I wouldn’t say losing its mind. Definitely some click bait title there on your end. It just goes into how the Chinese ethnic population in Singapore, which is a city state in Malaysia, are aligning more with the Chinese Communist party. An example is not believing in human rights abuse against the Uyghurs in China. This divergence will lead to unrest ultimately, and will impact the successes of the city state. I debated even posting but most people won’t read the article and just go based on your title, which is inflammatory.
It just goes into how the Chinese ethnic population in Singapore, which is a city state in Malaysia, are aligning more with the Chinese Communist party.
Malaysia has and will continue to be more Pro-China than Singapore ever will be you dumbass.
You don’t even know what you are talking about LMAO.
In the arena of SEA politics, the most Western friendly countries are: Phillipines (neocolonial comprador puppet state of the US), Singapore (glorified tax haven for which International Capital uses as a node for value transfer, and to better control the geopolitically important Strait of Malacca) and Papua New Guinea (neocolonized by Australian companies).
Singapore isn’t a “city-state” in Malaysia, it was booted out of Malaysia to fulfill the comprador Malay feudal classes interests here in Malaysia, that the British acquiesed because containing Communism was more important.
This division can still be seen as a modern-day example of a colonial scar, remaining unresolved because of past and present Western influence.
But surely and steadily this will be removed and our countries will be reunited. That is the logical conclusion of indigenous economic integration, as history has shown.
Singapore isn’t a “city-state” in Malaysia, it was booted out of Malaysia to fulfill the comprador Malay feudal classes interests here in Malaysia,
I know nothing about this subject. Is it sort of like what happened with Hong Kong and/or Macau?
Somewhat.
I think the key point you need to know is that most of the political parties in Singapore, and all the left-wing ones in Malaysia before independence and even after, wanted a unified country, and many in Malaysia even sought for a “Pan-Indonesianism” which would fit into the historical cultural realm of the Malay archipelago (the spoken lingua franca of the entire region prior to European influence).
Thank you!
wanted
If reunification has become less popular, is there a general cause of this that wouldn’t require you writing out a treatise for the sake of an offhand question?
I tried to keep it short and I began to write an entire monograph lmao.
TLDR: It just isn’t as materially important.
People can easily travel between the two states, there’s iirc hundreds of thousands that pass through the immigration bridge weekly.
Families are not separated and both states maintain cordial relations.
Personally I would obviously like to see it happening, but when it isn’t necessary, you get limited by political bureaucracy than anything else.
Makes perfect sense, thank you. I would have had no problem with an explanation of any length (and the forum might be interested in you making a post on this topic at some point) but I respect your time and patience.
Yup - I also did a quick double check with the stats, its more like hundreds of thousands (400k) per day.
Apparently it is literally the busiest or one of the busiest land borders on Earth.
and the forum might be interested in you making a post on this topic at some point
I have a lot of ideas on this topic regarding Southeast Asian history in general - but I always seemingly want to cover a certain book before I start it, and never get round to actually drafting/creating a post.
I couldn’t get through the whole thing, but this part made me lol.
More recently, the paper deferred to Beijing’s narrative on topics including last year’s “blank paper” protests against covid-19 lockdowns and CCP rule, as well as in coverage of the Chinese surveillance balloon shot down by the United States in February, in which stories routinely implied that the American reaction was irrational and a symptom of decline.
The “Chinese surveillance balloon” was nothing more than a hobbyist weather balloon, but let’s just skip over that because it doesn’t fit the narrative being presented here.
It wasn’t a hobbyist balloon to my knowledge. It was an expensive professional one. Unless the hobbyist was a millionaire it was likely launched by a University or their national weather service and they’d likely counted on recovering and re-using it but it was blown off course, this happens to US research balloons too from time to time so they’re buying new ones semi-regularly… They did later shoot down a hobbyist balloon sent up by an American group but that was a later incident.
Perhaps I got the stories mixed up. In any case, we know it wasn’t a “spy” balloon so continuing to refer to it as such is disingenuous and reveals that the author’s arguments are not being made in good faith.
At least one of the other balloons shot down was the hobbyst.
