong these accusations are, thereby winning over viewers at home who had those doubts. It looks like he interviewer here is condescending, but everyone in that room knows that he is just playing that role to give
@@sblbb929 Not all interviewers are like this though. The best of the best make it their duty to put the interviewee in difficult positions in order to extract the truth. However, nowadays there is a sharp uptick in a certain type of interviewer: one that enters into a debate with a presupposition, and tries his/her level best to get the interviewee to support that point of view, for better or for worse. Unfortunately it is the state of the heavily politicized world we live in today.
@@delphinegoh9056so you rather mr tan as a clown and someone who looks down on female? Guess u want a president that doesnt wish equality for women in workforce
@@jnzl523 I do not want Yet another Puppet from the ruling party who is most likely to be responsible in the news of Mr Tan. Not surprising propaganda from them. Its ok,we just have to wait out,their time n term will be over in no time. Nothing is permanent.
It is so much safer in Singapore than many Western countries, so much prosperity for anyone who work hard, so much religious freedom, people are generally polite, friendly and helpful. It is a much more better society than many many other places in Europe or U. S..
@@catmatismhahaha thats why they have a lot of government spies acting as normal people planted all around the country to ensure radicalized thinking is stopped before it reaches the society. And if you look at european countries it is infact harder to keep up with cults as it is way bigger than singapore.
@@catmatismthat's his point. In order to achieve certain liberties, some liberties must be buffered or compromised. In order for true religious freedom, the government is very vigilant against religious extremism and monitors the internet searches people have which infringes on certain freedoms are sacrificed so all can practice freely without worry that there'll be death cults or terrorists
It’s extraordinary that a country like singapore that started off so poor and without natural resources has advanced so far and in many ways become more advanced than the country’s the interviewer is trying to emulate, yet the interviewer is trying his level best to belittle rather than appreciate.
@@muralibalaraman Visiting is one thing, living next to them is another. Singapore was never poor, it was a thriving fishing island prior to their independence.
This supremely capable and humble gentleman just keeps raising the bar. Here's hoping he will be around for a long, long time, which can only be a huge positive for Singapore.
Knowledge wields influence! Mr. Tharman has not only thoroughly grasped the policies but has also delved into the foundational principles upon which many great minds among Singaporean leaders have laid their groundwork. His demeanor and response reflect a world-class standard.
I always remember what LKY said about foreign human right advocates and journalists use their own standard to measure us, “they have no stake in your wellbeing, they bear no consequences in our social harmony and we do not answer to their standard but to our own people.”
Where Tharman absolutely excelled .... He said the govt does what is best for 'THE COUNTRY', not 'the people' tho the v/o on the video paraphrased it as 'the people'. In calling Singapore govt as one that serves 'the country' he quietly and powerfully pulled Singapore away from populism which often shapes US style democracy and led to the lowest common denominator settings which can be costly to the economy. And Tharman was sharp to divert from populism.
Singapore's political system has been very much misunderstood in the West. President Tharman had explained our stand as a country yet remained calm and humble to listen to opinions. There is indeed no need to defend what other others think is not right for us so long as citizens, we understand and buy in the ideas. There is no perfect system. We cant have everything. The way how the West often promotes individualism is frightening, which disintegrates the society and teaches to always put yourself before others.
Who cares what the west thinks.. look at where their economies are at now .. look at how many homelessness there are in the UK and the US.. look at how confused about their gender they are… nah that’s not the kind of democracy we want ..
The Western political system has been very much misunderstood in Singapore. The way how Singapore often promotes collectivism is frightening, which sacrifices the well-being of the average Singaporean and teaches you to keep your head down, slog away your life, occasionally sabotage each other in the rat race, while enriching those at the top and keeping them in power without any check or balances.
@@wsxgfhccrlike I said who cares??? our system works coz we don’t have the world’s highest homeless; we don’t invade another country or countries because their system is not aligned with mine; we don’t execute other leaders because they are not pro west; we don’t instigate or provoke rebellion in another country; we don’t want streets full of people high on fentenyl; we don’t want our citizens to be confused about their gender; we don’t want citizens owning guns and carry out mass shooting; we don’t want a country with KKK or proud boys; we don’t want a system where the govt cannot do anything for the citizens coz they are busy fighting amongst themselves.. NO NO to the hypocritical western system
What an impressive presentation by a charismatic leader! It's hard to envision Tan Kin Lian and NG Kok Song achieving the same level of composure and excellence. The potential for embarrassment, especially with Tan Kin Lian's focus on his fantasy about pretty girls, would be a concern for Singapore.
Tharman's form of charisma came across more as cool, calm, collected, quietly assertive and at times, witty. He ably articulated Singapore's position on difficult / sensitive issues. Yes, during SG's presidential elections season, one can't help but compare TKL and NKS with Tharman, in terms of their skill and poise in explaining Singapore's interests well to an international audience, without coming across as emotional, angrily defensive, or worse, making gaffes and uttering inappropriate remarks. Equally significant are the voters who made up 70% of valid votes in favour of Tharman, reflected maturity and thoughtfulness. Some who had voted for opposition party candidates at general elections, put aside partisan interests to look objectively at each candidate's character, depth of knowledge, skill and experiences, etc. With the possible exception of Dr Tony Tan, Tharman is more qualified than the other 7 previous Presidents to be that second key to unlocking national reserves, based on his more intimate knowledge from prior experiences at MAS, GIC, Finance Minister, DPM & SM. For an increasingly well-educated electorate trained in higher-order critical thinking skills, some were not easily swayed by the seductive rhetoric about independence from the ruling party. On the contrary, over-playing this theme might have a counter-productive effect of causing some voters to re-visit the assumptions behind the rhetoric. On 1 Sep 23, its seems that most of the electorate played the role of HR recruitment managers by voting for the most suitable candidate for the specific job requirements of an elected Presidency. There is cause for qualified optimism for Singapore's future.
@@lychan2366 Nonsense. Tharman also went up against one of the weakest opposition ever out of all 7 presidents. There was no formidable reputable opposition due to the 500 million requirement set by PAP long before they brought over the Jurong senior MP to run for president. Considering most minorities of Singapore (30%) were never going to vote for a Chinese candidate when there's a non-Chinese present, that leaves the other 40% Chinese that voted for Tharman after being put in a spot where they had to pick between independent opposition but nobodies to represent Singapore or be forced to go with PAP's minion due to the perceived gap in terms of political background.
@@beepbeep5153 Instead of matching your sweeping generalization of every content in my post with a "Nonsense", I shall respectfully respond by stating that we're each entitled to our views. You're better off picking your fights elsewhere.
@@alexgamble4718most Singaporeans are politically aware. Most Singaporeans are also rational in choosing their leaders and not choosing for the sake of opposition.
@@uwet.8826 I hate to burst your bubble, but if Singapore ever encountered a crisis large enough and polling suggested the it would dislodge the ruling party, the PAP will simply come up with new tactics to ensure the free election went its way. It is extremely naive to suggest that a country ruled by one party for 58yrs and is currently ruled by the son of the first PM would simply relinquish power if the people wanted it.
@@alexgamble4718 ikr... I am sure a foreigner or oppie knows better because you are the top 2% minority that has information that the majority do not have access to and can follow the most miniscule trace of information and give perfect textbook answers.
Most astounding of this interview was Thaman not pointing to the flaws of the UK and US economies and so called democracies .. at least not directly...
