Unconscious confirmation.

Sometimes people reveal truths they are unconscious of, by the way they speak. It is not the words they say, that betrays them, but the other information hidden in tone and pitch and facial expression.

Just over a week ago, I was at a conference, in Malaysia. One of the speakers was from Australia. She was a slightly withered looking lady, with prematurely graying hair, who emanated a sense that disapproval came easily to her.

In a way, I thought her rather bizarre. You see, she was on the platform as a speaker on behalf of gifted education. However, her deepest feelings on the matter were not, exactly, consonant with her job description.

She was asked a question, by Zuhairah Ali, President of the NAGCM (NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR GIFTED CHILDREN, MALAYSIA).

“What do you think of child prodigies in the media?”, Zuhairah enquired.

“I don’t think much of parents who move countries for the education of their children.”, she replied, with an expression somewhere betwixt distaste and annoyance.

Oddly, she didn’t answer the question, but seemed to be answering another.

“That,”, she continued, stabbing at the word, “Is going too far.” Disapproval shone from her, like a very black light.

“There was one case,” she began, seeming to get more worked up as she thought about the case, “In Australia, of the parents of a sports prodigy – a 16 year old gymnast – who actually moved to New Zealand, because, they said, the Australian team wasn’t being friendly to her and the Kiwis were much nicer.”

I might have laughed, had this been a personal conversation. Her tone was so unfriendly, as she spoke of the emigrant gymnast, that it was almost beautiful to see how much she was confirming the correctness of their decision. There was such scorn in her face, that I can only say how pleased I was that the family had taken the decision to emigrate.

It was worrying, however, to see someone ostensibly working in gifted education with so little personal insight into the issues the gifted face, or the decisions families are led to take for the sake of their children’s futures. She saw the commitment to the children, that that Australian gymnast’s family showed, to be evidence of some kind of dysfunction: she couldn’t see it for what it is – parental love seeking to remove all obstacles in the way of their child. I have no doubt that if the parents are saying they moved countries because the Australian team was unfriendly to their child, then I am pretty sure that they must have been truly awful in their behaviour towards her. Now, which parent would stand by and do nothing in the face of such ill-treatment? Any good parent would seek to remove their child from the source of distress, either by quenching the torment, or changing the surroundings: they chose the latter, perhaps since it was likely to be their only option.

Any family that changes countries for their children’s future and present education, is showing a commitment to the child that many families do not have. Such commitment is to be admired and understood – not scoffed at, in a rather unfriendly fashion.

I deliberated whether to confront her with our own story – that we, too, had moved countries for our children. However, I decided not to, for I wanted my day to be a relaxed one, unriven by argument. She seemed too shriveled to be fun to talk to anyway – it would probably be a dispiriting experience I would be better off without. On the other hand, I doubt whether my conversation, which would have sought to enlighten her as to why parents do such things, would have any effect. Her very face, seemed stuck in an air of disapproval, so it seemed that she had practiced that emotion a little too often. My words would be unlikely to transform her.

I let her alone. However, she did give me the perfect memory of an Australian scoffing at the idea that Australians could be unfriendly enough to chase someone out of the country – delivered in a most unfriendly fashion, that quite convinced one that they could so be.

I hope the emigrant gymnast is happy with the New Zealand team. I further hope that all families who move countries for the sake of their children, find success.

We hope to, too.

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.htmland here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175

To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

The flight of the Malays.

Malays are leaving Singapore. Now, this is no news, but what may be news, is their relative abundance in those who emigrate.

A few days ago, I posted on the remarkable inflow of Chinese PRCs into Singapore. I wondered, in that post, "The secret Singaporean Teleportation Device", whether this deepening of the Chinese nature of Singapore, was prompting more Malays to leave, as they found themselves further marginalized. I had no figures to back up my intuition - well, now, I have.

Today, on reading the New Paper, I came across a little snippet of information in an article on Malay emigration to Australia. There was a quote from a Singaporean Chinese "immigration consultant"...or should it be "emigration consultant? This Mr. Sim remarked that fully 30 % of his clients were Singaporean Malays. That is a surprisingly high number for two reasons. Firstly, the proportion of Malays in Singapore is only 13.6%, so this abundance in his clientele was 2.2 times greater than expected by chance. Secondly he is a CHINESE consultant, and therefore presumably less well-connected to the Malay community than a Malay agent would be. Thus, his clientele may UNDERESTIMATE the proportion of Malays who are leaving Singapore, for other countries.

