Interesting read, but super long WOT.
If you get through the whole thing, good for you.
Who Rules Singapore? The Only True Mercantile State In The World - Analysis Eurasia Review | Eurasia Review
Am pasting only the conclusion bit. Which is a WOT in itself. Article is probably 2-3x longer...
If you get through the whole thing, good for you.
Who Rules Singapore? The Only True Mercantile State In The World - Analysis Eurasia Review | Eurasia Review
Am pasting only the conclusion bit. Which is a WOT in itself. Article is probably 2-3x longer...
Quote:
|
Conclusion: Nowhere to run Singapore has been able to protect its strategic assets through possession and history. Foreign interests have only been able to invest in what they have been allowed. Singapore has been able to successfully develop a very unique model of a modern mercantile state. The very factors that led to success are also the factors that are forcing change. The problem is that economic liberation is bringing pressure for social liberation. Changing demographics and aspirations are exerting pressure for change. In addition, the economic challenge for Singapore is to prevent the economy slip into the post industrial society syndrome where economic decline may take place. The government needs to identify the next driver of the economy to maintain Singapores survival in the form of the present city state. The government feels that there are no alternatives to this vision and consequently patience is very short with any political opposition parties with contrary views. Through its investment arms, Temasek Holdings and GIC, the Singapore Government has more than adequately backed the Singapore dollar with assets worth many times the value of Singapores currency. Singapore has also effectively through property and equity acquisition increased its wealth dramatically and influences many world markets. The Singapore Government is conquering the world, not militarily but through acquisition, thus expanding its economic space. However this also makes Singapore very dependent upon the world economy, and the state of the economy appears to echo international cycles. Singapore has been able so far to define the situation when particular industries decline and move on from the island state, thereby preventing community collapse. The government has managed three industry transitions. However other problems like the cost of living for Singapore nationals have emerged as one of the major issues to solve in the future. Jobs today exist for Singaporeans that didnt exist twenty years ago, and it is hoped that the government now that scientific and technical innovations will be the source of jobs in the future. Yet each transformation has created its own opportunities, and along with high quality education, Singaporeans have been able to rise economically over the decades transforming from docile factory workers four decades ago to professionals today. However this evolution has been criticized as being utilitarian, at the cost of developing rich social aspects of peoples lifestyles. A number of recent studies have indicated that Singapore is an unhappy society with the Gallup Poll in 2012 showing the country to be the least positive nation out of 148, and least emotional country out of more than 140 countries surveyedlxxxi. The utilitarian psych of government has created a vacuum in contentment. Singaporeans are travelling and foreigners are bringing in new values that cant be suppressed and have to be accommodated. Changing demographics may not allow the same to continue. The young generation will strongly influence elections in the future. The key to the future of Singapore is innovation. Innovation means the freedom to come up with new ideas. However the vibrancy and dynamism of ideas has been compromised with the Governments dominance of the economy and monopoly on market development. The concept of education still needs to be widened. To date, only civil servants have been the major source of new ideas, and innovation of late has been by commercial acquisition, rather than creation. This has been a major platform of control in Singapore society. Since 1963 the Singapore Government has turned the island from a sleepy backwater into one of the worlds most vibrant economies. Although nobody can fault the ruling party which has governed Singapore for more than 50 years of abandoning its responsibilities, many wish that it would tackle these responsibilities with some heart and connect emotionally with the people. Times are rapidly changing in the island republic. There is genuine disenchantment with rising prices, the influx of foreign workers, competition for jobs, crowded public places, rising home prices, rising cost of education, and the widening income gap in Singapore. There is even some feeling among Singaporeans with the migration of foreign professionals, they may descend to becoming second class citizens within their own countrylxxxii. Migration will be expected to continue as the local Singapore population is aging. Today it is not uncommon to see the old and infirm waiting on restaurant tables, clearing rubbish in the streets, or even scavenging into rubbish binslxxxiii. Singapores GINI index has declined from 0.433 in 2000 to 0.465 in 2010 and is similar to many African and South American countrieslxxxiv. According to Wilkinson and Pickett, social ills like erosion of trust, crime, obesity, teen pregnancy, mental health and drug addiction, is more closely