Writing this while listening to a beautiful performance of Majula Singapura by the Singapore Symphony Orchestra.

It might be slightly controversial to say this, and I am still unprepared for a titan such as Lee Kuan Yew to go, Singapore's 50th birthday seems to be an apt time for him to.

He is the politician I respect the most. Not because of his tenacity or grit even when all seemed to go wrong, or even his charismatic speeches, but his willingness to change policy direction to suit the changing political and economic climate of the time.

It may seem oxymoronic to respect a politician for his changing views over the years, when most win votes by strongly campaigning for the relatively unchanging views of their supporters. But that is precisely why I think he is different from most. He knew that his own view, or even that of his core supporters sometimes didn't matter. What did was what was best for the country, to which he devoted his life too.

As we commemorate his life though, we cannot forget the team that has backed him all this while. Most of our founding fathers have passed away too, and LKY's death can almost be seen as the passing away of a generation that guided Singapore through its toughest times.

Being born in the mid 90s, into relative wealth, I cannot profess to understand all the past struggles that have in some ways defined our national psyche and mentality. That being said, I think we are in a much better position today to think about who we are and where we want to go.

When independence was thrust upon us, the main narrative was one of survival. While we are still extremely vulnerable in certain ways, it is a fact that we now have the opportunity to focus on the deeper questions.

I would hate for Singapore to decline in my generation. Something that my forefathers built will not be squandered away.

Is it too grand a dream for me to want to make Singapore the best place one can live in? Not just in terms of opulence, but vibrancy, comfort and safety. Maybe, but I think we have proven to the world we can achieve what everyone says we can't. We just have to prove them wrong once again. Just like he did.

I think that would be the ultimate tribute to him. RIP Mr Lee, and thank you for everything.

I'm learning so much here, but it's just so emotionally and mentally draining. It's as if they are trying to tell me to run a full marathon when all I've ever run are sprints.

Why is travelling so expensive?! I'm going to Prague, Budapest, Vienna, Lisbon and Rome though... guess you get what you pay.

And can't wait for my shiny 3ds xl to arrive! Come quickly thanks.

Joseph de Maistre - Every nation gets the government it deserves.

Are love songs popular because they evoke emotions and thoughts you already have, or because they delude you into thinking that what they are saying is true?

you left me paralyzed, no cure, no rehab for me

funny that you got the nerve to keep asking me

how I’ve been

you’re the victor in this pageantry

but the only trophy you deserve, catastrophe

I’d rather we be dead to each other

no eulogies said for each other

no “rest in peace”s

the memories got my chest in pieces

I’m praying that your eyes are the first to go

the way they looked when you smiled

the way they opened and closed

and your nose, every single breath against my neck

and then your lips, every empty promise made and said

please fade, fade to black

please fade, fade to black

The euphoric moment when you borrow a book from the library which was only published a month ago and arrived at the library just yesterday.

I've been thinking quite a bit these days. Sitting alone in a room with books by your side and a quiet environment seems to encourage cognition. 

I've been thinking about the ephemerality of human relationships, and by extension, of life itself. The people I interact with now, should I endeavour to make them be comfortable with me, even when I know that I probably will not meet or talk to them again after a few years? Or is this mindset a crippling one, one that is affecting my daily interactions with others? 

Life is a curious thing. One way or another, whether by a higher being's providence or a random accumulation of events, we have been given the gift or indeed burden of the ability to think, and attach meaning to objects, whether material or not. And we have been particularly good at that, except for life itself.

After all, isn't life fleeting? It has been 4.6 billion years since Earth came to be, yet it has only been 19 since I have first breathed. And in the next 70-80 odd years that I have left, I have to learn to be content with what I have or have accomplished (or will), and risk leaving the world without the satisfaction that I have in my mind achieved at least part of my goals.

I have been watching the Game of Thrones recently, and what struck me the most out of all the houses was the Lannisters. The head of the house is so obsessed with legacy and family because 'that's all that's left once you're dead'. So is that what we should aim towards? Or is it to serve a higher purpose, to defend the weak, help the needy, solve world hunger, manipulate and manoeuvre towards world peace? 

Why should it matter what others think of you or your family once you are dead anyway? You will not be able to tell who is singing praises and who isn't. 

Hence, if life is temporary, and probably devoid of a 'true' meaning, does that mean it is meaningless, useless, and instead, we might as well delve into our hedonistic tendencies and forget anything else? Why should I help my country become more prosperous? So that I and my loved ones can enjoy the fruits of my labour in our short and temporary lives? Or for the sake of my children (if I do have any)? In fact, why should anyone help anyone else? Why would anyone?

Is it because we are 'programmed' by our genes to be predisposed to do so? For it increases the chances of our own survival, and our self-defined group as well? Or is it due to societal pressure, or as Foucault put it, the micro-physics of power?

I was reading this speech that has been shared countless of times in social media and mainstream media by Bilahari Kausikan, on how it is imperative to Singapore's survival that we remain extraordinarily successful. One of my friend commented that he is one of the more honest people in Singapore, and that his speech was clear and insightful. 

I think it was beautifully written. But is it really the honest truth? Singapore is a small country with little resources, but has more options that other because of its current world standing and relative economic weight, as the narrative goes. 

It is always easy to find oneself agreeing to such simple, hard-to-refute deductions. I find myself guilty most of the times as well. But did my friend praise him as honest because he gave us the reality of our situation, or that he was merely honest with his own view of the world? Ultimately, objects, terms and phrases only mean what people make of it. 

As in Derridan Deconstructionism, meaning can only come from a context, and this context is itself 'an open structure'. It is defined by social relations, perhaps long-standing naturalised understandings of that particular context, or perhaps even the imagination (does imagination and originality exist?) of people. 

Coming full circle, if tomorrow the whole world agrees that life's meaning is to be free from the addiction of  oxygen, carbon dioxide and water, does that mean that only death can give life meaning? Does that follow too, that meaning and context are what we ourselves define it?

I think I've asked too many poorly thought-out and worded questions tonight. I shall get back to my books and to a more manageable set of questions.