Transcription
And immigrants has been America's strength. Absolutely. But mind you, immigration of the highly intelligent and highly hardworking, very hardworking people. If you get immigration of the fruit pickers, you may not get very far.
But lately, Guanu recognized a fundamental shift in birth rates around the developed world. But the trend in all developed countries is once you have women educated and doing jobs the fertility rate goes to one because a cost is too high. A double income becomes a single income once you have a child pregnancy looking after the child first few years of life you have a second child or loss of income. So this is a problem that is affecting all European countries or developed countries with falling birth rates and rapidly aging populations. Nations like Singapore are increasingly relying on immigrants to prevent economic collapse. Otherwise you'll end up in 2050 one and a half persons working to support two notable the whole economy will collapse and because the burden will be so great the bright young ones will immigrate rather than pay those heavy burdens. Not possible.
While countries like America, Australia, and Singapore are often celebrated as successful immigrant societies, Lee remained deeply aware of the challenges of managing a multicultural society, believing that deep-seated tribal biases threaten social harmony. Racial biases, racial preferences, they are not going to go away. Let's not pretend. We are all prisoners of our own instincts. And the first instinct in man is to identify with somebody who looks like him.
In fact, Lee observed these struggles firsthand, not only through Singapore's own history of racial tensions, but also by watching the global stage where race riots and the scapegoating of minorities have often led to violence. If you are an Asian in a white society or even you're an Asian in an African society, the Indians in Africa have a very tough time and they get massacred from time to time.
Lee would also pay close attention to Europe's ongoing challenges with immigration, noticing how their leaders have openly acknowledged that multiculturalism has failed. He also recognized America and Australia's own struggles as multicultural societies. When you have a multi-racial, multicultural, multilingual situation, not a multi-racial, but a monolingual, monocultural situation as in the United States where different groups have joined a majority culture and language. Then you have divergent centrifugal forces because each language carries with its own baggage of cultural values, emotive overtones and worldview. Sabo Croats go to Australia and they carry out their feuds in Yugoslavia, in Melbourne and Sydney. It takes a long time before they become Australians.
In fact, Lee noticed that even among Chinese immigrants from mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, local Singaporean Chinese often voiced criticism, pointing out how different these newcomers could be despite their shared heritage. China Chinese, they are very different from us. Even Taiwan Chinese and indeed so many who have taken uh unkindly to our 25,000 Hong Kongers. They have emphasized to me how different the Hong Kongers are. Yes, up to a point. But in the next generation, they can become Singapore Chinese Singaporeans.
Studying these issues, Lee concluded that rather than forcing everyone to assimilate, Singaporeans should keep their own culture while embracing a shared national identity. I coined the word Singaporean first. I used it from about the 1970s to establish the point that we can become one distinct identity. But we are not going to be a homogenized identity. There is no such thing as I'm just a Singaporean. There is no such thing as I'm just an American. You're either a black American or a white American or a Hispanic American or an Asian American. And if you do not accept that, then you are deceiving yourself and you're in for a lot of unpleasantness.
However, Lee recognized that maintaining the shared national identity would be increasingly difficult to maintain if Singaporeans failed to reproduce themselves, relying purely on migrants to maintain economic stability. The foundation for multicultural society because they are not reproducing themselves. We have to depend on the children of the migrants to become Singaporeans. Is there a worry that the influx of foreign workers to Singapore will further dilute that national identity we're trying to build, the nationalism that we're trying to foster? Probably. But what's the choice? No, what's the choice? I ask you. I keep on saying look let's get to a niece the impossible it's not working but it's not working I mean it's a choice and unlike nations united by shared history culture and race where people willing to sacrifice for the greater community young multicultural countries like Singapore do not have that same deep rooted cohesiveness that would allow it to navigate profound challenges what um has to change in Singapore before you consider Singapore to be a nation I think there must be a sense of self, a sense of identity that you're prepared to die for your country, that you're prepared to die for each other. I mean you just look at the Chinese how many times they've been invaded but then they recreated themselves when the invaders got weak because there is that cohesiveness same language same culture and the same Han race as that are we in the same language same culture no we have adopted the one language which is a foreign language if we lose our second language we have lost all sense of our identity. What is the Singaporean 44 45 years? You don't create a nation 45 years.
As another example, he would highlight Sweden where an influx of refugees is challenging the country's high trust social contract built on strong traditions of shared culture, high taxes, and generous social benefits. He predicted that once the wealthy lost faith in the system and began to move out of the country, Sweden's social fabric could begin to unravel.
But even with these difficulties, Lee saw the clear advantages of allowing immigrants. He argued that Singapore's openness will make it more economically resilient than nations like Japan which choose to remain closed off to significant immigration. I think the Japanese need that overall in terms of their political system. Yeah. And in terms of their acceptance of immigrants, their birth rate is one point. Their fertility fertility rate is just slightly higher than ours. We are 1.29 to 1.38 and they're shrinking. But we are a small population. So in we can make up with any numbers from young bright Indians, young bright Chinese, young bright Malaysians and all the people around the world and some Middle Easterners. You we now have Ukrainians serving in our army, our citizens. Ukrainians in Singapore. Yes, of course. Russians too. But Japan does not want immigrants. So they are stuck. Today they have 3.2 working persons to support one adult. In 2055 they love 1.2 person to support one adult.
When managed well, a diverse society sparks a dynamic exchange of ideas and perspectives that is hard to replicate. Lee often pointed to America's enduring innovation as proof of multiculturalism's power, an example he believed Singapore should emulate. And America does it better than Europe and Britain because it is able to attract talents from all over the world and they are an embracive society welcoming newcomers. That is one reason for the success of Silicon Valley. The talented from the world over have been drawn to the US and increased the dynamism. We must increase the numbers of talent that we have in Singapore to join us in the worldwide competition for growth and progress.
Ultimately, Lee saw the management of immigration and multiculturalism as a perpetual balancing act, navigating national unity, deep-seated biases, and the demands of economic stability. Yet he remained confident that multicultural nations like Singapore could not only weather these challenges but truly thrive rising above racial tensions and nurturing a genuine live and let live spirit that has always been at the heart of Singapore's success. That we have got here not by suppressing or pretending that race differences, language differences, culture differences do not exist. But that they can coexist without the majority obliterating or oppressing the minority. But by accepting the fact that there are fundamental primeval differences and telling each other we have to live, put up with each other, accommodate, compromise, bargain, compromise. Again, that's how it's been done. My definition of a Singaporean which is will make us different from any others is that we accept whoever joins us as part of us. I think that must be our defining attribute. If we don't have that attribute we see we are going to have only those who are like us. Chinese from China like us. Indians from India like us. Malays from Malaysia are different from us. But in time they come here they they change. I think that's the defining attribute.