Those who says he's evading questions, he's not. The interviewer is asking ignorant questions that overly simplifies the situation in Singapore. Asking for a yes or no to "why do you like freedom" is dumb. So are the assumptions the interviewer makes of asking "authoritarian" questions. Why does it matter unless you're asking about comparisons to democracy? Why ask too, if you're already full of preconceived notions?
They just don't like his answers because it destroy their delusional and warped reality and self-centered, self-appointed "correct" ideologies. Results count, numbers count and Singapore is on every metric one of the most successful countries in the world, especially the fact that the current ruling party still enjoys high approval numbers. High approval number = democracy. This is result-driven definition of democracy. Western ideologues can't argue away that fact without contradicting their own superficial method-driven definition of democracy. They believe you can only be called a democracy if you adopt their methods on the surface, never mind if the result is still low approval and the corruption and hijacking of the government by a plutocratic class of private citizens. The life real results of their "democracy" is low approval from the people, and pent up frustration as even common people in the west can see that their system is ultimately not serving their interests and their voting does nothing to change the policies. When you peel off the facade of western liberal democracy, what you find is a lackluster system of enforcement for public interests, and many trojan horses for powerful rich people to control the government. Western liberal democracy system is mostly a front for capitalist control in the back when they are practiced in real life. They do not want people to realize that, so they only always ask superficial, ignorant questions and demand un-nuanced, slapdash answers. Any nuanced answer they can dismissed with one-liners. This is one way how the capitalist cultural hegemony maintains control over all political discourse and thus the scope and imagination of people.
@@bandfan327 interviewer was smug and clearly trying to bait him. "Look our system is superior with its safety net". He also wasn't looking at the smaller picture of a specific safety net, but the bigger picture of what do we do when our people are down and need support. Tharman's position is that our solutions doesn't give people fish, but teach them to fish. He is answering the broader underlying issue. No solution is perfect. You can fall off a trampoline, but you can also fall through a safety net.
@@Princess_Pear Not that. The Yes/No you mentioned was not for "why do you like freedom" (which isn't even a question) but for whether he believed in a safety net.
@@bandfan327 I think we are arguing 2 different points. My point was in reference to the comments made by others and the argument that Tharman was evasive. Not any specific questions posed by the interviewer.
What a marvellous questions and answers performance of our newly elected NINETH SINGAPORE PRESIDENT MR THARMAN. Any questions he can give a perfect replies.
I voted for him yesterday, I admire him ever since I saw this video, in putting down this woke reporter with wit and grace. He is the best person when he meets, woke western politicians.
Brilliant analysis of President Shanmugaratnam tactics and tact. Very impressed with the President‘s answers - keen to see how Singapore will flourish more under his leadership. Found the near arrogant, narrow point of view of the interviewer annoying and insulting. Regards from a Malaysian neighbour
Due to his depth and breath of knowledge and experience, he is better suited as singapore's Prime Minister. The office of the President is mostly ceremonial and custodial. Inward looking, dealing with the welfare of Singaporeans.
Related to answering questions: 1. I think what you point out in this video is absolutely right, in all discussions and interviews we must ensure that the larger picture and principle considerations and then go further into the weeds Regarding the content of the interview: 1. I feel every country has their own right of way of managing their country, we all know the downfalls of top down and bottom up approach but Singapore is striking a balance between ensuring the larger and harder policies are kept in check by dedicated and selected professionals (not just popular poster boys) and leaving the smaller freedoms to individuals. This might infringe upon the benefits faced by certain groups but we try to find the sweet spot in a very delicate balancing act. 2. Bringing that to the topic of media freedom, Singapore has never dictated the contents of external media, but always seeks to ensure the facts are truth (yes some might say the truth is what the government makes of it but that is why our leaders must remain incorruptible and shall only speak the truth). In the larger picture the downside of trusting a group of educated and vetted individuals to fact check a matter over millions of potentially misinformed or sinister individuals, your odds are much better w a central body who depends on the ppl to survive their next term. All in all the 1st principle is to keep Singapore, as a whole, safely professing where we will always take the rational, neutral, and meritocratic approach rather than the popular, single-use and most of the time easier approach to do things because “Rules, without them we live with the animals”
animals must follow rules to survive. Not people in USA. the government is feeding them so they can buy a gun in the Wal-Mart and freely butcher the crowd in the cinema hall. And than he is fed till he dies in the jail.😅 freeeee-dum.
"every country has their own right of way of managing their country" Meanwhile the issue is how you manage to begin with, such as sticky situations where 'you get to decide' if the country is "for you to decide"
Singapore is an Ideal Democracy. You have a right to choose government but not to intervene with every decision. Mother does not use democracy while cooking food and ask what everyone wants to eat, she cooks whats best for the family
If Singapore 's authoritarian style is "uncomfortable" for the Western people, don't migrate, or live, or work in Singapore. One is not forced to. Go live in a place where by you are comfortable and happy with the type of freedom you feel suitable. Dont impose your likes and dislikes onto others.
You didnt' have to watch this video if you didn't like it, just like Tharman didn't have to take this interview at all. But fortunately he was open and capable enough to explain the system to the world. Your way of "go back to where you came from and leave us alone" only show that Singapore is not open to criticisms which is wrong, because Singaporeans are proud and ready to defend its system.
Asians are generally more pragmatic. We look at the results of each input. Now take a look at the western world. The degree of lawlessness and social chaos subjectively speaking, is much higher. To the point I have given up thoughts of migrating to either Europe and the US.
He attempts to show Singapore's confidence and social cohesion. Throughout the discussion, he used some tactics to answer tough questions. In short, the flexibility was the core element that he could be praised of.
I personally am quite unimpressed by the standards and output of some major western media today. They are losing the plot. Today the world may not accept a western so called 'leadership' and opinion masthead. I appreciate the Singaporean outlook on their well being. Being an Indian, I truly appreciate the development process of the global South countries.
Around 80% of low income families own their home? That’s a mind blowing statistic. The government must be doing a lot of things right for it to have an impact of this magnitude in the society. As someone who knows nothing about Singaporean politics, this paints a brilliant picture.
What an honest and open statement to question put by the journalist. I wish our Australian government act accordingly. Esp where the minister stated how the feels proud of what the people have achieved by their hard work and not just handouts for no effort or accountability .
Singapore is leading the world annd is becoming a benchmark of perfection. Being an expat have observed this closely, Singaporeans are well educated and a very different country in many ways.They will continue to be the most competitive country in the world.
Yes media especially western countries can write untruthful or baise views. But when those affected replies, the media just keep it quiet and not write about them. Let all judge, why cant the affected reply?
The affected here means the Government itself. The Government cutting media's ad revenues over this is a bit controversial. In the hands of the wrong kind of government this could get out of hand
Well Done Tharman, only you could have answered with such Eloquence, Being Factual Yet With Humility and Wisdom. We doubt that GG and TKL could have answered Intelligently with Tact on the questions by the BBC Commentator.
Singapore has many problems but it is now a great country to live. Safe, stable, clean, efficient. It’s different from western countries. In fact, I think there are so much to learn from Singapore for western countries, especially the UK.
@@leonardTsn "The only real prison is fear, and the only real freedom is freedom from fear." - Aung San Suu Kyi All the best living in the prison of your fears.