Recently the Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, spoke of the "privileged position" of the Malays in Singapore and of the importance of maintaining that privilege. I thought this an eminently funny speech, because anyone who knows anything of the real situation, in Singapore, for Malays, knows that they are not privileged, in any real sense - they are, in fact, disadvantaged and discriminated against. So many jobs, for instance, in Singapore require that the applicant be of Chinese race. They call it "Chinese speaking"...but if a Malay fluent in Mandarin applies for the job (or an Indian for that matter), I have heard that they get turned down. I have even heard of minorities fluent in Chinese being told that they are not being hired because a Chinese person is wanted - despite their Mandarin fluency.

The real test, of course, as to whether a minority feels at home, in their nation, is whether or not they leave and the relative proportion of those who depart, who are from the minority in question. By this measure, and by the evidence of Mr. Sim's clientele (which we have no reason to believe is unusual or atypical of other agents' clientele in any way), the Malays certainly don't feel privileged. They clearly feel that they will have a better life elsewhere - which is why so many of them are leaving.

What do they find overseas? Well, one thing which is refreshing, for many Malays, is that they don't experience the active discrimination in the workplace that is present in Singapore. They don't see job adverts for "Must speak Mandarin"...they are only required to speak English (in the places they tend to go to, like Australia), which, of course, they do. I have heard, on the grapevine, many success stories of Malays who couldn't really "make it" in Singapore, who found it very much easier to do so, in other countries. Tellingly, the person, in question, is no different and no more able - all that has changed is the environment and the set of social forces they are up against.

Of course, Singapore won't be bothered about this loss of Malays. They will just be replaced by PRCs from China. However, we should be concerned, because one day, there may not be any Malays left in Singapore. That will be a loss of diversity and plurality that will change the character of Singapore - and not for the better. In no way, in my view, is uniformity (which shall prevail) superior to diversity. Yet, the future of Singapore shall be rather more uniform than it is today. We can see it with our own eyes, on a daily basis, on the streets of Singapore. The national demographic statistics, too, show a steady reduction in the proportion of Malays, every decade, since the foundation of Singapore. Now, this is strange, since Malays, as it is well known, like to have children rather more than Chinese Singaporeans do. That they have more children and yet there are fewer of them, relatively, owes itself to two forces: higher relative emigration of Malays, and higher relative immigration of Chinese PRCs (plus Chinese from Malaysia, Indonesia and anywhere else they can be found).

What I find curious is that Singaporean politicians mumble about the need to maintain the Chinese population (MM Lee himself, is famous for this view). Yet, one doesn't hear any of them drawing attention to the decline of the Malays. I suppose it is, actually, one and the same thing. The decline of the Malays, implies a relative increase in the Chinese - which is what is quite clearly sought, anyway.

Were a future Singapore to lack Malays entirely, I think the Government, here, might suddenly realize their value. You see, the Singaporean Malays allow better integration of Singapore into the rest of South-East Asia. After all, Singapore's Malays speak the language of Malaysia and Indonesia. They also share cultural, religious and ideological understandings. It is one of Singapore's strengths that some of its people share the language and culture of its nearest neighbours. This helps Singapore with trade and survival, both. Were Singapore to become a solely Chinese state, two things would happen: firstly, its ability to communicate with and integrate, effectively, with its neighbouring states would be impaired. Secondly, there would be much greater likelihood of conflict with those very same neighbouring states. Whilst Singapore remains a partially Malay nation, its Malay neighbours will continue to feel they have something in common with it. Once, however, it becomes entirely Chinese (or almost so), the possibility of conflict and resentment will be much heightened. A Singapore without a Malay minority, is a Singapore that invites its own extinction. There will, of course, be a certain irony in that. A state which makes the Malays feel so unwelcome that they decide to leave, until none remain, thereby extinguishing them, will, actually have extinguished itself.

It is best not to listen to what political figures say of a country, it is preferable to watch what the people do. It is not politicians that tell the truth, by their words, but people who tell the truth, by their actions. Singapore's leaders talk of equality for all races, yet, if Singapore's races felt truly equal in opportunity and life chances, the numbers who emigrated would be in direct proportion to their relative racial abundance in the nation. We can see from the New Paper article and Mr. Sim's experience of his clientele that this is not so. Vastly more Malays than expected, are emigrating. This can only be because Malays feel that their lives would be better elsewhere. If they thought that their lives, in Singapore, would be as equally good, as their fellow non-Malays, they would not emigrate in disproportionate numbers.

Countries which make minorities feel welcome are healthy countries, socially and psychologically. They also tend to be successful ones (just think of the demographics of America). Would not Singapore be better off matching the welcome of an America, than the monoculture of China or Japan?

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to:http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

IMDB is the Internet Movie Database for film and tv professionals. If you would like to look at my IMDb listing for which another fifteen credits are to be uploaded, (which will probably take several months before they are accepted) please go to: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3438598/ As I write, the listing is new and brief - however, by the time you read this it might have a dozen or a score of credits...so please do take a look. My son, Ainan Celeste Cawley, also has an IMDb listing. His is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3305973/ My wife, Syahidah Osman Cawley, has a listing as well. Hers is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)

Is Singapore's population too low?

