Not to mention, I find the first few paragraphs describing a homogenous society as a negative very racist, and hope someday this barrier in Singapore would be broken. Especially, since Singapore is a multicultural society.

In fact, I have to say that I do hope Singapore becomes more westernized, so it would actually act more like a democratic society, rather than prohibit freedom of speech with it’s communistic shadow.

1. Your argument is predicated on an assumption that Singapore’s organic culture and globalisation are separate phenomena. You mention and agree with your introduction that Globalisation is not a new phenomenon. Similarly, Singapore’s very existence was based on the globalisation of trade, due to the convenient location of the island on a trade route. In fact, Singapore’s organic culture arose out of the people who settled in Singapore due to this globalisation of trade. Singapore’s family values therefore have to be seen as rooted in this context of globalisation. Singapore’s distinct culture, including any family values, was defined by, and is intimately tied to globalisation.

2. The ‘multigenerational passing down of family values’, which you claim has been broken down by globalisation, similarly should be viewed within the context of Singapore’s trade origins. It was only due to the success of Singapore in trade and commerce that attracted its early settlors. These early settlors would have, at that time, broken all ties with their families back in china, india etc. In fact, they would have been much more isolated from their families as comapared to the modern day immigrant who has phones and the internet. It is more likely than not that many of Singapore’s settlors were viewed as ‘unfilial’ by the parents they had left behind. Singaporean family values have arisen out of this same group of people, and again is a product of Globalisation. In contrary to your argument, we can now see that Globalisation has in fact played a major role in the nurturing of Singaporean family values.

3. Secularism, cynicism and commercialisation are not the pillars of globalisation at all. Globalisation means increased human convergence and networking. Look at how Globalism has spread catholicism across the entire world, including the Philippines and South America. The trend towards modern personal values (secularism, cynicism etc), and the lower birth rates / higher divorce rates may not be a direct product of Globalisation, although it may appear to be. Humans naturally form their personal life values and beliefs according to the environment they are found in. The increase in the personal wealth and the ‘spoiling of the child (Singaporeans)’ is more directly related to the trend. Ironically, the massive increase in the wealth of Singaporeans is due to Globalisation.

To blame globalisation alone for these trends is an easy way out, and does not hold up to scrutiny as shown. The countries who have taken your views and shunned globalisation by building up the walls between them and the world have all met tragedy. Just look at the number of people starving in North Korea.

kidding.

^.^