CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Proof is that Farquhar's administration was fairly funded and was prohibited from collecting port duties to raise revenue as Raffles had decided that Singapore would be a free port. He also armed Singapore with some artillery and a small regiment of Indian soldiers.How much does this cost?Therefore,Raffles provided Singapore with not just money but the army and much more.
Even though farquhar stayed in Singapore, he only carried out the plans that were given to him by Raffles so this proves that Modern Singapore was made out of Raffles plans.
Yes you might say that way as if Farquhar was only a worker for Raffles and not a founder. But,on 9 May 1821, William Farquhar was sacked. Despite his many positive achievements in the formative period of Singapore's development, he adopted measures in his administration which conflicted with Raffles, notably in allowing the erection of houses and go downs on the Padang and on the nearby banks of the Singapore River. His justification was that in the fast-rapidly expanding settlement 'nothing is heard in the shape of complaint but the want of more ground to build on'.
And how did the message get across? They don't have telephones then. Raffles also wasn't there to observer Singapore, it was all Farquhar reports to keep him updated.
Raffles was the one who set up a trading port in Singapore.
But Raffles had plans for Singapore.And William Farquhar did the groundwork doesn’t necessarily mean he cares for Singapore. He had to help Singapore in its growth as it was in his Job.
Raffles was the one who suggested to make a base in Singapore and a trait of a leader is to take intiative to make the country a better place , and this is what Raffles did so this is what makes him the leader of that country and the founder
There were also policies introduced by F,such as policy implemented by Farquhar to cope with a rats problem that Singapore faced by paying people for every rat they caught.
1.Raffles was the first one to find the land and take the initiative to make it his,thus i think that Raffles is the founder as he was the first one to made the land be known.
By making Singapore a British settlement, he attracted many foreigners to settle in Singapore. With his far-sightedness, he also declared Singapore a free port, encouraging and increasing trade.
F tried to increase the revenue for the government but R sacked him because of that and another reason which is that he thought F was getting to close with the Locals.
That was because he wanted the best for the people and during that time there were numerous infestations in Singapore which started the project of the removal of centipedes and rats. If not for that, Singapore might still be infected with all these pests.
I agree that F played a important part in the ground work but without R would they be modernized and known throughout the world like what Singapore is today.
He took credit for all the work that Farquhar did, Farquhar tried many different ways to improve the living conditions of the people but Raffles only dreamt big but did not do anything.
Wrong.Farquhar might be forced to help Singapore flourish by Raffles because Raffles was his boss.Raffles longed and thirsted to stay in Singapore but he didn 't as He was forced to go to Bencoolen to work there by the british company.
But that does not mean he did more work right? He only became more popular due to the fact his supporters won an argument between them and Farquhar's supporters.
Raffles wanted Singapore to be a British colonised group with law and order.Even though he sent William to SIngapore and did not stayed in Singapore as much as William Farquhar did, but he attracted British people to contribute to singapore.
He also made Singapore look better in the eyes of the superiors as he had lots of knowledge in that place and thus when the superiors came to places in southeast Asia. Raffles would be the one to tell them about it, and as he was the founder of modern Singapore, it would make Singapore look better.
Raffles was controlling opium and gambling in another country and he also did not want to make gambling a part of Singapore and did not put that in his plans for Singapore, thus when Raffles came back he immediately fired Farquhar as it was not the ideal state that he wanted Singapore too be in
Raffles paid Farquhar and put Farquhar in charge to manage singapore while he is busy with his work.This shows that Raffles Cared for the welfare of SIngapore and wanted Singapore to expand.
Even when Raffles was in charge of Java that was a bigger place, he was still concern about Singapore and thought that he should establish a base there to protect the country as he saw a good opportunity for Singapore to fly.
