This is a sore spot for africacels. Whenever people discuss the stunning success of Singapore which developed into an economic power which punches far above its weight, even though it is a relatively tiny nation by population and size.
Like much of africa, it was a colony post, used for trading. Yet it's early leadership was extremely well managed.
"I've seen Singapore come up a lot on discusslions of paths for African development and I am am the only one who thinks it's nonsensical? Singapore was a colonial trading post perfectly situated, comparing Singapore to let's say niger seems so incredibly stupid, Malaysia and other south and southeast Asian countries are better comparisons"
Basically they immediately lass out as always, and deny everything.
Africacels are not fans of Singapore's version of Attaturk - SingaDaddy (aka Lee Kuan Yew). That his authoritarian leadership turned a 3rd world backwater, into an emerging educated market state within his leadership lifespan, makes the Africacels green with envy
Africacels are illiterate morons
@X please correct their bullshit for us
"a well managed already good situation." lol lmoa. Ah yes this phrase
And this is the crux of the seeth for africans. They feel that post colonialism powers like Bongland and Frogland getting out of africa, had left few resources infrastructure and expertise for the new fledgling nations to govern themselves. And much of this is true. The colonization of Africa and Asia was different
However much of african nations did in fact inherit sufficient infrastructure, if not even more so than the fledgeling Singapore post colonialism, and the success of the tiny country is a painful reminder that failure was not a garrantee post colonialism, and that at least some; a non-zero percent of the fault of the failed state and anarchy and dictatorships in much of the 50 african states today is thus in the very least partly of their own doing - and this is a painful pill to swallow for /r/africacels whose entire libshit identity is build on their repression being the fault of white colonizers exclusively
Never once did african warlords seize power at the expense of their fellow inhabitants, or commit nation destroying corruption, no no, only colonization.
Thus the mere mention of Singapore triggers these fools like that rightoid who spazzed out this week from the non-binary option in starfield .
A few more levelheaded africacels try to go against the circlejerk
"Every successful country has lessons you can draw from and Singapore is one of them. You can't dismiss it outright. Singapore might have had an advantage in terms of its location but it also had several disadvantages; it had a small market, it had reached the limits of its entrepot trade economy, communist problem and surrounded by countries that either didn't like it or was at least suspicious of it, this meant limited trade.
The lessons African countries can draw from Singapore is that for a country to develop you don't need to be terribly reliant on having natural resources, you need a strong and pragmatic leadership that prizes economic growth and development via industrialization, carefully coordinating human resource development with infrastructure and industrial strategy, etc."
This of course deeply upsets the locals
And then what follows is a cope argument thread about nonsense and economics which basically boils down to the belief that africa never stood a chance bla bla
More example arguments about example this, example that 
Chud Nigerian say:
"You are missing the point. Nobody realised the potential of Singapore when independence was forced on them or when they had to stand on their own. It took vision, discipline, and a bit of good fortune for Singapore to be what it is today. Any country can copy that and be equally successful. Singapore strategic location might not be as big a factor as most people assume. There are a lot of small African countries with massive natural resources earning millions of dollars, yet they are poor. Natural advantages don't determine wealth in the modern world, you need good economic models, vision, and discipline."
This ticks off the examplecels 
Finland is great/poor example of prosperity
NO IT IS YOU WHO IS MISSING THE POINT!! 
"You mean if the Malaysians knew how strategic and economically important Singapore would become, they would have still expelled them? They were expelled for tribal reasons. If Malaysia realised their economic importance, then they wouldn't expel them." 
LOL
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
PalestinePingsalot 1yr ago #4945569Malaysia never could've had something successful like Singapore
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context