@@oldporkchops i look forward to the day you are able to exercise your own thinking, instead of having to pull quotes from "famous people" LOL. enjoy living in the shadow of these people hahah
Lot's of people in the comments don't understand the Interviewer's style and confuse it with condescension. In reality he was hired exactly for this. He is playing devils advocate, asking questions that opponents and doubters might want to ask. The real quality of that style is that the person being interviewed can take these questions and show how wrong these accusations are, thereby winning over viewers at home who had those doubts. That wouldn't be possible if the questions were soft balls. It looks like he interviewer here is condescending, but everyone in that room knows that he is just playing that role to give Tharman a chance to show his intellect
If he is simply asking tough questions, it wouldn't come off as condescending. The way he phrases his questions, and his choice of words, shows strong bias
Please do not tell us not to confuse the interviewer’s style etc. I am from Malaysia, studied/worked in UK and lived in Singapore. UK is in chaos with ideological issues, homelessness and unplanned pregnancies rising with crimes reaching uncomfortable levels but yet the typical BBC will portray a free democratic society that is better any country apart from US. One only needs to live in Singapore to know the days of typical Westerner know best is long gone. My English wife can walk on her own in Singapore with no concerns; I would not have her do that in London. A typical BBC interviewer is condescending and rude to Singaporean leader since LKY’s time.
Tharman should have also asked: What makes you think the british system is working and are creating wealth for Britain? Britian wealth came from colonialism and looting of poorer countries, nothing to do with their industrialization nor their "hardworking" people.
Tharman has to tread a fine line of defending its policies without insulting the policies of other countries. Because it's not our job to challenge their policies. We simply want to take in what works and is good for our system, and identify what does not work so that it does not get introduced. It's not in Singapore's interest to tell other countries that their policies are inferior, or that their history is murky. Even if we all know it.
@@dreamsofmishra LKY said to the crowd and press, in front of Chris Patten democracy will not work in the long run. It gives Patten a black face. This is the kind of leader we need. Its true we dont tell others how to run their countries but if u tell us what we should do, we will blast you.
Straightly No Drugs, No Crimes, Clean Quiet Environment, Personal & Human Freedom With Guidelines (No Red Lines Should Be Crossed Through Selfishness That Cause Harm, Disturbance or Invade Other's Privacy)
10 techniques I use to answer my parents' questions: 1. Admit (to some degree) on bad things (before asked about negative things) 2. Give answers that give them room for counterarguments 3. Explain reasoning only when they seem to be in the mood for it 4. Use humor they understand 5. Keep everyone's cool 6. Don't questions underlying assumptions of the questions 7. No focuses 8. Know when to talk 9. Is well prepared beforehand(?) 10. if still couldn't succeed run
Great, the laws and 4:41 the policies best suits for singapore it doesn’t nee to follow other countries and comparison is not necessary with other western countries
I think the point about evolution is important. The interviewer mentioned himself that the West has a binary view on politics. Capitalism vs communism. But what is to say that will always be the case? Surely over the course of humanity, we will develop something new and constantly improve for the better. And what denotes the good and bad of those 2 political stances anyway? Sure history shows that communism has never really worked. But history is written by the winners and saying that China is currently failing as a nation would simply be incorrect.
Trampoline, and Sackur's laugh right after. Telling. Given Stephen himself has benefited from such a trampoline. Rewarding one's loyalty to the Empire with a leg up and a jump.
This is exactly how a (Singapore) President should be interacting himself/herself on this kind of international stage. Without him being a Prime Minister, he is only missing out the executive powers a minister has, which is not required in this context.
No need even your single comment section matters and keep your country proud , mother always matters, respect to you❤. Anyway I am not Singaporean and but stay with many friends who have the relationship in Singapore.
Every leader and representative Singapore produces are all top notch statesmen. The creme de la creme. Regardless of ethnic background, each cares for the nation of singapore and holds responsibility of leadership and representation to the highest levels.
BBC Needs a lesson, and this lesson was given very succinctly. One can see a wise and learned man speak and one hyped up and entitled man struggle with logic.
I have not checked prime minister numbers / statistics mentioned at the end , but if that is true , I think Singapore have achieved what many countries did not manage to achieve till today but only in few decades ! this is just "mind blowinggggggggg" and above all in the absence of the Europe /US's implementation of the understanding of the word / motto / " of democracy "
Burst the bubble 'We are good, you are bad' Algorithms recommend what we like to watch, and if we're not actively looking for different points of views, most likely we'll be exposed to views we agree with most of the time. I’ve been trying to watch various channels to try to make comprehensive understanding of the world. I’ve made many videos teaching Chinese language vividly and in a humorous way. I hope somebody can recommend my videos to those who want to learn Chinese. For beginners, Chinese characters may look complicated. But once you learn about 100 basic radicals, most characters become easy. I hope more people can learn Chinese to get comprehensive firsthand information about China and most likely seek more job opportunities. Know ourselves as well as our partners, competitors, adversaries…..
When will this western nations and media like BBC will understand Singapore 's democracy is not for them so is theirs not for Singapore. As a 18 year old from Malaysia I went to Singapore and got a job as a trainee marine mechanic. And I was very comfortable with the democracy of Singapore and enjoyed it.Even today I am a Canadian and live in Canada but I do miss my time in SUNNY ISLAND SET IN THE SEA SINGAPORE
Excellent video and an excellent analysis by you. Answers by now President Tharman are very good- he does not fall into any trap - I best liked the trampoline answer !!!
That last line, "I am raising my family... keeping that culture going, is what keeps a society vibrant..."... can be true in some cases. But it's not necessarily always the truth. Once we start to evolve spiritually and understand what humans have done on the planet, we start to realise, that the fruits are on the trees. Unnecessarily working "hard" for some old school version of glory which goes back to the education system (the modern education system in the world) for factory workers, doesn't necessarily create vibrancy. It creates drudgery, disease, sickness, and depression. It's quite clear from how we've shaped the Earth so far (largely), that this isn't what divinity was supposed to be. Nevertheless, we persist. No doubt he's a thoughtful man and I hope we do well under him and whatever the government has in store for us. Blessings and love to everyone, Zeph
@@rapid5208 I do agree, Tharman seemed so genuine yet sophisticated in his speech. He explain things in a well structured manner and easy to understand. Obama more dramatic approach, I guess it fits well with American cultures. Most of their presidents showed up with intensities..
Well, I'm waiting for the so called 'tough questions' to pop up. The interviewer here has allowed the speaker a free hand to run his narrative. This is the most easy going interview I have seen and heard.
