PolyMatter - 2021-07-03
The first 1,000 people to use this link will get a 1-month free trial of Skillshare: https://skl.sh/polymatter07212 Watch this video on Nebula: https://nebula.tv/videos/polymatter-singapore-the-worlds-only-successful-dictatorship Sources: https://pastebin.com/pbs8awgt Twitter: https://twitter.com/polymatters Patreon: https://patreon.com/polymatter Pins & T-Shirts: https://standard.tv/collections/polymatter Reddit: https://reddit.com/r/PolyMatter Music by Graham Haerther (http://www.Haerther.net) Audio editing by Eric Schneider Motion graphics by Vincent de Langen Everything else by Evan This includes a paid sponsorship which had no part in the writing, editing, or production of the rest of the video. Music by Epidemic Sound: http://epidemicsound.com Video supplied by Getty Images
When I first arrived in Singapore, from US, I was very surprised to see the level of trust people have on the government. They don't blindly believe in every word government says but at least they trust their government to get the job done. So at least for now, government is doing a good job and people are content. Who knows where it will go from here.
@K F North Korea (nobody has complained)
@Riley GShep Heheh you are right
It isn't trust you see, it is the knowledge that they have absolutely no way to affect what the government will do, so they don't worry about it. Yes that sort of resignation may look like trust, but it's like riding in an airplane, it may crash but as a passenger you can't do anything. The government makes all the decisions and you don't make any. It's even more totalitarian than China.
government kills people for small amount of drugs.
@The Trance Cartel I would much rather prefer trading some of my personal freedoms for political stability and economic prosperity. It's much better than what's going on in America right now
Recently I was thinking about the faillings we see in some countries and their democracies where sh*t doesnt get done because there's too much infighting. And I believed that the best governance is a benevolent dictatorship. The issue being it's near impossible to implement. And it comes with the risks of the leader becoming power hungry and wanting a legacy. So the cons make it too risky to try to implement
But Singapore does show that when you get the right people in. It flourishes amazingly.
I look at Singapore and think of it as everything right about this type of governance. Issue being. Power can corrupt. And all it takes is the next generation to destroy everything.
Power is like alcohol, it doesn’t create vices, it reveals them.
This is an interesting analysis but as a Singaporean, I have to say that there is quite a lot of Singapore's history that was not properly analyzed especially when there was a lot of focus on the PAP remaining in power. The choice to take this "authoritarian shortcut" was something borne out of necessity and not just a high risk high reward decision. During the period of decolonization, Singapore as an independent state was at its weakest and most vulnerable. My parents tell me of stories when gangs roamed the streets, how there were always fights breaking out that our "ang chia" (anti-riot vehicles) had to come and stop, how several families were crowded under one roof and shared one toilet, and all the stuff that you could never imagine when you look at modern-day Singapore. Authoritarianism is a system with its flaws, but in a time of civil unrest with a divided population, ruling with an iron fist and setting the country onto one specific path was the most socio-politically viable way for Singapore to survive and move forward in a short period of time. We were just lucky that our ruling party was not so greedy and corrupt to begin with, so under their leadership, Singapore went from third to first world in a single generation. This is not to say our governance is perfect, in fact, it is far from it. A lot of the early policies heavily affected the people of the previous generations. My grandparents and parents were hit by these rapid changes and struggled to adapt. But the choices the government made in those early days were what made Singapore the country it is today. Singapore is certainly not a perfect utopia, there exists no such thing in the world. But as a Singaporean, I personally believe it is as close to a utopia as it gets. I would rather have peace and security over democracy and freedom. If anyone would like to understand more about Singapore's decision and position to rule as a "communist democracy", I implore you to watch Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam's speech at the 45th St Gallen Symposium. Democracy isn't the only way to run a country. Every country has their own specific circumstance and their own "best" way to rule.
@Val Do you even understand the definition of "dictatorship"?
🇸🇬♥️
@Chris Peng Democracy, as a concept played out through history, has been shown to be a failure in most cases, so I totally understand why some wouldn't want it.
Not a Singaporen but I have always admired how efficient their system is and how well run their country is.
Most of the countries that are poor are because of corruption and greed. Most people from those countries would happily trade off whatever is necessary to have Singapore as their country.
@WaveHello I believe it’s necessary. If too much freedom is given, it can be abused . Why change the policy if the prevailing policy brings so much benefits to the people and country.
I took a class a number of years ago called "Electoral Authoritarianism" in University where we took a look at Singapore (among a number of countries) and had to judge whether or not it was a democracy or not. Took a look at a lot of the stuff you highlighted in the video and had a guy come speak to us who did contract law work for tech companies over there. Really interesting stuff, glad(?) to see it highlighted.
The police can catch you easily
What did the class say?
Have you not heard of North Korea. Not a single citizen has ever complained about anything it is truly a paradise
@Kim Jong Un people are complaining to much how I fix that.
