History should be an interesting topic. but I dislike it when it comes to the history of Islam or whatever things that are related to Islam. It is non that I am being racialist because at my ain position. in order to analyze good in topics related to history. one has to hold the involvement to research it and happen out what caused such historical minute to happen. and I have the least involvement to research Islam. However. things go the other manner round when it comes to the history of my fatherland. Malaya and our neighbour. Singapore.
When I looked at the universe map for the first clip when I was immature. I was shocked to see the size of Singapore. which is about the size of Selangor. one of the province in Malaysia. Despite of its size and deficiency of natural resources. Singapore still could pull off to catch Malaysia in tonss of facet. such as economic system. political stableness. promotion of engineering and cleanliness. As a Malayan. I felt ashamed. but at the same clip. I am funny on how did Singapore manage to accomplish such consequence.
Although by and large Malaysia and Singapore are different. still they portion certain sum of similarities. Both Malaysia and Singapore are similar in term of their historical background. In 1800s. both Singapore and Malaysia were antecedently under the British colonisation. During that clip. Malaysia and Singapore were sharing the same end. which was to be independent and construct up a strong political and economic society. Hence. leaders from both states attempted to convey their states towards independency.
As for Malaysia. British promised to allow Malaysia independency with a status. which was to guarantee people in the state to populate peacefully and harmony regardless of their difference in races. For illustration. Tunku Abdul Rahman put a batch of attempts to convert and unify the political parties such as UMNO. MIC. and MCA because he believed that all leaders can guarantee the safety and public assistance of their several people. Not merely Tunku Abdul Rahman and political party’s leaders worked hard. all the occupants in Malaya besides sacrificed a batch. For illustration. Malayans were willing to accept jus soli which was to give citizenship to non-Malay.
As for non-Malays. they were to acknowledge the privilege of Malays ( Awkhalid. 2010 ) . At last. Malaya was granted independency on 31 August 1957. Similarly. Singapore was under British colonisation in 1800s and Singapore wished to be independent excessively. Before 1961. Singapore was led by Lee Kwan Yew. During that clip. Malaya was granted independency while Singapore was non. One of the grounds that British do non allow Singapore independency was because they feared Communists will take over Singapore after it was granted independency ( Sadman Ridoy. 2009 ) .
In 1961. Tunku Abdul Rahman proposed Singapore. Sabah. and Sarawak to fall in Malaya in a federal brotherhood. The chief intent of the proposed of this amalgamation is to construct a closer political and economic co-operation between all members of the amalgamation ( About Singapore. 2013 ) . Hence. Lee Kwan Yew took this chance and agreed to fall in the amalgamation with federal brotherhood in order to liberate Singapore from colonisation since Malaya was a strong anti-communist state ( Sadman Ridoy. 2009 ) . In 16 September 1963. Singapore. Sabah. Sarawak and Malaya were merged and form Malaysia.
However. Singapore was forced to choose out from the brotherhood in 1965 ( Malaysia – Independence and Onward: 1957 – Present. 2007 ) . This was due to Lee Kwan Yew was believed to be politically stirring up racial animus ( Bowring. 2005 ) . Singapore was eventually granted independency in 9 August 1963 ( About Singapore. 2013 ) . Malaysia and Singapore portion the same root in footings of instruction since they were both colonized by British in the 1800s. but they took different waies when Singapore was opted out from the federation of Malaysia on 9 August 1965.
Taking University of Malaya ( UM ) in Malaysia and National University of Singapore ( NUS ) as illustrations. despite that these two universities were branched out from the same root. they developed and applied their instruction policy in different ways. Singapore authorities started to concentrate on developing third instruction when they realized the importance of the universities in economic growing. NUS started to concentrate on research excellence other than learning when the labour-intensive scheme gave manner to a higher value technology-intensive scheme in 1970s ( as cited in Mukherjee & A ; Wong. n. . ) . In Malaysia. due to the cultural public violences in 1969. the Malayan authorities came out with the New Economic Policy with instruction served as the nucleus instrument. Bumiputras were given the precedence in instruction as the New Economic Policy imposed the cultural quotas for pupil admittance at a ratio of 55 to 45 for Bumiputras to non-Bumiputras. whereby this citation was ne’er been seen before in Singapore ( Mukherjee & A ; Wong. n. d. ) . Language policy is the chief difference in the instruction system of Malaysia and Singapore.