😢.. 👉🏻👉🏼👉🏽 America calls it "Liberation" instead of "Invasion". That was what US call it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the list goes on... Why the double standard? Confused... Please enlighten. Genuine question... Instances of the United States "liberated" or overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government) China 1949 to early 1960s Albania 1949-53 East Germany 1950s Iran 1953 * Guatemala 1954 * Costa Rica mid-1950s Syria 1956-7 Egypt 1957 Indonesia 1957-8 British Guiana 1953-64 * Iraq 1963 * North Vietnam 1945-73 Cambodia 1955-70 * Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 * Ecuador 1960-63 * Congo 1960 * France 1965 Brazil 1962-64 * Dominican Republic 1963 * Cuba 1959 to present Bolivia 1964 * Indonesia 1965 * Ghana 1966 * Chile 1964-73 * Greece 1967 * Costa Rica 1970-71 Bolivia 1971 * Australia 1973-75 * Angola 1975, 1980s Zaire 1975 Portugal 1974-76 * Jamaica 1976-80 * Seychelles 1979-81 Chad 1981-82 * Grenada 1983 * South Yemen 1982-84 Suriname 1982-84 Fiji 1987 * Libya 1980s Nicaragua 1981-90 * Panama 1989 * Bulgaria 1990 * Albania 1991 * Iraq 1991 Afghanistan 1980s * Somalia 1993 Yugoslavia 1999-2000 * Ecuador 2000 * Afghanistan 2001 * Venezuela 2002 * Iraq 2003 * Haiti 2004 * Somalia 2007 to present Honduras 2009 * Libya 2011 * Syria 2012 Ukraine 2014 * 2014 - 2022 - 9 countries yet to verify. Pakistan 2022 * Haiti 2022 * Israel 2023
Western media has a very narrow view on what a democracy should look like. Their countries were fortunate enough to ransack the world to gain an insight, through trials and errors, on what model is best for them. This model doesn't always fit other countries. For one, this is no 1600 and there are no countries to invade, subjugate and test your hypothesis (unless you are Russia). So we learn in our ways, with our small successes and failures, towards a path that we believe is the best for our society. The lecturing helps nobody.
Always when I hear about “free” western countries, as a born European, this statement to me sounds like excessive arrogance. The West has huge problems with crime, drugs, infrastructure, religious extremism, border control, corruption, unemployment and so on. Is this the kind of freedom their people want? A social net? Just look around in the poor quarters in UK and US, what kind of net are they talking about? I know Singapore very well but still wondering what kind of freedom Singapore does not have and it should have to make it a better place.
Well said. I’ve lived 13 years in Singapore, 12 years in the US, 3 years between Germany and UK, and 20 years between Philippines and Indonesia. My issue with the West’s definition of freedoms is that the loudest one like you say questions others with arrogance and belief that their system is the only right system which kinda defeats the notion of freedom of choice. Another issue I have is freedom without accountability of the Western system especially that of the Western elected officials and media which is what is leading the decline of Western societies. If I were to answer the freedom of press question, I would have retorted with, Free Julian Assange before you lecture me on freedom of press. In Singapore and actually in China as well, a leader’s political career is defined by the success of improvements of the people they serve, if they fail they are brought to account for their failures. I’m hard pressed to think of any modern western leaders that were ever brought to account for their failures to the people but I do have a long list of these western leaders who are still in office after many failures. I’ve always thought that democracy was supposed to be government by the people for the people, in this regard, Singapore and China are doing way better on every metric than any current western government from my own personal experiences living in all those countries. Singapore’s public housing projects is the best in the world bar none. The ones developed in the last 2 decades are on par and imo better than the luxury apartments that I lived in Boston, New York and London and they are affordable to over 90% of Singaporeans. This is an amazing achievement.
@@WarrenKLiu Totally agree, accountability of politicians is a major point. Hope you are addressing the interviewer, when you say the " loudest one like you", don't you?
Excellent. Thank you. I learnt something and I enjoyed the analysis. I would love to have this kind of democracy in India, and not the populist one we have.
![Digital Circus Episode 4 [TRAILER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/abZtsmMUbJo/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for the video! As someone who has lived in Singapore for upwards of a decade and in the UK, this analysis you illustrate especially points out the different, yet equally valid approaches to government. The BBC and many of the western media and journalists prefer the simplistic, broad stroke approach to global issues, and ends up either coming off as condescending or outright accusatory. Anyway, it was an excellent lesson on staying cool.
Thanks for sharing such detailed thoughts!
Very well said. So much condescending tone from the British interviewer
So true. That interviewer Steven Sanker is known for his aggressive condescending way of questioning his guests. Good for Mr Shanmugaratnam to handle that kind of "interviewing" so smoothly and getting his points through so effectively.
,
Results speak for itself
I like how he repeats his point on 'humility', which this interviewer obviously needs.
Tharman's pocket pen says it all.
The interviewer is playing devils advocate, asking questions that opponents and doubters might want to ask. That's why he was hired. The real quality of that style is that the person being interviewed can take these questions and show how wrong these accusations are, thereby winning over viewers at home who had those doubts.
It looks like he interviewer here is condescending, but everyone in that room knows that he is just playing that role to give
Westerners are generally condescending when they interview non-westerners.
Brits are too proud to practice humility as they feel they are race supremo especially the Anglos bloodline
@@sblbb929 Not all interviewers are like this though. The best of the best make it their duty to put the interviewee in difficult positions in order to extract the truth. However, nowadays there is a sharp uptick in a certain type of interviewer: one that enters into a debate with a presupposition, and tries his/her level best to get the interviewee to support that point of view, for better or for worse. Unfortunately it is the state of the heavily politicized world we live in today.
Aren’t we all glad that it’s President Tharman now representing Singapore on the global stage
And sucking a pacifier given by the PAP n taking instructions from them as obedient as a kid will do😆
@@delphinegoh9056so you rather mr tan as a clown and someone who looks down on female? Guess u want a president that doesnt wish equality for women in workforce
@@jnzl523
I do not want Yet another Puppet from the ruling party who is most likely to be responsible in the news of Mr Tan. Not surprising propaganda from them.
Its ok,we just have to wait out,their time n term will be over in no time.
Nothing is permanent.
Nope
@@thekunj7
Another puppet on the laughing stock 🥱🥱🥱🥱🥱🥱🥱🥱
Already anticipated he was will sooner or later be the next chip
PAP utilize.
True enough.
It takes an intellect to be able to stay firm and counter the argument in the world stage. Feel proud of having him representing spore. ❤
How about we dont entertain low life journalists from the U.K or the supposedly free world that they are trying to impose on everyone else
It is so much safer in Singapore than many Western countries, so much prosperity for anyone who work hard, so much religious freedom, people are generally polite, friendly and helpful. It is a much more better society than many many other places in Europe or U. S..
Religious freedom is a double edged sword. Extremism and death cults may ensue.
@@catmatismhahaha thats why they have a lot of government spies acting as normal people planted all around the country to ensure radicalized thinking is stopped before it reaches the society. And if you look at european countries it is infact harder to keep up with cults as it is way bigger than singapore.
@@catmatism there is laws against religious action certain ones
Yes, and these arrogant westerners still think they are the best. :slaphead:
@@catmatismthat's his point. In order to achieve certain liberties, some liberties must be buffered or compromised. In order for true religious freedom, the government is very vigilant against religious extremism and monitors the internet searches people have which infringes on certain freedoms are sacrificed so all can practice freely without worry that there'll be death cults or terrorists
It’s extraordinary that a country like singapore that started off so poor and without natural resources has advanced so far and in many ways become more advanced than the country’s the interviewer is trying to emulate, yet the interviewer is trying his level best to belittle rather than appreciate.
We are very grateful for leaders of Singapore to keep up and remembering the hard way we Singaporeans came up....
Just ok.... Big brother's are helping , everything easy peasy.
Singapore was never poor. I think you haven't learn history properly.
@@potatoeskimos chief I don’t know how old you are but look up from 1965 to 1980 . I have been visiting singapore for a very very very long time
@@muralibalaraman Visiting is one thing, living next to them is another. Singapore was never poor, it was a thriving fishing island prior to their independence.
