2025 KS BULL - Issue 1

The views expressed in each essay are purely for the academic purposes of crafting a viable argumentative response. They do not necessarily reflect the personal opinions of any student or staff member, nor do they necessarily represent the perspective(s) of Raffles Institution. No portion of this collection may be reproduced or shared for any reason and by any means whatsoever. Note: The comments that follow each student response include both markers’ and editors’ comments.

KS Bull 2025 Issue 1 © Raffles Institution 2 CONTENTS 2024 Year 6 GP Prelim | Paper 1 ‘Only powerful nations have a significant voice in global affairs.’ Discuss. 1 Pan Haotian | 24A01B 5 2 Chua Yu Jie | 24A01B 8 To what extent should the state interfere in the private life of its citizens? 3 Ernest Tan En-rae | 24S03M 12 ‘Technology has given us a false sense of hope in solving problems.’ To what extent is this true? 4 Dhruv Manoj | 24S06G 16 2024 Year 6 GP Prelim | Paper 2 5 Passages: “Climate change” 19 6 Jennifer Jing Jia Yi | 24A01A 22 7 Phua Yong Xuan Addison | 24S03F 24 2024 Year 6 GP Promo | Paper 2 8 Passages: “Pet ownership” 26 9 Chan Shun Hang Isaac | 25A01B 29 10 Lin Jiarui | 25S06D 31

KS Bull 2025 Issue 1 © Raffles Institution 3 2024 Year 6 KI Prelim | Paper 1 | Question 1 Critically assess the view that we cannot know anything about the external world. 11 Michelle Lee Rui Ling | 24A01A 33 2024 Year 6 KI Prelim | Paper 2 | Question 1 12 Passage: “Contemporary art” 36 13 Emma-Ruth Oh | 24S07A 38 2024 Year 6 KI Prelim | Paper 2 | Question 2 14 Passage: “Government-funded environmental initiatives” 41 15 Lee Yu Zhe | 24A01A 42 16 Soh Jun Hee | 24A01A 44 2024 Year 6 KI Prelim | Paper 2 | Question 3 17 Passage: “Lack of equality and inclusivity” 46 18 Arunmozhi Vikneswari | 24S06F 47 2024 Year 6 KI Prelim | Paper 2 | Question 4 19 Passage: “Being a winning corporation” 49 20 Michelle Lee Rui Ling | 24A01A 50 21 Soh Jun Hee | 24A01A 52

KS Bull 2025 Issue 1 © Raffles Institution 4 2024 Year 5 KI Promo | Question 2 ‘Science is simply consensus.’ Discuss the implications of this view on the nature and construction of scientific knowledge. 22 Pan Wan Ting Christina | 25S06C 54 2024 Year 5 KI Promo | Question 4 ‘The validity of knowledge depends on the methods used.’ Discuss with reference to the nature and construction of knowledge in two fields. 23 Wong E Jeh | 25S06N 56 2024 Year 5 KI Promo | Question 5 24 Passage: “How a society is constructed” 60 25 Wong E Jeh | 25S06N 62 Editorial Team 66

KS Bull 2025 Issue 1 © Raffles Institution 5 1 2024 | Y6 | GP Prelim | Paper 1 | Question 4 Pan Haotian | 24A01B ‘Only powerful nations have a significant voice in global affairs.’ Discuss. The statement that only powerful nations have a significant voice in global affairs is an aphorism that many regard as fact, not opinion. From a cursory glance, international politics resembles not an even playing field but an unequal arena in which only superpowers – like the US, or China, with their economic preponderance, or Russia and France, with their military prowess – may ascend to the podium. Smaller nations, like those in Southeast Asia, Africa, and South America, often lack a significant value: the right to not just speak, but to be heard, and have your interests taken into account. Regardless, I contend that it is far too absolutist and defeatist to claim that only powerful nations have a significant value in the ever -evolving global affairs of our time, where smaller nations may still have the limelight. Those who term themselves the “realists” of global affairs often resign themselves to the cynical stance that only powerful nations have a significant voice in global affairs. Since these major powers were often the pioneers of international organisations, they monopolise attention and discourse through the hierarchical structures of international organisations. The United Nations Security Council is famously dominated by the Permanent 5: the only 5 nations who hold veto power, and can single-handedly shut down any discussions. This power has been wielded as a weapon for powerful nations to ensure that their voice rises above the din, and their interests are considered above all else. During the Rwandan genocide in the 1990s, African nations begged for the world to take action against génocidaires who had unleashed bloodshed and chaos upon Rwanda. Their calls rang hollow in the Security Council – the word “genocide” was never even mentioned in council caucuses as the United States euphemistically termed it “civil strife”. The reason their voices could not be heard is because France exerted its veto power to shut down any talk of intervention in Rwanda, for fear of having to extend additional resources on military aid. This example evinces how the ossified, hierarchical structures of international organisations magnify solely the voices of the powerful, while silencing the weak, who hold no international authority. The harsh truth is that this is not an isolated example contained within the United Nations, because powerful nations have the greatest leverage in almost every international organisation. They have the unique ability to silence others because their institutionalised power gives them leverage over weaker nations who have no resources to force others to listen. Within the World Bank, the United States directs most developmental projects because they are the largest donor, and hence insist on having the final say over where their money goes, despite recipient nations’ milquetoast protests. Halfway across the globe, China’s voice is amplified in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation as it is the founder, and thus centres most discourse around its domestic interests. Both examples elucidate that powerful nations have the only significant voices,

KS Bull 2025 Issue 1 © Raffles Institution 6 because only power can grant leverage – in the form of threatening to withdraw funding to weaker nations if they object or asserting their interests in discussions they direct. Hence, weaker nations who face the double jeopardy of being excluded from discourse in both international organisations like the United Nations, and regional organisations like the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, may never speak, or if they do, are never heard. However, to say that only powerful nations have a significant voice in global affairs is a blanket statement that fails to capture nuances of reality. Certainly, it may be said that less powerful nations individually lack a significant voice; but no man is an island, and no nation is all alone. Through banding together over common interests, less powerful nations may combine their influence to exert leverage over more powerful nations and force them to listen. Southeast Asia mostly consists of developing countries like Myanmar or Cambodia, with neither economic nor military might. Taken together, though, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is the fastest- growing regional economy in the world. This alone has invited the world to cater to ASEAN’ s interests: when Vietnam called for help against China’s incursions in the South China Sea, the US spoke out against China’s transgressions, and dozens of other countries staunchly supported the International Court of Justice’s ruling against China’s territorial claims. Small and weak nations may also band together to push urgent needs to the forefront of global affairs. Island nations, like Vanuatu and Tuvalu, are so small that they are often forgotten by the layman – but at each and every single United N ations General Assembly meeting, or the Conference of Parties climate conference, they directed their speaking time towards clamouring