The first post-independence premier curate of Singapore. Lee Kuan Yew imposed English as a common linguistic communication to be used in school while maintaining the native-language to be available as good. Therefore. English is used as a common tool to pass on among pupils from different cultural backgrounds. It is besides the linguistic communication of direction throughout the instruction system. As a consequence. pupils will be good prepared for international engagement. On the other manus in Malaysia. the chief linguistic communication of direction of the instruction system was English ab initio. but it was replaced with Bahasa Malaysia in 1971.
Although Chinese and Tamil schools are still available for primary schooling. yet they are non available for secondary degree in authorities school. The alteration of the linguistic communication medium benefited the Malays alternatively of other races and language-training plans were implemented in order to develop instructors to learn in Bahasa Malaysia ( Mukherjee & A ; Wong. n. d. ) . Fiscal committedness to instruction in Malaysia and Singapore is different every bit good. Singapore government’s fiscal committedness to instruction has sustained about the same sum since 1962. whereby the proportion of public educational outgo for university instruction increased from 10. % to 19. 8 % in between twelvemonth 1962 and 2007. which is about US $ 1. 31 billion in twelvemonth 2007. In Malaysia. although public outgo for instruction is about 25 % of the authorities budget. the existent sums are non comparable to those of Singapore. Based on the GDP per capita in between 1970 and 2005. in 1970. Singapore GDP per capita income was 913. 8 and Malaysia’s per capita income was 394. 1. but it was more 5 times of this sum by 2005. which were 26892. 9 for Singapore and 5141. 6 for Malaysia ( as cited in Mukherjee & A ; Wong. n. d. ) .
These figures show that Malaysia has lower fiscal resources available to all sectors. including instruction degree as compared to Singapore. As for the economic facet. Malaysia and Singapore are different in the economic activities involved and the extent of their economic growing. Malaysia is about 478 times larger than Singapore and Malaysia has more natural resources such as crude oil. Sn ore. and lands every bit compared to Singapore. This had enabled Malaysia to transport out a assortment of economic activities which include fabricating industries. agribusiness. and trade.
On the other manus. Singapore is holding lesser resources and Singapore even used to import imbibing H2O from Malaysia. Since Singapore is deficiency of resources. therefore the Singapore’s authorities tend to concentrate strictly on trading particularly in entrepot trading ( Singapore Local Economic Development. n. vitamin D ) . Even though Malaysia is holding a batch of resources and have been transporting out more economic activities than Singapore. but still the growing is slower than Singapore. “Singapore has grown 189-fold in the 45 old ages since independency. and saw its GDP per capita rise dramatically from US $ 512 to US $ 36. 537 last twelvemonth along the manner.
During the same period. Malaysia’s economic system expanded at one-third the gait. merely pull offing to hike GDP per capita from US $ 335 in 1965 to US $ 6. 975 in 2009. ” said by Chieh ( 2010. parity. 11 ) . In fact. the economic system of Singapore is spread outing even more quickly than earlier as Singapore had been successfully transformed themselves into a regional hub late. non merely for service but besides fabricating sector. in order to make full capacity in their productiveness ( Chieh. 2010 ) . Consequently. their high growing rate in productiveness had lead their economic system to make a higher terminal.
RAM Retentions main economic expert. Dr Yeah Kim Leng agreed to the remarks made by our former premier curate. Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad. that Singapore is confronting a rapid economic growing and even will catch Malaysia because Singapore merely focus in turning the economic system. Unlike Malaysia non merely grows the economic system. in the average clip Malaysia yet needs to put for the “social restructuring goal” such as just distribution of wealth between all races ( Chieh. 2010 ) . However. if Malaysia wants to accomplish its vision 2020. the Malaysia authorities should larn from Singapore on how to make a high-income and high economic growing state.
In short. Malaysia and Singapore are really similar in footings of their history background. However. as Singapore opted out from the federation of Malaysia. their instruction and economic activities went toward different waies. Judging from the current position of Singapore and Malaysia. Singapore will still stay in front of Malaysia be it in economic growing. political stableness or grade of graft. Malayan authorities should function Singapore as an illustration in many ways in footings of pull offing a state. particularly the rate of graft among the curates as Singapore is renowned for its low graft rate.