Do you have a boss who takes credit for everything? You know, the kind who’s never around to help but always present when the champagne pops?

Does the guy praise you in public, only to whisper ‘child-molester’ behind your back? Is he also an incompetent jackass who criticizes everything you do but is incapable of owning his own mistakes?

If the answer is ‘yes’, take heart because William Farquhar had such a boss too. His name was no other than Sir Stamford Raffles—full-time national hero and part-time sociopath.

Although Raffles is celebrated for ‘founding’ modern Singapore, historical records show that he was also an asshole, a hypocrite, a pathological liar, a pimp, and a moron who was incapable of managing a Gong Cha outlet, let alone Singapore.

This is the conclusion that readers may draw from Nadia H. Wright’s recently-published book “William Farquhar and Singapore: Stepping out from Raffles’ Shadow”. By celebrating Raffles’s deputy William Farquhar, Ms Wright inadvertently sheds new light on just how much of a prick Singapore’s founder was.

To start, we’re told that it was Farquhar who built Singapore into a successful city-state, not Raffles. Hard to argue against this thesis since Raffles was only in Singapore for no more than 31 days in 1819. He left soon after the flag-raising and left Farquhar holding his baby.

Apparently, he had a habit of doing this. In the words of one contemporary, Raffles was “the man who sets a house on fire and then runs away.”

In lieu of money or resources, he sent bureaucratic obstacles and bitchy letters. When Farquhar needed supplies for Singapore, Raffles forbade him from trading with the closest port of Penang because he had a personal beef with the port’s governor.

He also forbade Farquhar from hiring new staff while demanding more paperwork for every commercial dealing in Singapore, forcing Farquhar to use his own salary for HR.

While Farquhar struggled to make Singapore happen, Raffles was busy backstabbing him. He wrote letters to their superior, Lord Hastings, alleging that Farquhar had overspent on public works, under-spent on defence, and failed to follow his instructions properly. He also claimed full responsibility for Singapore’s growing success, while blaming Farquhar for ‘any irregularities or inconvenience’. According to Raffles, everything good about Singapore was thanks to Raffles, while everything bad was Farquhar’s fault.

In 1820, Raffles even accused Farquhar of wanting to take leave too often and tried to remove him. No evidence was found to support Raffles’ claim of chao keng.

Despite these difficulties, Singapore was a thriving success by the time Raffles returned in 1822. Thanks to Farquhar’s capable administration, Singapore’s trade had already surpassed Malacca’s and it was fast becoming ‘the favourite rendez-vous’ for trading ships in South East Asia.

However, Raffles’ return to Singapore marked the start of discord, incompetence and eventually, the scandalous dismissal of Farquhar.