Was this a mammoth PAP propaganda exercise?

Ever so often we find the filial sonny boy Lee Hsien Loong trying to revive the memory of his late famous or infamous father Lee Kuan Yew (depending on which side you are on) with some massive propaganda at taxpayers' expense to perpetuate his godly image. And so it was with the mammoth PAP propaganda to honour the first anniversary of the death of PM Lee's father Lee Kuan Yew. True to its slavish character as a PAP propaganda organ, the Straits Times produced voluminous columns of celebratory articles extolling the so-called virtues of Lee Kuan Yew, the distinguished father of PM Lee. Who would want to read such a hugh amount of literary trash except the fanatical fans of the late Lee Kuan Yew who had nothing better to do? But then the Straits Times could not be seen as lagging in pandering to their political masters.

You find that all the celebratory events were dominated by PAP minister like Tharman Shanmugaratnam and Chan Chun Seng. Tharman was so comical in highlighting the quirkiness of Lee Kuan Yew over some bougainvilia plant that he could have passed off as a stand-up comedian. Workers' Party chief Low Thia Khiang stood out like a sore thumb, a forlorn opposition figure among past and present PAP parliamentarians in the old Parliament House. Does Low honestly believe in Lee Kuan Yew's character and so-called achievements and adultaes him like the PAP leaders?

Clearly, this was purely a mammoth PAP show to idolise their late leader who started off promisingly as a founding prime minister. But it was debatable if he had stood steadfastly in his original principles which had led to a lot of sufferings and unhappiness among a considerable section of the society. Except for Low Thia Khiang whose stand is questionable, no opposition leaders had shown any inclination to participate in the honour of someone regarded by the PAP as a national hero but regarded by them as an antithesis. Then there are those who had suffered inordinately under his rule and their families and supporters. And a considerable number who consider him an autocratic ruler.

PM Lee Hsien Loong is really keen to portray his late father Lee Kuan Yew as the Father of Singapore. He would have liked his father to be accepted in the same manner as the late Dr. Sun Yat-sen had been respected by the Chinese people as the Father of China. There is no way that Lee Kuan Yew can be compared with Dr. Sun Yat-sen in character and achievements, especially in the way Dr. Sun was idolised by the Chinese. One is a titan and the other is,well, a dwarf by comparison.

Papier-mache caricature of a Hero

It is not difficult to fathom the reason behind the fanatic glorification of the late Lee Kuan Yew on the first anniversary of his death. To say that it is a colossal effort by PM Lee Hsien Loong and his ilks to shore up the waning reputation of the PAP for future domination of Singapore is not way off. So it became imperative for the jocular PM Lee Hsien Loong to over-hype the so-called achievements of his late father, the papier-mache caricature of a hero, to rally gullible Singaporeans to bolster the erratic reputation of the PAP.

The PAP wallahs are trying to create the image of the questionable Lee Kuan Yew into some kind of a demi-god. But what do the students and younger Singaporeans, even older Singaporeans, know of the heinous character of Lee Kuan Yew?  They simply follow the leader in exhibiting their enthusiasm of idolising the late Lee Kuan Yew without actually knowing the real meaning of it. And this is accentuated by the PAP propagandists, PM Lee and his ministers not exempted, by dwelling on Lee Kuan Yew's so-called virtues and making him out to be the sole leader to transform Singapore to what it is today. They try to impress the public that they owe their living today to Lee Kuan Yew.

To put it cynically, nothing can be more preposterous. Lee Kuan Yew would be floundering like a drowning man if he did not have eminent ministers like Dr. Goh Keng Swee, Mr. Hon Sui Sen, Mr. S.Rajaratnam and last but not the least the eminent Dr. Albert Winseimus, to help him transform Singapore, economically and politically, to what it is today. And where is the sense of integrity and duty to the public for the PAP propagandists to say that it is a one-man show by Lee Kuan Yew to transform Singapore to its present stage? Do PM Lee and his flattering ministers think that this is a fair representation of the contributions of Dr. Goh and his colleagues, especially Dr. Winseimus who almost single-handedly transformed Singapore economically with his inimitable expert advice.

There is an urgent need to put Lee Kuan Yew's achievements in perspective, warts and all, in order not to short-change Singaporeans. There is a reason why renowned historians have so far not given any verdict on Lee Kuan Yew. Dr. Poh Soo Kai, in his book "Living in the time of deception", has given an illuminating account of the complicity of Lee Kuan Yew with Lim Yew Hock in dealing with his political adversaries.. The million dollar question is why Dr. Poh had held back in exposing Lee Kuan Yew to his PAP members at the first opportunity?