Bold look at Singapore's origins

There is a new book "A 700-Year History: From Early Emporium To World City" about Singapore" history. It debunks the notion that Singapore's history truly began only when Sir Stamford Raffles docked at the banks of the Singapore River in 1819.

There is a bold attempt by the authors to pull back another 500 years of Singapore's history. The authors say Singapore did not merely take a back seat to history between its heyday as a trading emporium in the 14th century, and the time Raffles set up a trading post at the Singapore River.

Take a look at the full article on the Straits Times.


Questions:
1. What was Singapore's history before 1819 like?
(you can refer to your textbook)

2. What is the purpose of knowing Singapore's history before 1819?

3. Lets say there is no evidence of Singapore's history before 1819. History is the record of past events. Can we say that because there is no record of anything, Singapore does not have a history before 1819?

Invest in history to secure the future

HISTORY is boring. Dead boring.
That's the refrain of about half a dozen secondary school students I've talked to in the course of my work.
History is just about a bunch of facts and dates we have to cram for exams, they say. And what's the significance of these facts and dates? They shrug; they aren't sure.
Never mind that part of their O-level history examination is 'source-based', that is, testing their ability to assess the purpose, arguments and credibility of a historical source, such as a text excerpt, speech or interview...

See the full article.

Discussion Questions
1. What is history?
2. Is history all about facts?
3. If not, what else does history involve besides facts?
4. Do you think history is boring or interesting? Explain why.

Election pledges mean very little in Germany

This article appeared on page 2 of the Straits Times (Sept 7) and also on a few other newspapers.

"...German politicians are able to make such “truth-deficient” promises because of a complicated electoral system designed to ensure that no single party can ever rule on its own.

For decades, only three political formations dominated the scene: Chancellor Merkel's right-of-centre Christian Democrats, the Socialists and the minority, pro-business Liberals. So, coalitions were straightforward: Depending on how the votes were cast, the Liberals either joined the left or the right of the political spectrum.

But now, two additional parties - the Greens and a far-left movement - have gained a foothold in Parliament. Creating a government has therefore become a much more complicated task. Political enemies have had to work together.

Coalitions have been made out of strange bedfellows. Germany is currently run by a 'grand coalition' of both Socialists and Christian Democrats.

The unintended consequence of the system is that no party is held to account for promises made during the electoral campaign. Pledges are made in the full knowledge that most of them would be discarded when a coalition is formed...."

Click here for the full article on the Malaysian Insider.


Questions:

1. What is a coalition?
2. What is a system of proportional representation?
3. How does/did this system of proportional representation affect Germany (i) during the Weimar years, (ii) now?
4. How far is Germany's political situation similar to the situation during the Weimar years?