I wouldn’t say losing its mind. Definitely some click bait title there on your end. It just goes into how the Chinese ethnic population in Singapore, which is a city state in Malaysia, are aligning more with the Chinese Communist party. An example is not believing in human rights abuse against the Uyghurs in China. This divergence will lead to unrest ultimately, and will impact the successes of the city state. I debated even posting but most people won’t read the article and just go based on your title, which is inflammatory.
It just goes into how the Chinese ethnic population in Singapore, which is a city state in Malaysia, are aligning more with the Chinese Communist party.
Malaysia has and will continue to be more Pro-China than Singapore ever will be you dumbass.
You don't even know what you are talking about LMAO.
In the arena of SEA politics, the most Western friendly countries are: Phillipines (neocolonial comprador puppet state of the US), Singapore (glorified tax haven for which International Capital uses as a node for value transfer, and to better control the geopolitically important Strait of Malacca) and Papua New Guinea (neocolonized by Australian companies).
Singapore isn't a "city-state" in Malaysia, it was booted out of Malaysia to fulfill the comprador Malay feudal classes interests here in Malaysia, that the British acquiesed because containing Communism was more important.
This division can still be seen as a modern-day example of a colonial scar, remaining unresolved because of past and present Western influence.
But surely and steadily this will be removed and our countries will be reunited. That is the logical conclusion of indigenous economic integration, as history has shown.
I couldn't get through the whole thing, but this part made me lol.
More recently, the paper deferred to Beijing’s narrative on topics including last year’s “blank paper” protests against covid-19 lockdowns and CCP rule, as well as in coverage of the Chinese surveillance balloon shot down by the United States in February, in which stories routinely implied that the American reaction was irrational and a symptom of decline.
The "Chinese surveillance balloon" was nothing more than a hobbyist weather balloon, but let's just skip over that because it doesn't fit the narrative being presented here.
It wasn't a hobbyist balloon to my knowledge. It was an expensive professional one. Unless the hobbyist was a millionaire it was likely launched by a University or their national weather service and they'd likely counted on recovering and re-using it but it was blown off course, this happens to US research balloons too from time to time so they're buying new ones semi-regularly.. They did later shoot down a hobbyist balloon sent up by an American group but that was a later incident.
Perhaps I got the stories mixed up. In any case, we know it wasn't a "spy" balloon so continuing to refer to it as such is disingenuous and reveals that the author's arguments are not being made in good faith.