associated with income inequality rater than low average per-capita incomelxxxv. Consequently the electoral landscape is quickly beginning to change, where the PAP will not in the future be returned to power uncontested on nomination day due to the failure of opposition candidates to nominate for election. The scrapping in of the PAPs preferred candidate Tony Tan for president in 2011 showed that there is a growing proportion of the Singapore electorate that wants a change to the PAPs heavy handed style of government and more scrutinylxxxvi. However one of the issues that may hinder any further decline in the PAPs fortunes is that there is currently a lack of any credible opposition in Singapore as an alternative governmentlxxxvii. From another paradigm, Singapore could be seen as the domination of one group over another. Most of the leadership has been drawn from the Baba Chinese community, a group cultured in Malay and Colonial Britishlxxxviii. Babas strongly hold family values, community cohesiveness, and tend to respect authority. This is in contrast to the Southern mainland Chinese migrants to Singapore who fled oppression, and tended to oppose authority. Singapore has been run more in the manner like a British Colonial administrator would have aspired. Thus patriarchal leadership with neo-Victorian values is not something the migrating Chinese accepted openlylxxxix. Singapore has seen many campaigns, incentives, and deterrents to achieve the values of the Baba classxc. One of the major legacies of Lee Kuan Yew was the authoritarian style of leadership and the fear it invoked into the Singaporean psych. For decades Singaporeans were expected to fall in line with what leaders expected without question, as they were told that this was best for them. The bounds of what couldnt be done were clearly set, i.e., not to criticize leaders, not to discuss sensitive issues, or not to give alternative opinions. If these boundary crossings were noticed, harsh penalties would be applied to those that crossed themxci. The strong control of Lee Kuan Yew was the dominant driver of society, and the state itself also had the responsibility of being the agent of change. This to some degree squeezed out small private businesses as an alternative engine to growth of the Singapore economy. This persona of authority and control still exists today. Singapore Government ministers appear to be disconnected with the people who elected them. They have become so concerned about running Singapore from an elite bureaucracy, trusted to make the best decisions for the country to protect and improve the livelihoods of its citizens. However as they live in some of the choicest real estate in Singapore and have rewarded themselves with some of the highest salaries in the world, they have have become out of touch with the struggles and plight of the common people of Singapore. For Singapore to prosper in the long term. And for Singapore to maintain the unique system of government that has evolved, with all the good, and perhaps less of the bad and ugly, the PAP needs to re-evaluate itself for the future and decide whether it is a broad based political party, or just the extension of one man and an elite group that has ruled over Singapore for the last 50 years? Under the present structure of the PAP, it will be impossible for the party to reform itself from the grassroots and allow new ideas to reach the top. The ability of people to rise through the ranks of the party with new ideas is heavily restricted. The Lim Chin Siong legacy saw to that. The very way the PAP has sought both meritocracy and stability has become its Achilles heel, paralyzing the ability to adapt to changing Singaporexcii, where ironically the country has been so successful in adapting to outside factors of change while being so internally rigid. The cadre system itself prevents change, as the selection process is a closed system selecting only same minded people to the leadershipxciii, subjecting government to the risks of groupthink. The challenge of change brings uncertainty and with this comes insecurity about the continuation of a successful paradigm of government that has served Singapore so well in the past. Lee Kuan Yew had dominated Singaporean politics, economy, and society since the 1950s. The family has influenced affairs in Singapore for over 50 years, much longer than any other political family in the region. His eldest son, Lee Hsien Loong became Prime Minister in 2004. Lee Hsien Loongs wife Ho Ching is CEO of Temasek Holdings. Lee Kuan Yews youngest son Lee Hsien Yang is the head of Singapore Telecom. The Lees have achieved their positions on merit and are genuinely an exceptionally talented family. Officially, the reason given for this is by former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong is the small talent pool in Singaporexciv. Both the political and business sectors appear incestuous in Singapore, but due to the city-state nature of the country, there appears to be little in the way of any solution to this. When the opportunities rose under Goh Chok Tongs Premiership in the mid 1990s, no moves were made to check the power of the Lee familyxcv. There is no doubt that the Lees legacy is embedded in Singapore and its influence will last decades. Just how and when this influence will begin to dissipate remains to be seen. Is there truth to the old Chinese proverb that in three generations, a family or dynasty will have run its course? |