This supremely capable and humble gentleman just keeps raising the bar. Here's hoping he will be around for a long, long time, which can only be a huge positive for Singapore.
Knowledge wields influence! Mr. Tharman has not only thoroughly grasped the policies but has also delved into the foundational principles upon which many great minds among Singaporean leaders have laid their groundwork. His demeanor and response reflect a world-class standard.
I always remember what LKY said about foreign human right advocates and journalists use their own standard to measure us, “they have no stake in your wellbeing, they bear no consequences in our social harmony and we do not answer to their standard but to our own people.”
He was and he is still living in the heart of Singaporean peoples and peoples in Tamil Nadu India.
Where Tharman absolutely excelled .... He said the govt does what is best for 'THE COUNTRY', not 'the people' tho the v/o on the video paraphrased it as 'the people'. In calling Singapore govt as one that serves 'the country' he quietly and powerfully pulled Singapore away from populism which often shapes US style democracy and led to the lowest common denominator settings which can be costly to the economy. And Tharman was sharp to divert from populism.
well you know what a moderator or speaker of parliament would say, to such a righteous interviewer. F*v king populist! 😂
Singapore's political system has been very much misunderstood in the West. President Tharman had explained our stand as a country yet remained calm and humble to listen to opinions. There is indeed no need to defend what other others think is not right for us so long as citizens, we understand and buy in the ideas. There is no perfect system. We cant have everything. The way how the West often promotes individualism is frightening, which disintegrates the society and teaches to always put yourself before others.
And yet untold multitudes of Asians desperately yearn to emigrate to the West.
Who cares what the west thinks.. look at where their economies are at now .. look at how many homelessness there are in the UK and the US.. look at how confused about their gender they are… nah that’s not the kind of democracy we want ..
The Western political system has been very much misunderstood in Singapore. The way how Singapore often promotes collectivism is frightening, which sacrifices the well-being of the average Singaporean and teaches you to keep your head down, slog away your life, occasionally sabotage each other in the rat race, while enriching those at the top and keeping them in power without any check or balances.
@@wsxgfhccrlike I said who cares??? our system works coz we don’t have the world’s highest homeless; we don’t invade another country or countries because their system is not aligned with mine; we don’t execute other leaders because they are not pro west; we don’t instigate or provoke rebellion in another country; we don’t want streets full of people high on fentenyl; we don’t want our citizens to be confused about their gender; we don’t want citizens owning guns and carry out mass shooting; we don’t want a country with KKK or proud boys; we don’t want a system where the govt cannot do anything for the citizens coz they are busy fighting amongst themselves.. NO NO to the hypocritical western system
@@wsxgfhccrSmart response 🤣
This guy is amazing. Even opposition supporters respect him.
What an impressive presentation by a charismatic leader! It's hard to envision Tan Kin Lian and NG Kok Song achieving the same level of composure and excellence. The potential for embarrassment, especially with Tan Kin Lian's focus on his fantasy about pretty girls, would be a concern for Singapore.
In the first place, we only have challengers like NKS or TKL is a direct result of Tharman's party.
Now they will pay for it through jurong.
Tharman's form of charisma came across more as cool, calm, collected, quietly assertive and at times, witty. He ably articulated Singapore's position on difficult / sensitive issues.
Yes, during SG's presidential elections season, one can't help but compare TKL and NKS with Tharman, in terms of their skill and poise in explaining Singapore's interests well to an international audience, without coming across as emotional, angrily defensive, or worse, making gaffes and uttering inappropriate remarks.
Equally significant are the voters who made up 70% of valid votes in favour of Tharman, reflected maturity and thoughtfulness. Some who had voted for opposition party candidates at general elections, put aside partisan interests to look objectively at each candidate's character, depth of knowledge, skill and experiences, etc. With the possible exception of Dr Tony Tan, Tharman is more qualified than the other 7 previous Presidents to be that second key to unlocking national reserves, based on his more intimate knowledge from prior experiences at MAS, GIC, Finance Minister, DPM & SM.
For an increasingly well-educated electorate trained in higher-order critical thinking skills, some were not easily swayed by the seductive rhetoric about independence from the ruling party. On the contrary, over-playing this theme might have a counter-productive effect of causing some voters to re-visit the assumptions behind the rhetoric. On 1 Sep 23, its seems that most of the electorate played the role of HR recruitment managers by voting for the most suitable candidate for the specific job requirements of an elected Presidency.
There is cause for qualified optimism for Singapore's future.
@@lychan2366 Nonsense. Tharman also went up against one of the weakest opposition ever out of all 7 presidents. There was no formidable reputable opposition due to the 500 million requirement set by PAP long before they brought over the Jurong senior MP to run for president.
Considering most minorities of Singapore (30%) were never going to vote for a Chinese candidate when there's a non-Chinese present, that leaves the other 40% Chinese that voted for Tharman after being put in a spot where they had to pick between independent opposition but nobodies to represent Singapore or be forced to go with PAP's minion due to the perceived gap in terms of political background.
@@beepbeep5153 Instead of matching your sweeping generalization of every content in my post with a "Nonsense", I shall respectfully respond by stating that we're each entitled to our views. You're better off picking your fights elsewhere.
I like how Tharman doesn’t allow Stephen to interrupt him and projects his points till the very end
Singapore is one of the best countries for living. Very disciplined.
🤣🤣🤣
If you work hard and have no interest in politics beyond voting for the ruling party you will do well.
@@alexgamble4718most Singaporeans are politically aware. Most Singaporeans are also rational in choosing their leaders and not choosing for the sake of opposition.
@@uwet.8826 I hate to burst your bubble, but if Singapore ever encountered a crisis large enough and polling suggested the it would dislodge the ruling party, the PAP will simply come up with new tactics to ensure the free election went its way. It is extremely naive to suggest that a country ruled by one party for 58yrs and is currently ruled by the son of the first PM would simply relinquish power if the people wanted it.
@@alexgamble4718 ikr... I am sure a foreigner or oppie knows better because you are the top 2% minority that has information that the majority do not have access to and can follow the most miniscule trace of information and give perfect textbook answers.
Most astounding of this interview was Thaman not pointing to the flaws of the UK and US economies and so called democracies .. at least not directly...
It's his personal style. Throughout his Presidential campaign, he made his points without attacking any candidate, even though they attacked him.
Tharman makes us Proud to be Sporeans. The interviewer lacked humility ... Talks down...rude.....Tharman,'s intelligence puts him in place🎉😂
How come Singaporeans then interfere n write RUBBISH about India…????????????? Mind your business Singapore
Those who says he's evading questions, he's not. The interviewer is asking ignorant questions that overly simplifies the situation in Singapore. Asking for a yes or no to "why do you like freedom" is dumb. So are the assumptions the interviewer makes of asking "authoritarian" questions. Why does it matter unless you're asking about comparisons to democracy? Why ask too, if you're already full of preconceived notions?
They just don't like his answers because it destroy their delusional and warped reality and self-centered, self-appointed "correct" ideologies.
Results count, numbers count and Singapore is on every metric one of the most successful countries in the world, especially the fact that the current ruling party still enjoys high approval numbers. High approval number = democracy. This is result-driven definition of democracy. Western ideologues can't argue away that fact without contradicting their own superficial method-driven definition of democracy. They believe you can only be called a democracy if you adopt their methods on the surface, never mind if the result is still low approval and the corruption and hijacking of the government by a plutocratic class of private citizens. The life real results of their "democracy" is low approval from the people, and pent up frustration as even common people in the west can see that their system is ultimately not serving their interests and their voting does nothing to change the policies.
