Quora Answer: Do Singaporeans View Colonialism Negatively?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “Do Singaporeans view colonialism negatively?”

Singaporeans are pragmatic.  If there were no colonialism, there would be no Singapore, there would have no development of Singapore as a global free port, there would have been no massive immigration of people from outside the region.  Singapore would have been a regional backwater, a Malay island, subordinate to an infighting sultanate, at the tip of the Malay Peninsula.

Singapore is what it is thanks to the ambition of Sir Thomas Stamford Bingley Raffles, who did not want to plateau as the Governor of Bencoolen, and wrote to Lord Francis Edward Rawdon-Hastings, for permission to found a port along the Malacca Straits to counter the influence of the Dutch.  Singapore is what it is thanks to the efficient administration of Major-General William Farquhar, first Resident of Singapore.

It should also be noted that unlike many other parts of the world, Singapore did not actually want the British to leave.  What they agitated for, then, was greater self-determination in internal affairs.  Singapore was quite content to remain a British colony.  The announcement by Prime Minister James Harold Wilson, of the pull out of British forces from bases east of Aden, in January 1968, was viewed with trepidation.  This means, even after independence, Singapore was not keen to lose British protection.

In those intervening decades, however, things have greatly changed.  Singapore has navigated the challenges of independence, and grown wealthy.  With that wealth, and success, came a greater sense of nationhood, and confidence.  A wealthy, assertive Singapore has no use for the British.  There is this historical sense that the British abandoned us, from their mismanagement of the Pacific campaign that lead to the Fall of Singapore, to their abrupt pulling out from the colonies in the East Indies.  It was a Labour Prime Minister that pulled out, and abandoned us as a defenseless island, and it was Conservative Prime Minister, Sir Edward Richard George Heath, that mitigated that with the FPDA.

In that time, British prestige has lost much of its lustre.  The average Singaporean will not be enamoured with the calibre of British political leadership now, or the policies pursued by either side of the aisle.  Whilst the Fall of Singapore is taught in school, including the inept leadership of Lieutenant-General Arthur Ernest Percival, British help during the Konfrotasi, and the Emergency, is not highlighted, which colours the views of the younger generation.  This creates a divide across generations, on whether British rule was good for us.

If we can have an honest look, Singapore would not be where it is without the British.  Among all the colonial powers, the British had the best record of developing her colonies.  The Dutch were exploitative, and monopolistic.  The French still tie her former colonies to her.  The Belgians were genocidal.  The Portuguese and the Spanish looted theirs.  The British left Singapore, upon independence, with the one of the best ports, and airport in East Asia.  She left Singapore with a fully functioning civil service, and judiciary.  She left Singapore with educational institutions, and a legal system we still use.  At the very least, Singapore had the building blocks to become a successful, and wealthy city state.  For that, we are grudgingly grateful.