Charlie Munger, the vice Chair of Berkshire Hathaway, reflects on the achievements of Lee Kuan Yew and explains why he thinks LKY is historically important.
As an outsider, Munger might be considered to be too removed to know LKY firsthand or to experience life as a Singaporean in the 60s, 70s, and 80s, or to know personally the reality of life in LKY's Singapore, be be able to comment authentically on LKY.
And so Singaporeans would either castigate him for being shallow or lionising LKY without firsthand experiential knowledge, while others may applaud him for recognising LKY's unique and undeniable achievements.
And the pedantic might take him to task for spectacular or even nit-picky inaccuracies or rhetorical hyperbole, to argue that his assessment is therefore invalid.
I am not here to defend Munger or to correct him, or to set any kind of record straight.
I am a student of history and observer of events.
But I am basking in the reflected glory of LKY and SG.
What I found interesting was Munger's observation that because LKY showed that it could be done, China made the switch to capitalism/globalisation. Vietnam also did it. And now perhaps North Korea might follow.
Sure, maybe (as some commented) Goh Keng Swee was the real architect and he went to China to change things for the Chinese. It was NOT all LKY's effort. But it was LKY's name and brand.
If China, or rather Deng Xiaoping, had not seen the Singapore miracle, had not been able to visualise it, would he have made the commitment? Change the whole country's track? Believe that it was possible?
Maybe it was Goh Keng Swee. Certainly his contribution was significant. But people know LKY better thant GKS, just as people are more familiar with Warren Buffet than Charlie Munger.
Munger's outsider status is a handicap to Singaporeans who think they know better. But his outsider status also makes his perspective a little more objective or impartial. He has NO reason to lionise LKY. He gains nothing from doing so.
But he does.
No comments:
Post a Comment