When you peel off the facade of western liberal democracy, what you find is a lackluster system of enforcement for public interests, and many trojan horses for powerful rich people to control the government. Western liberal democracy system is mostly a front for capitalist control in the back when they are practiced in real life. They do not want people to realize that, so they only always ask superficial, ignorant questions and demand un-nuanced, slapdash answers. Any nuanced answer they can dismissed with one-liners. This is one way how the capitalist cultural hegemony maintains control over all political discourse and thus the scope and imagination of people.
no not really, interviewer was asking if he believed in a safety net, not democracy.
@@bandfan327 interviewer was smug and clearly trying to bait him. "Look our system is superior with its safety net". He also wasn't looking at the smaller picture of a specific safety net, but the bigger picture of what do we do when our people are down and need support. Tharman's position is that our solutions doesn't give people fish, but teach them to fish. He is answering the broader underlying issue. No solution is perfect. You can fall off a trampoline, but you can also fall through a safety net.
@@Princess_Pear Not that. The Yes/No you mentioned was not for "why do you like freedom" (which isn't even a question) but for whether he believed in a safety net.
@@bandfan327 I think we are arguing 2 different points. My point was in reference to the comments made by others and the argument that Tharman was evasive. Not any specific questions posed by the interviewer.
What a marvellous questions and answers performance of our newly elected NINETH SINGAPORE PRESIDENT MR THARMAN. Any questions he can give a perfect replies.
A pity he's no longer a serving minister in Singapore anymore. Well.. cheers to more good times ahead, hopefully.
No longer minister, but now he's president.
I voted for him yesterday, I admire him ever since I saw this video, in putting down this woke reporter with wit and grace. He is the best person when he meets, woke western politicians.
He became our president yesterday
congr to him
He is well aware of happenings and more professional in social amd many related to our Singapore issues
Brilliant analysis of President Shanmugaratnam tactics and tact. Very impressed with the President‘s answers - keen to see how Singapore will flourish more under his leadership. Found the near arrogant, narrow point of view of the interviewer annoying and insulting.
Regards from a Malaysian neighbour
This is why he needs to win the PE.
He did
Well said Mr Tharman 👍👍
❤❤❤
Due to his depth and breath of knowledge and experience, he is better suited as singapore's Prime Minister. The office of the President is mostly ceremonial and custodial. Inward looking, dealing with the welfare of Singaporeans.
Related to answering questions:
1. I think what you point out in this video is absolutely right, in all discussions and interviews we must ensure that the larger picture and principle considerations and then go further into the weeds
Regarding the content of the interview:
1. I feel every country has their own right of way of managing their country, we all know the downfalls of top down and bottom up approach but Singapore is striking a balance between ensuring the larger and harder policies are kept in check by dedicated and selected professionals (not just popular poster boys) and leaving the smaller freedoms to individuals. This might infringe upon the benefits faced by certain groups but we try to find the sweet spot in a very delicate balancing act.
2. Bringing that to the topic of media freedom, Singapore has never dictated the contents of external media, but always seeks to ensure the facts are truth (yes some might say the truth is what the government makes of it but that is why our leaders must remain incorruptible and shall only speak the truth). In the larger picture the downside of trusting a group of educated and vetted individuals to fact check a matter over millions of potentially misinformed or sinister individuals, your odds are much better w a central body who depends on the ppl to survive their next term.
All in all the 1st principle is to keep Singapore, as a whole, safely professing where we will always take the rational, neutral, and meritocratic approach rather than the popular, single-use and most of the time easier approach to do things because
“Rules, without them we live with the animals”
John Wick reference? XD
animals must follow rules to survive. Not people in USA. the government is feeding them so they can buy a gun in the Wal-Mart and freely butcher the crowd in the cinema hall. And than he is fed till he dies in the jail.😅 freeeee-dum.
"every country has their own right of way of managing their country"
Meanwhile the issue is how you manage to begin with, such as sticky situations where 'you get to decide' if the country is "for you to decide"
does UK have a free enough society that your daughter can walk home late at nite by herself ?
I am so proud that this gentleman is my country's President!
Singapore is an Ideal Democracy. You have a right to choose government but not to intervene with every decision.
Mother does not use democracy while cooking food and ask what everyone wants to eat, she cooks whats best for the family
If Singapore 's authoritarian style is "uncomfortable" for the Western people, don't migrate, or live, or work in Singapore. One is not forced to. Go live in a place where by you are comfortable and happy with the type of freedom you feel suitable. Dont impose your likes and dislikes onto others.
You didnt' have to watch this video if you didn't like it, just like Tharman didn't have to take this interview at all. But fortunately he was open and capable enough to explain the system to the world. Your way of "go back to where you came from and leave us alone" only show that Singapore is not open to criticisms which is wrong, because Singaporeans are proud and ready to defend its system.
Asians are generally more pragmatic. We look at the results of each input. Now take a look at the western world. The degree of lawlessness and social chaos subjectively speaking, is much higher. To the point I have given up thoughts of migrating to either Europe and the US.
@@jackcylow taking criticisms from hypocrites is a waste of time. Responding to them is foolish.
Thank you. And you just imposed your thoughts as a Singaporean, did you not realise that?
@@n8mogan Yes. And it's mind your own business. Hypocrites have no right to criticize and judge others.
US or UK is not a benchmark for anything..infact a hard working singapore is the model we need to work towards
You did a very good analysis dude! Keep it up, I'm sure you'll have a successful youtube channel
Thank you for your kind thoughts!
Impressed by both speakers.
Even if Questions were made known to Tharman like most High Profile Interviews are , Tharman’s Delivery was impeccable ❤
He attempts to show Singapore's confidence and social cohesion. Throughout the discussion, he used some tactics to answer tough questions. In short, the flexibility was the core element that he could be praised of.
Hmm he seems one of the smartest politicians I have ever come across. Singapore is lucky.
A brilliant man who would have made a good PM for Singapore 🇸🇬
I personally am quite unimpressed by the standards and output of some major western media today. They are losing the plot. Today the world may not accept a western so called 'leadership' and opinion masthead. I appreciate the Singaporean outlook on their well being. Being an Indian, I truly appreciate the development process of the global South countries.
Western media completely forgets its cancel culture it’s not as free as it makes it self to be . Very good and calm answers from Singaporean minister.
Around 80% of low income families own their home? That’s a mind blowing statistic. The government must be doing a lot of things right for it to have an impact of this magnitude in the society. As someone who knows nothing about Singaporean politics, this paints a brilliant picture.
The government is heavily involved in housing. My video "How Singapore Solved Segregation" explains a little bit more!
@@weiwenleung Definitely checking it out. Thanks!
Low income in Singapore means middle class in the West.😂
@@userre85 but wouldn’t it still be “low income” compared to the expenses in Singapore? 🤔
President Tharman is brilliant.
The Last message was a good idea. Great and helpful video.
Tharman of Indian Origin- possibly from Tamil family. In which case Tharman is close to read as Dharman - which means a person who is upright.
What an honest and open statement to question put by the journalist. I wish our Australian government act accordingly. Esp where the minister stated how the feels proud of what the people have achieved by their hard work and not just handouts for no effort or accountability .