Raffles only fired Faquhar as what Faquhar did was not in his plans for Singapore and if this news would leak out it would be harmful to the reputation of Singapore even though it had a wonderful port, if the hygiene there was terrible nobody would come and the chances for Singapore to fly would be bad
The sultan Hussein was consulted by Raffles and a treaty was agreed upon.Thereafter, the British Flag was raised.
Raffles was the one who had drawn the plan.William just followed it.Raffles made everything easier for William to work on. William Farquhar only did the groundwork.Raffles did the talking, which was helpful in making relations with the Sultan.Without him , Singapore will not be what it is now.
Raffles should be the founder as he was the one that signed the official document with the sultan of singapore. so i believe that he is the rightful founder of singapore
If Raffles was there without Faquhar i would think he would solve these problems as he already took the initiative to make Singapore famous, and he had the overall view for Singapore and what it was going to become in the future.
But R only dreamt about the big things for Singapore, he did not help with the little things like the living condition for the people which Farquhar took care of.
But he wanted to see the overall picture and took care of the more important events, it is not possible for a person to do the huge thing are the tiny ones at the same time.
He was the first one to set foot on Singapore, so therefore he should be the rightful founder on Singapore while Faquhar only helped him in building Singapore.
So if you step foot on something first, you are the founder? No it does not. Raffles did step foot first but he only did that while Farquhar made improvements to the coutry.
Raffles sailed to Malacca in late 1818 to personally secure a British presence in the Riau area, especially Singapura, which was favoured by him both through the readings of Malayan histories and by Farquhar's explorations.
From a mere fishing village not known to the other far developed countries, Sir Stamford Bingley Raffles saw potential in this fishing village and sought to develop it into a thriving port and settlement. Without him, who knows, Singapore might still be a poorly-developed island. I feel that we ought to honour and remember him in years to come. Not only has he made our island prosper, he also established an institution for higher education and abolished illegal public gambling, slavery and cock-fighting. I highly admire Raffles' foresightedness in all things that he do, taking into consideration the development and views of our people.
Farquhar is the founder of Singapore. Without Farquhar, who would fill in the large broad lines Raffles drew? Who would have put Raffles' plans into reality? Not me. He spent 58 months, but Raffles, the "ever present" father spends a great 200 odd days in Singapore. Also, many of the letters sent to Raffles from Farquhar went unanswered for months! Thus, Farquhar was not to blame for the allowance of social vices as Raffles, if a true founder, did not even instruct Farquhar on what to do abput the falling amount of funds.
The next day on 7 Febuary 1819, which Raffles appointed Farquhar as Singapore’s first Resident to develop the country according to a specific plan Raffles drawn up, Farquhar was left to do the job when Raffles left Singapore. Farquhar was left to manage the colony without Raffles, an absence lasting for 4 years
He only Maintained the land but did not take the initiative to implement new rules put in new attractions or publicize the land while Raffles had already thought of all this.
William Farquhar was the first resident and commandent from 1819 to 1823.Thus,he is more loyal to Singapore since he also helped drastically in the improvement of Singapore and put it to work.
But if Raffles did not sign the formal treaty on 6 February 1819.Singapore would not be able to expand into the future Singapore and it would be under the sultan.Today,Would Singapore still be one of the busiest ports in the World or will it be a third World country?
Raffles left Singapore for Bencoolen, where he was to be appointed the Lieutanent-Governer. It was an order from the headquarters, and although he tried to decline, it was rejected. He spent about a few years there before he had to go back to England because of a severe disease.
Advantage???Giving him priority is more like it.Raffles felt that Farquar has the potential,therefore,Raffles put Farquar in charge of Singapore to give him the power and unleash his potential to be a LEADER!
To make a company strong, you need a good leader, but why not have two good leaders instead of one? One to plan, one to understand want people wants. WHy couldn't Raffles work with him instead of wasting his potential? To me, that is a real waste of human resources.
