social engagements aside, revision is just not happening for reasons being procrastination.

i could talk about a lot of things, especially about politicians and their selection criteria. also, the link between cultural citizenship, forms of government and managerial style, and a very interesting article by an Indian writer on ‘values’.

but i have to read about anthropology and colonialism.

which brings to mind why there is a gap in the singapore history books of the time between 1819 and the japanese occupation during world war II. i concede that there were topics such as tin-mining, and triads, and the ‘hearts and minds campaign’, but what else? i’m sure singapore wasn’t just full of gang members and tin miners and communists.

it’s like how japanese students didn’t (until recently) learn of their involvement in world war II.

do we distance ourselves from colonialism because we’re ashamed at being a former colony, or because we do not want to admit that a lot of the institutions in singapore are the remains colonialism? what’s wrong with admitting that we are a direct result of our colonial past?

and another thing, why does our supposed history start in 1819 with the ‘founding’ of singapore by raffles? singapore was already a well-known port, and had long been used as a trading post by the chinese, indians and arabs. why not go into that history? why do we simultaneously applaud and detract from colonial history?

i have a lot of grief within me regarding the education system, yes. it’s a good thing my mother instilled in me the habit of reading at an early age and the possession of a library membership card. it was also probably a very good thing that i decided early on to question everything.

how else would i have gained real knowledge (as opposed to facts)? the textbooks certainly weren’t handing it out on a platter, spoon-fed or not.