Singapore is leading the world annd is becoming a benchmark of perfection. Being an expat have observed this closely, Singaporeans are well educated and a very different country in many ways.They will continue to be the most competitive country in the world.
Yes media especially western countries can write untruthful or baise views. But when those affected replies, the media just keep it quiet and not write about them. Let all judge, why cant the affected reply?
The affected here means the Government itself.
The Government cutting media's ad revenues over this is a bit controversial. In the hands of the wrong kind of government this could get out of hand
Well Done Tharman, only you could have answered with such Eloquence, Being Factual Yet With Humility and Wisdom. We doubt that GG and TKL could have answered Intelligently with Tact on the questions by the BBC Commentator.
Great to see another Indian- origin head of state!
Singapore has many problems but it is now a great country to live. Safe, stable, clean, efficient. It’s different from western countries. In fact, I think there are so much to learn from Singapore for western countries, especially the UK.
Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
and i say, those who give up their current safety dies the next moment
@@leonardTsn "The only real prison is fear, and the only real freedom is freedom from fear."
- Aung San Suu Kyi
All the best living in the prison of your fears.
@@oldporkchops i look forward to the day you are able to exercise your own thinking, instead of having to pull quotes from "famous people" LOL. enjoy living in the shadow of these people hahah
Great video bro! Good to see u after so long since schooling days and to see you run this awesome RUclips channel. Keep it up! 😊
Thanks so much! Nice to meet you again virtually :)
Lot's of people in the comments don't understand the Interviewer's style and confuse it with condescension. In reality he was hired exactly for this. He is playing devils advocate, asking questions that opponents and doubters might want to ask. The real quality of that style is that the person being interviewed can take these questions and show how wrong these accusations are, thereby winning over viewers at home who had those doubts.
That wouldn't be possible if the questions were soft balls. It looks like he interviewer here is condescending, but everyone in that room knows that he is just playing that role to give Tharman a chance to show his intellect
If he is simply asking tough questions, it wouldn't come off as condescending. The way he phrases his questions, and his choice of words, shows strong bias
Please do not tell us not to confuse the interviewer’s style etc. I am from Malaysia, studied/worked in UK and lived in Singapore. UK is in chaos with ideological issues, homelessness and unplanned pregnancies rising with crimes reaching uncomfortable levels but yet the typical BBC will portray a free democratic society that is better any country apart from US. One only needs to live in Singapore to know the days of typical Westerner know best is long gone. My English wife can walk on her own in Singapore with no concerns; I would not have her do that in London. A typical BBC interviewer is condescending and rude to Singaporean leader since LKY’s time.
He should have been Prime Minister.
Even if he is the President, most likely he will respond the same way. Tharman is still Tharman.
He will make a very good one too.
Totally agree too.
Agree 100%. What a waste on such a huge talent to go become President.
Tharman should have also asked: What makes you think the british system is working and are creating wealth for Britain? Britian wealth came from colonialism and looting of poorer countries, nothing to do with their industrialization nor their "hardworking" people.
exactly right, if you rob 25% of the earth for a hundred years, that wealth compounds for a fairly long time
From Russian oligarchs
@@86soulx its not an interview. Its the western media projecting their holier than thou values which we know its full of shit and piss.
Tharman has to tread a fine line of defending its policies without insulting the policies of other countries.
Because it's not our job to challenge their policies. We simply want to take in what works and is good for our system, and identify what does not work so that it does not get introduced.
It's not in Singapore's interest to tell other countries that their policies are inferior, or that their history is murky. Even if we all know it.
@@dreamsofmishra LKY said to the crowd and press, in front of Chris Patten democracy will not work in the long run. It gives Patten a black face. This is the kind of leader we need.
Its true we dont tell others how to run their countries but if u tell us what we should do, we will blast you.
Straightly No Drugs, No Crimes, Clean Quiet Environment, Personal & Human Freedom With Guidelines (No Red Lines Should Be Crossed Through Selfishness That Cause Harm, Disturbance or Invade Other's Privacy)
He Reminds us of our Indian foreign minister s jay shankar , great talk
And just yesterday. He was sworn as Singapore 9th President
10 techniques I use to answer my parents' questions:
1. Admit (to some degree) on bad things (before asked about negative things)
2. Give answers that give them room for counterarguments
3. Explain reasoning only when they seem to be in the mood for it
4. Use humor they understand
5. Keep everyone's cool
6. Don't questions underlying assumptions of the questions
7. No focuses
8. Know when to talk
9. Is well prepared beforehand(?)
10. if still couldn't succeed run
Great, the laws and 4:41 the policies best suits for singapore
it doesn’t nee to follow other countries and comparison is not necessary with other western countries
He is right candidate as next president
No, he is suitable for PM
@@KV0105 Not as a 4G PM
Just an update, he's finally Singapore's president.
I think the point about evolution is important. The interviewer mentioned himself that the West has a binary view on politics. Capitalism vs communism. But what is to say that will always be the case? Surely over the course of humanity, we will develop something new and constantly improve for the better.
And what denotes the good and bad of those 2 political stances anyway? Sure history shows that communism has never really worked. But history is written by the winners and saying that China is currently failing as a nation would simply be incorrect.
Trampoline, and Sackur's laugh right after. Telling. Given Stephen himself has benefited from such a trampoline. Rewarding one's loyalty to the Empire with a leg up and a jump.
Kind of a pity how Mr. Tharman did not end up being our Prime Minister...
This is exactly how a (Singapore) President should be interacting himself/herself on this kind of international stage. Without him being a Prime Minister, he is only missing out the executive powers a minister has, which is not required in this context.
No need even your single comment section matters and keep your country proud , mother always matters, respect to you❤. Anyway I am not Singaporean and but stay with many friends who have the relationship in Singapore.
Tharman is the best. He is more then world class.
Every leader and representative Singapore produces are all top notch statesmen. The creme de la creme. Regardless of ethnic background, each cares for the nation of singapore and holds responsibility of leadership and representation to the highest levels.
BBC Needs a lesson, and this lesson was given very succinctly. One can see a wise and learned man speak and one hyped up and entitled man struggle with logic.
I learnt so much from one interview of tharman. He is so succinct and intelligent.
I have not checked prime minister numbers / statistics mentioned at the end , but if that is true , I think Singapore have achieved what many countries did not manage to achieve till today but only in few decades ! this is just "mind blowinggggggggg" and above all in the absence of the Europe /US's implementation of the understanding of the word / motto / " of democracy "
Burst the bubble 'We are good, you are bad'
Algorithms recommend what we like to watch, and if we're not actively looking for different points of views, most likely we'll be exposed to views we agree with most of the time.
I’ve been trying to watch various channels to try to make comprehensive understanding of the world.
I’ve made many videos teaching Chinese language vividly and in a humorous way. I hope somebody can recommend my videos to those who want to learn Chinese. For beginners, Chinese characters may look complicated. But once you learn about 100 basic radicals, most characters become easy.
I hope more people can learn Chinese to get comprehensive firsthand information about China and most likely seek more job opportunities.
Know ourselves as well as our partners, competitors, adversaries…..