Raffles did not really help him in helping Singapore. he might be the master mind in creating all the plans on how Singapore should be. But farquhar was the hard-working one and did all the work. Even so, although Raffles might be the one who thought of the planning, the one with the strategies that without him, Singapore might not be where she is today, if you have the planning, but not do any of the hardwork, we would not be where we are today also.
Without entering into an argument of who did more, it is clear that while the objectives and initiatives were from raffles himself, but the actual operations and implementation were left to Farquhar, in his capacity as a British Resident and Commandant of Singapore. He created things, therefore Singapore is where she is today.
Argument 1 Raffles was the one who set up a trading port in Singapore.
But raffles had plans for Singapore.And William Farquhar doing the groundwork doesn’t necessarily mean he cares for Singapore. He had to help Singapore in its growth as it was in his Job. William Farquhar was the one who was largely for turning Raffles’s dreams into reality. He was the one who cared and help Singapore the most.
This shows that he really cares about Singapore as if he didnt care about Singapore, he would not even take the initiative to help Singapore establish to become a better society.
Imagine Singapore without Faquhar, with Raffles in charge then. There would still be an ongoing rat and centipede problem, money shortage, lack of education, lack of work and Singapore would be a really poor country. Would you want that?
No i do not. Actually, without Farquhar himself to rule today, the whole world would change. Farquhar actually played an important part in the timeline.
I think Farquhar should be the rightful founder of Singapore as he did most of the plannings for Singapore
Raffles was not present for a period of time in Singapore and Farquhar took over the entire ‘project’ and Singapore could have perished entirely without Farquhar’s guidance.
But raffles had plans for Singapore.And William Farquhar doing the groundwork doesn’t necessarily mean he cares for Singapore. He had to help Singapore in its growth as it was in his Job.
Raffles was the one had planned how Singapore should be.William Farquhar just obeyed his orders.
Farquhar’s approach suited the locals who followed him and he managed to clear space at the north-east bank of Singapore to make land for the settlers which turned Singapore into a cosmopolitian town.
William Farquhar Helped negotiate the provisional agreement of 30 jan 1819 with the local Temenggong.and the more formal treaty of Singapore on 6 feb 1819.
It is due to the fact that Raffles’ supporters wanted Raffles to be the main founder of Singapore. They started an argument with Farquhar’s supporters but they won in the end.
The people of singapore did not know that Raffles was the one who had planned everything for them as F worked out everything they thought he is the Founder
Farquar was Raffles’s Assistant.If Raffles founded Singapore,and Farquar was a wittness,then it s also valid that William Farquar was a founder of Singapore.
Yes affirmative.The search was by Raffles and Farquhar was only his assistant.Raffles set about drafting a set of new policies for the settlement. He also organized Singapore into functional and ethnic subdivisions under the Raffles Plan of Singapore. Today, remnants of this organization can still be found in the ethnic neighborhoods.
Even though u say that Farquhar was his assistant but Raffles together with Farquah was the one that found singapore so you are saying that Farquahar was the founder of singapore because he was there. then the whole crew there can be considered as the founder but why only these two peoples names are remembered
Why do you say that? Being a founder doesn't only mean finding a land, he must also be able to start up one, plan things and get activities going on in the area.
Raffles betrayed Singapore, by firing Faquhar after all the work he had done. What did Raffles even do? Well, he founded Singapore then nothing, only for the glory. Whereas Faquhar had solved all Singapore’s problems and development.
Provide some examples as to how? He did not betray Singapore. He had a valid reason to left. If not he wouldn't have come to Singapore in the first place.
Farquhar is the rightful owner as he was the one who had done the groundwork in Singapore and had bothered to help Singapore such as pulling money out of his own pocket to help Singapore in tough times while Raffles just treated Singapore as a island which would give him revenue.
Raffles betrayed Singapore, by firing Faquhar after all the work he had done. What did Raffles even do? Well, he founded Singapore then nothing, only for the glory. Whereas Faquhar had solved all Singapore’s problems and development.
