This is what LKY wrote a lot about. People are ultimately loyal to their tribe over policies. Singapore survives coz it's 70% Chinese. If it was less than that, things would start falling apart real fast. He said it would be better if SG had more Chinese but that's reality so he dealt the best way he could. Maybe it's different now but I believe that in the Singapore army, they did not let Malays handle stuff like artillery or other advance weaponry since they could not be trusted with such important stuff.There is indeed a global trend toward resurgent nationalism, or rather, major powers have always been this way—it was merely masked by decades of economic prosperity and international peace, while propaganda avoided nationalist narratives. Some of the previous user's language was indeed rather extreme. I don't believe contemporary nationalism aims to expel foreigners or portray other ethnic groups as inferior. Rather, it represents a national security measure—for instance, core positions in major corporations should ideally be filled by nationals, and core government officials should ideally be nationals as well. This significantly reduces the risk of corporate or governmental defection while also reassuring citizens fearful of outsiders. A nation where the largest ethnic group constitutes 90% of the population is far more likely to remain stable and avoid fragmentation than one where that group makes up only 50%. We can observe this dynamic in Japan's concerns regarding foreign residents.
Honestly I'm surprised even the west still praises him. By modern western standards he should have been cancelled for racism, Chinese chuvanism and other right wing stuff.