Comments by "K `" (@user-jt3dw6vv4x) on "Asian Boss" channel.

  1. 6
  2. 6
  3. 6
  4. 5
  5. 5
  6. 5
  7. 5
  8. 5
  9. 5
  10. 5
  11. 5
  12. 5
  13. 5
  14. 5
  15. 5
  16. 4
  17. 4
  18. 4
  19. 4
  20. 4
  21. 4
  22. 4
  23. 4
  24. 4
  25. 4
  26. 4
  27. 4
  28. 4
  29. 4
  30. 3
  31. 3
  32. 3
  33. 3
  34. 3
  35. 3
  36. 3
  37. The fertility rates of Singapore's three main ethnic groups look like this: Chinese - 0.94, Indian - 0.97 and Malay - 1.83. The Chinese and Indians have the lowest in Singapore and the Chinese and Indians have been living in Singapore for many generations before the modern nations of China and India were even formed. Chinese, Indians and Malays they all share Singaporean culture. Thus, they are far removed from the cultural psyche of China and India respectively and cannot be compared to places like Canada. It would be like comparing French-Quebec Canadians with French in France. The report you quoted is from 2010 and there are several factors as to why that is now outdated, one of which is that the fertility rate for South Asian women would've declined for natural reasons, it would've been low to begin with considering the people in question would've been of a higher status and thus having probably 2 kids while Chinese immigrants came from a One-Child Policy era China and were used to being an only sibling and thus would've only had 1 kid. Additionally, when we look at the fertility rates in India which now stands at 2 and everywhere else in South Asia, except for Pakistan, it's below replacement level so the idea that the fertility rate of South Asian women in Canada, even with new immigrants, wouldn't have decreased doesn't make sense. It would've decreased and regardless, the difference would've likely been 1 between the two groups anyway. We're talking about higher quality immigrants and then their first generation offspring, who are adapted to the local culture.
    3
  38. 3
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41. 3
  42. 3
  43. 3
  44. It's so annoying when people say this because it just shows one's ignorance of Asian history and cultures. China and India are the two main cultural powers in Asia and culturally influenced East, South and Southeast Asia. People always make this distinction that "Asia" makes no sense and talk about East Asia and South Asia simply because the majority of people of East Asia and South Asia look different from each other but the reality is that culture is the binding factor here, not facial features. Ancient Asians had their own ideas of Asia such as the Japanese with the concept of "Sangoku" which centred on China, India and Japan and defined due to cultural similarities. When Imperial Japan invaded and colonised large parts of Asia during WW2 they were doing so in order to unite the areas of Asia that were culturally influenced by China and India in order to create the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. Since the Age of Exploration, Europeans have tried to divide Asians up - they did this in Singapore creating ethnic ghettos and separating the Chinese, Malays and Indians from living together, they did the same in Malaysia and sowed division in other colonies of the regions such as Myanmar and Sri Lanka. This ignorance of Asia and this idea that the concept of "Asia" makes no sense is why the Chinese government's pro-Asian rhetoric is at an all time high today, so high that it has gained sympathisers in other parts of Asia believing in ideas that Americans and Westerners in general are a threat to the stability of Asia and being radicalised into believing in Asiacentrism - in order words the CCP is echoing the same views that the Japanese did during WW2 and people in the West continue to think the concept of "Asia" makes no sense.
    3
  45. 3
  46. 3
  47. 3
  48. 3
  49. 3
  50. 3