Singapore 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 answer.

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.

Topic 4
In your opinion, what could have prevented the Maria Hertogh riots in 1950? Give at least 2 suggestions.

As your have know, the Maria Hertogh riots was caused by the rejection of Che Aminah appeal. Fellow Malays felt betrayed by what they saw as the British taking sides with the Dutch caused the supporters of Aminah at the Padang started to riot.However, I believe that the riot could be prevented.Measures such as ordering the army or police forces to surround the Padang beforehand or even forbid anyone to crowd around the Padang when they are making the verdict.By surrounding the Padang with the army or police forces, it could at least prevent any possible threat done when the verdict was made. Having the army or police forces there, could have reduce the damage done as they are properly equipped and well prepare to deal with the problem.By forbidding the crowd to gather outside the Padang, the place would not be crowded with people. When there is no people, even when there is a rejection for the appeal, no one would be able to stage any riot as there are no people there. If they want to stage a riot, they would have to find time and place to gather which is troublesome.Therefore, the suggestions above could at least prevent large damage done to both the humans and the public.

Topic 3

Did the Industrial Revolution affect the way people lived and worked in the 19th century for the better or the worse?

The Industrial Revolution affect the way people lived and worked in the 19th century for the better or the worse. Here are some examples of Industrial Revolution...With the invention of the steamship, more Europeans could now sail to the East to obtain their raw materials and find markets to sell their goods. This resulted in more ships visiting Singapore and led to the growth in trade. From the 1880s many European and American steamships made Singapore thief port-of-call, where their ships stopped to refuel and obtain food supplies. The Asians in Singapore also used steamships to transport their goods between Singapore and other ports in the region. Thus, Singapore's position as a port for collection of goods from the East and the distribution of manufactured goods from the West gained importance.The other example is the Suez Canal. The need for raw materials and new markets to sell their goods caused many merchants to seek a shorter route to the East. Ships travelling between Europe and Asia had to sail around the southern tip of Africa, clled the Cape of Good Hope. This long and often dangerous journey from London to Singapore took sailing ships at least 120 days. A French engineer drew up plans to aviod the sea route around Africa by cutting a long canal to link the Mediterranean Sea with Red Sea. When the Suez Canal was finally opened, the cost was nearly double the amount originally intended.The journry from London to Singapore took only 50 days.

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 Tan Tock Seng as there are already a few statues of Sir Stamford Raffles in some of the museums. This will let younger generations have a chance to not only know about Sir Stamford Raffles, but also have a chance to know this man who had done a lot for the public of Singapore in the past.Tan Tock Seng had contributed by giving medical help for poor people for little or no cost at all. He also uses his own money to pay for the funeral expenses of unclaimed bodies that die in the streets and verandahs. By doing so, he supplied 1,032 coffins.Tan Tock Seng helps in settling problems and disputes in the Chinese community as he was appointed the leader of Chinese community with the title of Kapitan of the Hokkien clan. Even after his death, his descendants like Tan Kim Ching, Tan Teck Guan and Tan Chay Yan continued his legacy in helping the poor Chinese and each of them became leaders if the Chinese community.So I would choose to erect a statue of Tan Tock Seng in front of the National Mueseum entrance instead of Sir Stamford Raffles's

Who really "founded" Singapore?

In my opinion, I think that Sir Stamford Raffles was the real founder of Singapore. Though William Farquhar and Dr. John Crawfurd indirectly had a share in shaping Singapore into what it is today but Sir Stamford Raffles after all had played a far more important role in the founding og Singapore. Without Raffles concern about the Dutch Spreading monopoly of their trade and authority, William Farquhar would not had embarked on a journey with Raffles to the south of Dutch Melaka, in search of a new British trading settlement. It was also Raffles who had decide to establish a trading settlement on the island and also fought hard on the ideal even though the one who ruled the island, Sultan Abdul Rahman, was under the control of the Dutch. Raffles came up with a plan to bring back the rightful heir, Tengku Hussein, to Singapore secretly so as to not arouse the Dutch suspision and then back on the island, Tengku was recognised by British as the rightful heir. After Raffles had signed the treaty that allowed the British to build a settlement on the island, he left to govern Bencoolen as Lieutenant-Governor, hence, William Farquhar had to take over the management of Singapore. Dr. John Crawfurd signed the treaty that allowed the British to have control over the whole island and that was at the time when Raffles had already left for Bencoolen. If Raffles had stay on to manage Singapore, he would haveb been the one who signed the treaty. Hence, Raffles is the one who really "founded" Singapore.