Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
History: Merger of Singapore and Maysia
Transcript of History: Merger of Singapore and Maysia
Well, we have always believed in merger. We are nationalists, and everybody including the Communists have since 1945 denounced the British for separating Singapore from the Federation. Now the time has come to re-unite. And, as you know, some people are very unhappy at the prospect of national
security being in the hands of a strong Central Government, so they look for all
kinds of reasons why this merger is not a very good thing. But they dare not say
they are against merger. They just say they are against this kind of merger, and
they propose a kind of merger with security not in the hands of the Central
Government and thereby expose their hand.
History: Merger of Singapore and Malaysia
Group 9: Delroy & Timothy
Source A was produced by Mr. Lee Kuan Yew. It is directed at locals in Singapore who were concerned about the upcoming potential merger with Malaya. Its aim is to persuade the locals that the merger was beneficial. So that the locals would side with his point of view. I know this as the source states, "And my best, in fact, best in the circumstances, is to reach reasonable agreement with a reasonable Prime Minister in charge of the Federation of Malaya."
Type of Source
This are excerpts from a primary oral source said by Mr. Lee Kuan Yew who had experienced the event, (PM of Singapore) [Taken November 19, 1961, 1600 hours]. The target audience are the locals in Singapore at the time who wanted to know more about the upcoming potential merger of Singapore and Malaya.
I can infer that some locals in Singapore were anti-merger. The source states, "some people are very unhappy at the prospect of national security being in the hands of a strong Central Government". This shows that there were some in Singapore that were unhappy with the probable merger.
I can infer that Mr. Lee Kuan Yew was pro-merger. The source states, "Well, we have always believed in merger. We are nationalists, and everybody including the Communists have since 1945 denounced the British for separating Singapore from the Federation.". This shows that Mr. Lee Kuan Yew was pro-merger.
If, in the end, the Communists succeed in creating trouble over this either
by stirring up people over Chinese schools -- or God knows what else they will
try -- citizenship, representation, all kinds of things -- if they succeed, then I say,
the outcome is not an independent Singapore, which is what they really want, but
the outcome is a West Irian situation. So, I say to the people of Singapore my
duty to them is to do my best for them. And my best, in fact, best in the
circumstances, is to reach reasonable agreement with a reasonable Prime
Minister in charge of the Federation of Malaya. Nobody doubts, particularly the
Chinese, that the Tunku is not anti-Chinese.
Source A pt.2
I am not surprised by what the source say. I believe it is reliable as it is said by the Prime Minister of Singapore himself. I do feel it is biased as he has reasons to encourage the locals to accept the merger such as Malaya giving them protection.
The tone is cajoling as he subtly urges the locals to side with him and vote for merging with Malaya.
Type of Source
It is a primary written source. It is primary as it is directly from a journalist who had experienced the merger of Singapore and Malaya. (16 September 1963) The author is a journalist for The Straits Times and the target audience are the locals in Singapore who want to know more about what the results of the vote were.
I can infer that The Straits Times had supported the merger. This is because the source states, "HAIL MALAYSIA!". Thus, it is evident that The Straits Times is accepting of Singapore's merge with Malaysia. Therefore, I can infer that the Straits Times were supportive of the merger.
Purpose for Source B: It is directed towards locals in Singapore who wanted to know how the Malaysians reacted to their merger. Its aim is to convince locals that the Malaysians were very acceptive towards them so that locals would be acceptive towards them in return. I know this as the source states that "Hundreds of thousands of people jammed the gally-decorated streets in all the 14 States till late in the night to greet the birth of the new nation"
I believe the source as it is produced by the Straits Times, a credited new source, it is reliable.
The tone is celebratory as the source states that that were celebrations in all the 14 states to greet the birth of a new nation.
They are similar in that they both are supportive of Singapore's merger with Malaya. This can be seen in Source A with "We have always believed in merger" and Source B with "HAIL MALAYSIA". Therefore, both sources think that merger is a positive.
THANKS FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION
Sources A and B differ in the fact that Source B suggests that it was almost unanimous for merger but Source A says that there were some against it.