Singapore's population is a matter often in the news, in Singapore. It is a question that is raised again and again.

Presently, Singapore's population is about 4.5 million. However this includes about 1 million foreigners who are working here. The Singaporean government has long voiced the intention, in many news articles, of raising the population in the coming decades to 6.5 million people. I do not know the exact time scale over which this is to happen, but it always appears that they mean this to happen in the near future. That is in the lifetimes of most people now living in Singapore.

Without knowing what Singapore is now like to live in, it is difficult to judge the wisdom, or otherwise of such a number. Firstly, you should know that Singapore is a small island. It is, perhaps, a forty-five minute drive from its East Coast to its West Coast - and rather less from North to South. It is small. Secondly, you should realize that about 80 % of people live in high-rise government flats called HDB (for Housing Development Board). Most of the rest live in high rise private condominiums. Very, very few live in houses. Thus people are tightly packed together. The newer the apartment block, the taller it is. Old ones tend to be around a dozen stories, but the latest ones can have scores of floors.

Recently, I have been confronted with just how many people there are in Singapore. It is easy enough to do: just go shopping. My wife and I went to Orchard Road last night to see a film. Even though it was the evening, and one would have thought that many people would be at home having dinner with their families, Orchard Road was packed. At some places, it was a standing room only, jostling crowd. There was barely enough space to breathe. Yet, despite this evident inability to cope with its own population numbers, the official intention is to raise the population of Singapore by a further 50 % to 6.5 million. I find that incredible.

If you live in Singapore, you never get the feeling that it lacks people. So, why is the official view that it is 2 million short of its target? Well, one reason I read is that a study, many years ago, showed that the most successful small countries have a mean population of...you guessed it...6.5 million. Singapore has understood this to mean that you must have this magic number of people to be really successful. I think this is pure numerology. (Which, for me, means nonsense.) A country may be successful at almost any size. It is just what that country does that counts. It doesn't take a magic number of people to do this. I very much doubt that there is anything that Singapore could do at 6.5 million people, that it can't do at 4.5 million - apart from raise more taxes (and taxi fares - which here is the same thing), from its people. So, the only actual benefit of a larger population would be a larger tax base: nothing more.

There would, however, be considerable down-sides to a higher population. Already the main shopping centres can get uncomfortably crowded at peak periods (despite the fact that Singapore is just one big shopping centre anyway). The buses and trains (MRT) are often too overcrowded to be pleasant. The taxis are now unaffordable for many. Rental rates have doubled in a year (residentially and commercially). Indeed, my employer has complained of an office rent that has risen three fold, recently. Singapore is becoming a crowded, busy, expensive city. Yet, the official aim is to make it more crowded, more busy and more expensive. (The official policy is, for instance, to keep on raising taxi fares until most people are forced to use buses).

I think Singapore would be just lovely if it had a population of 2 million, not a population of 6.5 million.

People like a little room to live in. No-one likes to be sandwiched against the next person. Yet, if the population really does rise by 2 million, people will be sandwiched together. They will live in even higher rise estates, travel in overcrowded buses and trains and shop in standing room only shopping centres. It won't be pleasant. It won't, actually, be a city that people want to live in.

I think that last observation is what will defeat this population plan. You see, as Singapore becomes more crowded, more unpleasant, and more unlivable, people will just leave. Emigration will soar and, as quickly as new Chinese mainlanders can be persuaded to come here (for they constitute the majority of the immigrants), native Singaporeans and Permanent Residents will be leaving, for less crowded, more hospitable countries.

The effect of this population drive will be to drive away the people who have made Singapore their home these past few decades. For they will have seen Singapore go from poor, to relatively rich and comfortable, to rich but poor in living space and living conditions. These people will leave, finally, for somewhere else - for virtually anywhere else, would be less crowded.

Singapore has a high standard of public infrastructure. It looks clean. Most things work well enough. What it does not have, however, is space. There is very little room, here, per person. I don't think it is wise, therefore, to squeeze a couple of million more people onto this small, but well-formed island. For, as anyone knows, even the best looking small frame, shouldn't really carry too many extra pounds. Singapore needs to slim down a bit, not fatten up, as a nation.

It is possible that many people think Singapore is already too crowded. Why do I say this? Well, because the emigration rate is already rather high. That wouldn't be so, if people felt comfortable here. The matter of crowdedness is, no doubt, only one factor the emigrants would have considered before leaving - but I am sure it is a contributing factor. Let us hope that Singapore does not become more crowded still - for otherwise I can foresee that many more people will seek living space, elsewhere.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and no months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and five months, and Tiarnan, twenty-two months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)