Even so Raffles had to go to Bencoolen, after all the hard work that Farquhar put into Singapore, Raffles was not appreciative and dismissed him eventually.
Once when Singapore had an centpede and rats problem, Faquhar helped greatly by awarding people who killed centipedes or rats, whereas Raffles did not care at all, did nothing.
He told his boss that Singapore was right for a trading port, thus the British was interested in Singapore. If he didn't do that, Singapore will never be colonized
Once when Singapore had an centpede and rats problem, Faquhar helped greatly by awarding people who killed centipedes or rats, whereas Raffles did not care at all, did nothing.
In one instance, Farquhar used a portion set aside by Raffles as government land around the Singapore River for merchants to use under pressure from influential traders who would have withdrawn their businesses from Singapore. On another instance, Farquhar allowed taxes from gambling and opium as a source of revenue even though Raffles was against such vices. Both instances of disagreement were out of the tight budget which seems to be due to Raffles’ refusal to increase funding.
After F got fired, he went home to England and consulted with the court.In the end after the court reviewed every thing F and R said, they found that F was correct and so R had to pay back the money he used.
When Raffles fired Farquhar, the people in Singapore bid Farquhar farewell in a very respectful and grand way. The people back then did not give Raffles the same respect
Raffles accused him of being too close to the local population, which should be how a good leader be, close to his subjects thus he can know what his people need.
William Farquhar as while Sir Stamford Raffles was away at Bencoolen, William Faquhar was left in charge. If the people actually encountered a problem, Farquhar would use his own money to fix the problem
Both Raffles and Farquhar should not be known as the "founder" of Singapore. Raffles can be considered as the brain-child of Singapore, while Farquhar as the person who set up Raffles plans accordingly.
However, Raffles was only historically present in Singapore only 3 times, Jan-Feb 1819, May-June 1819, and October 1822-June1823, altogether for a total of 10 months
Farquhar however, enabled gambling dens and opium smoking among Chinese, in which Raffles shut down
Raffles was the one who made Singapore a free port thus if even Farquhar was there, Singapore would not be the same as the trading port was Singapore's main income.
Evidence? How did he publicize, Faquhar solved the centipedes and rats problem and many others, but what did Raffles do? Publicize? Wow, how does that help Singapore? Singapore main problems then was not not widely known, but financial and housing problems.
When he went to java, many of the superiors in Britain would come to Asia and R would be the main source of information for them, thus as the founder of Singapore, he would put Singapore in the light as a good country as he was the founder and with his values it would show how he would bring up singapore and made it a successful country
Raffles publicize Singapore for British and even people from Java and Bencoolen to Invest in Singapore.The money will be then used for expanding purposes.
Raffles 'Publicized' Singapore by informing Britain about and because it was in the middle of the trade route to India and China. Because of this fact, Singapore was a well know among traders as a stop over.
Farquhar worked for many years there and contributed a lot to Singapore, like gaining money for Singapore’s government (by introducing gambling) although that didnt worked, he still tried.
It was clearly meant for the local's entertainment and this benefits both parties, the government by gaining money for problems and citizens for entertainment.
But at that time many of the locals were poor and Singapore was not so well known, would it be wise for farquhar to put a casino then and make the locals bankrupt?
But he had no intention to make locals bankrupt futhermore making a casino would help get jobs for people and there was no way to stop the youth at that time from gambling so he might as well make jobs and earn revenue from gambling rather then let the youth gamble illegally and create havoc.
He introduced gambling to the people of SINGAPORE.It is basically trying to impulse the addiction in them and take the money for gambling to do some other private actions.
If Raffles hada actually funded F in the first place he would not have to resort to such desperate measures.Furthermore how the money taken was used for Singapore the advance and not of his private actions.
There is. Check Rediscovering William Farquhar.pdf the last 2 columns of the bottem page. The article pointed out that Farquhar used his own pocket money.
