Legacies of the Labour Front Singapore 1955-1959

Labour Front Singapore 1955-1959

1. T3W1 Welcome Back to School! Revision on Unit 2 – Legacies of Labour Front Government (1955-1959)

2. Essay Skills What’s the success criteria? (Chapter 6 - We need to examine criteria in order to assess if an outcome had been successful/effective/justified ..etc Therefore we need to understand that our content is tied to a set of learning outcomes/objectives. Chapter Inquiry question:

3. Inquiry Question: "Why did the Labour Front lose the election in 1959?" What do you are possible factors that could have influenced the Labour Front's defeat in the 1959 elections , despite the charisma of David Marshall – SLS Inquiry Activity

4. SLS Lesson Activity: 3 phenomena related to the loss of the Labour Front in the 1959 election: Actions of David Marshall Actions of Lim Yew Hock 1959 Electoral Process Each phenomenon has its own set of sources, and guiding questions that will help you to understand the myriad reasons as to why the Labour Front government had lost the 1959 election.

5. I nference ! This indicates a perception of Marshall as ineffective and lacking assertiveness in dealing with the rioters.

6. I nference ! Similar to Source A, Source B suggests a perception of Marshall as ineffective in calming the situation and providing reassurance to the public

7. Checkpoint 1 : Sources A and B From both sources, it can be inferred that David Marshall struggled to handle the rioters of the Hock Lee Bus Riot effectively. Both accounts point to his speeches being perceived as inadequate, failing to deter further violence or reassure the public. (evidence to substantiate inference) Further Inferences: The criticisms highlight Marshall's perceived inability to assert leadership and take decisive action in a crisis situation, which may have contributed to the escalation of tensions during the riot. Therefore, based on these sources, Marshall's ability to handle the rioters appears to have been questioned and found lacking by observers.

8. Checkpoint 2: Source C From earlier sources (Sources A and B), we understand that David Marshall was perceived as sometimes indecisive and ineffective in handling crises, such as during the Hock Lee Bus Riot. He was criticized for delivering unconvincing speeches and not effectively managing the situation. Combining these insights provides context for understanding why David Marshall's request for self-government was rebuffed by the British: 1. Perceived Ineffectiveness: Marshall's leadership during crises like the Hock Lee Bus Riot may have created doubts among British officials about his ability to maintain stability and govern effectively without British oversight. They might have viewed him as lacking the firmness and control needed to lead a self-governing Singapore. 2. Political Turbulence: Source C underscores the political turbulence in Singapore during Merdeka Week, where even Marshall's attempt to reassure British officials of safety backfired with violence erupting. This could have reinforced British concerns about the stability and security of Singapore under local leadership. 3. British Interests and Colonial Mindset: The British officials likely had strategic and economic interests in maintaining control over Singapore. They might have been hesitant to grant self-government due to fears of instability, economic disruption, or loss of influence in the region. Marshall's perceived weaknesses in handling internal unrest may have validated their concerns.

9. Checkpoint 2: Source C Combining these insights provides context for understanding why David Marshall's request for self-government was rebuffed by the British: 1. Perceived Ineffectiveness: Marshall's leadership during crises like the Hock Lee Bus Riot may have created doubts among British officials about his ability to maintain stability and govern effectively without British oversight. They might have viewed him as lacking the firmness and control needed to lead a self-governing Singapore. 2. Political Turbulence: Source C underscores the political turbulence in Singapore during Merdeka Week, where even Marshall's attempt to reassure British officials of safety backfired with violence erupting. This could have reinforced British concerns about the stability and security of Singapore under local leadership. 3. British Interests and Colonial Mindset: The British officials likely had strategic and economic interests in maintaining control over Singapore. They might have been hesitant to grant self-government due to fears of instability, economic disruption, or loss of influence in the region. Marshall's perceived weaknesses in handling internal unrest may have validated their concerns.

10. Checkpoint 3: “Let’s Discuss” What is the relationship between the Chinese schools' unions and communism?  Is communism considered to be a communal ideology in Singapore? Explain (make references to both internal and external developments in newly independent SG)

11. Checkpoint 4: Conclude