When will this western nations and media like BBC will understand Singapore 's democracy is not for them so is theirs not for Singapore. As a 18 year old from Malaysia I went to Singapore and got a job as a trainee marine mechanic. And I was very comfortable with the democracy of Singapore and enjoyed it.Even today I am a Canadian and live in Canada but I do miss my time in SUNNY ISLAND SET IN THE SEA SINGAPORE
You only defend an unassailable point, but you always attack everything else.
Excellent video and an excellent analysis by you. Answers by now President Tharman are very good- he does not fall into any trap - I best liked the trampoline answer !!!
My pleasure!
Wish my country had leaders like him
Damn...loved it..when he said thats not entirely compliment.
That's what I like about Tharman now President Tharman.
A government that works for the people will be favourable to those people. 🎉Great answers 👍 😊
For me, ultimately, what counts for a government is competence and character, not any ism.
That last line, "I am raising my family... keeping that culture going, is what keeps a society vibrant..."... can be true in some cases. But it's not necessarily always the truth.
Once we start to evolve spiritually and understand what humans have done on the planet, we start to realise, that the fruits are on the trees. Unnecessarily working "hard" for some old school version of glory which goes back to the education system (the modern education system in the world) for factory workers, doesn't necessarily create vibrancy. It creates drudgery, disease, sickness, and depression.
It's quite clear from how we've shaped the Earth so far (largely), that this isn't what divinity was supposed to be.
Nevertheless, we persist.
No doubt he's a thoughtful man and I hope we do well under him and whatever the government has in store for us.
Blessings and love to everyone,
Zeph
5:14- LOL..that's a slap for Malaysia. I'm Malaysian and I am so happy for Singaporeans to have such good governance.
ironic, Malaysia is more free than Singapore.
Dey kicap, you the one who always creates chaos for nothing. Clean your own people Malaysian tamilan ass first before advising others.
This man should be standing next to Obama. Both have outstanding ability in their speech and understanding on multidimension of complex issues.
Obama is dramatic and talks in general. This man is crystal clear and grounded to reality!.
@@rapid5208 I do agree, Tharman seemed so genuine yet sophisticated in his speech. He explain things in a well structured manner and easy to understand.
Obama more dramatic approach, I guess it fits well with American cultures. Most of their presidents showed up with intensities..
Well, I'm waiting for the so called 'tough questions' to pop up. The interviewer here has allowed the speaker a free hand to run his narrative. This is the most easy going interview I have seen and heard.
Watch the full video.
😢.. 👉🏻👉🏼👉🏽 America calls it "Liberation" instead of "Invasion". That was what US call it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the list goes on... Why the double standard? Confused... Please enlighten. Genuine question...
Instances of the United States "liberated" or overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)
China 1949 to early 1960s
Albania 1949-53
East Germany 1950s
Iran 1953 *
Guatemala 1954 *
Costa Rica mid-1950s
Syria 1956-7
Egypt 1957
Indonesia 1957-8
British Guiana 1953-64 *
Iraq 1963 *
North Vietnam 1945-73
Cambodia 1955-70 *
Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 *
Ecuador 1960-63 *
Congo 1960 *
France 1965
Brazil 1962-64 *
Dominican Republic 1963 *
Cuba 1959 to present
Bolivia 1964 *
Indonesia 1965 *
Ghana 1966 *
Chile 1964-73 *
Greece 1967 *
Costa Rica 1970-71
Bolivia 1971 *
Australia 1973-75 *
Angola 1975, 1980s
Zaire 1975
Portugal 1974-76 *
Jamaica 1976-80 *
Seychelles 1979-81
Chad 1981-82 *
Grenada 1983 *
South Yemen 1982-84
Suriname 1982-84
Fiji 1987 *
Libya 1980s
Nicaragua 1981-90 *
Panama 1989 *
Bulgaria 1990 *
Albania 1991 *
Iraq 1991
Afghanistan 1980s *
Somalia 1993
Yugoslavia 1999-2000 *
Ecuador 2000 *
Afghanistan 2001 *
Venezuela 2002 *
Iraq 2003 *
Haiti 2004 *
Somalia 2007 to present
Honduras 2009 *
Libya 2011 *
Syria 2012
Ukraine 2014 *
2014 - 2022 - 9 countries yet to verify.
Pakistan 2022 *
Haiti 2022 *
Israel 2023
Hi Mr President!
I agree with Tharman --- UK needs to evolve more than being a hostage to "free press" thinking
UK press is not free. They are all forced to cover up ukraine nazis
Western media has a very narrow view on what a democracy should look like. Their countries were fortunate enough to ransack the world to gain an insight, through trials and errors, on what model is best for them.
This model doesn't always fit other countries. For one, this is no 1600 and there are no countries to invade, subjugate and test your hypothesis (unless you are Russia). So we learn in our ways, with our small successes and failures, towards a path that we believe is the best for our society.
The lecturing helps nobody.
Thank you for posting the video. Tharman our president
@weiwenleung, you earn a new subscriber with this 1 year old video. Thanks for making it.
Just like my bosses methods to answer during tough Q&A during townhall:-
1. Nvr answer directly.
2. Tell a related story to invoke thoughts.
That's why your bosses get no respect
Thank you for sharing those tips…. Makes you also question your own beliefs
Thanks for watching the video!
Always when I hear about “free” western countries, as a born European, this statement to me sounds like excessive arrogance. The West has huge problems with crime, drugs, infrastructure, religious extremism, border control, corruption, unemployment and so on. Is this the kind of freedom their people want? A social net? Just look around in the poor quarters in UK and US, what kind of net are they talking about? I know Singapore very well but still wondering what kind of freedom Singapore does not have and it should have to make it a better place.
Well said. I’ve lived 13 years in Singapore, 12 years in the US, 3 years between Germany and UK, and 20 years between Philippines and Indonesia. My issue with the West’s definition of freedoms is that the loudest one like you say questions others with arrogance and belief that their system is the only right system which kinda defeats the notion of freedom of choice. Another issue I have is freedom without accountability of the Western system especially that of the Western elected officials and media which is what is leading the decline of Western societies. If I were to answer the freedom of press question, I would have retorted with, Free Julian Assange before you lecture me on freedom of press. In Singapore and actually in China as well, a leader’s political career is defined by the success of improvements of the people they serve, if they fail they are brought to account for their failures. I’m hard pressed to think of any modern western leaders that were ever brought to account for their failures to the people but I do have a long list of these western leaders who are still in office after many failures. I’ve always thought that democracy was supposed to be government by the people for the people, in this regard, Singapore and China are doing way better on every metric than any current western government from my own personal experiences living in all those countries.
Singapore’s public housing projects is the best in the world bar none. The ones developed in the last 2 decades are on par and imo better than the luxury apartments that I lived in Boston, New York and London and they are affordable to over 90% of Singaporeans. This is an amazing achievement.
@@WarrenKLiu Totally agree, accountability of politicians is a major point. Hope you are addressing the interviewer, when you say the " loudest one like you", don't you?
Ask TS as education minister from 2003-2008, did he try to ban Christian practices In mission school & turn them into secular institutions?
Sackur later on did admit he got schooled by Tharman in Social Media
He smashed it out of the park
We aspire a liberty to be able to walk the streets freely.
Excellent. Thank you. I learnt something and I enjoyed the analysis. I would love to have this kind of democracy in India, and not the populist one we have.
There is a diff between a tough question and a stupid question.
Fantastic replies. 👏👌👍
Great video
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
He should have been the PM.. not Pres
Thank you very much 🙏🏽🙇🏻♀️