Hahahahaha nice 1
It's like comparing 🥇with💩
But everyone else thinks they're villains, Singaporean are held to a high regard by other nations.
wrg, say, can say any nmw and any s perfx ,idts
I'll paraphrase what I saw someone in the reply section said; Yeah I'd rather earn a higher than average salary and have great living conditions if it meant living in a dictatorship that doesn't feel like a dictatorship, but I'd also appreciate the option to hold a smiley face in protest.
This is the crux of it for me. If I want to hold an anti-war Ukraine solidarity walk, I shouldn't have to worry about some bitch arresting me. Protests and freedom of speech are important, one day when a corrupt leader gets his hands on the PAP, SG will realize that. I hope they don't realize it too late.
You can really see the strong influence of Chinese culture in Singapore. Historically, Chinese people often consent to top-down authoritarian governments for as long as they are able to keeps things stable and prosperous. But they also reserve themselves the right (or even the moral duty) of overthrowing it as soon as things start going south (condensed into the concept of the "Mandate of Heaven"). Makes sense, seeing as most of the population is ethnically Chinese.
Then you should check out Taiwan. It's the politics shaped the ppl, not the other way round.
Chinese culture is not a Confucian monolith. There are aspects which celebrate personal freedom above centralized power, and even bohemian living. Just look at the philosophical aspects of Taoism and the Zhuangzi.
what crack are you smoking?
CHINESE in Singapore are mostly imports. They will be scared if they are not the 75%. Look at their terrible TFR. All those chinese in Singapore are imports. Only the ageing Chinese the ones who live through independance
I went there as a tourist for about a month. Being in a dictatorship, I expected the country to have rude authorities. But the police I approached are very nice. Well, probably because I'm tourist, but still not what I expected. Even the immigration guy when I landed was pretty much chill, he just asked me if I had a hotel and that's it. No extra questioning.
please just because its a "dictatorship" doesn't mean that the people or the authorities are rude, i dont see the connection between the those 2. As long as you dont break the rules ( obv ), you're fine.
In Spanish, "dictatorship" is called "dictadura". So considering "dura" means "tough", In cases like Singapore we make a game of words, calling them "dictablanda". "Blanda" means "soft".
@0_0 you can't really blame the OP for having a bias mind set. Most of the audiences on YouTube are from the western world and most of the western media aren't even trying to hide their effort at dictating dictatorship as evil and bad.
@bambangl how about Amos yee? Think again.
@bambangl Fucking BS
As a malaysian, what I've admired about Lee Kuan Yew is that he did exactly what most other countries failed to do with the same system, while having a smaller country helps, it is still as hard to commit to the vision you had initially for an entire country, let alone set it up to follow that vision through even after death.
While I feel pity for those he has jailed, he did so knowing he could bring singapore up unhindered. Had he been able to convince them he was going to turn singapore into what it is now, he likely would have not jailed them. And who can blame them or LKY himself? It's very skeptical that anyone would follow through with their promise with that much power, yet LKY did.
I wish Malaysia was equally well off but we're a joke.
@S TR You know, chopstick...
@Connor Tan 4896Malaysia had LKY once but she decided to kick him and singapore out of Malaysia in 1965
@viperozzy Yea
sorry capitalism as a system is always doom to fail. unless we are okay with keeping certain countries poor to be a source for cheap labor.
'Had he been able to convince them he was going to turn singapore into what it is now, he likely would have not jailed them. '
Sadly he was the one who betray them by "promising" them he would release them when he got into power. he needed them to gain the votes to secure power. During that period there were majority chinese voters who would vote for Barisan Sosialis instead of pap. those who are jail/exile would never agree with his vision. his vision is nulifying the union, creating pro-business policies & getting rid of socialist/communist. singapore is consider a sucessful neoliberal for a reason.
There is reason why foreigners love using singapore as successful capitalist country. we exploit the foreigner worker to build our country, capitalism needs exploitation or it wont be profitable.
@Connor Tan 4896 Flashback to that time Lee Kuan Yew competed in the Malaysian Federal Elections because UMNO competed in the Singaporean elections... and somehow won 1 seat. Not much, but it terrified UMNO XD
A smart dictatorship is one that makes you feel like you're not living in one.
@Sentryion Then maybe biliteral, then? (just kidding).
@80386 that would be more an oligarchy than a dictatorship
so western governments and the western elites?
Indeed, that is the whole point behind a ''Comfortable Dystopia'' after all.....
wrg
This video had me thinking would a nation controlled by an AI increase in wealth and productivity or decrease?
And would this change affect the people? would they have a better or worse quality of life?
I feel most "free" democracies are really controlled by their financial institutions and its major earning companies.
Would an AI with no morals or feelings towards gaining financial assets or the feelings of its people be able to run a country successfully or would it use up its resources and ultimately fail.
Would be interesting to see.
Its the Matrix question... would people take the red pill and care to know or the blue and stubbornly stick their heads in the sand?
No person I've ever met has known the answer.
I would've hoped that sometime in the past 20 years for that the people via use of military or the police or PMC's with mass communication would've revolted and taken back control of their lands.
But astonishingly its almost never happened, only 2 relatively small groups of people have ever somewhat managed it (to my knowledge), Ukraine and Taiwan.
Is there even enough information in existence to determine what option people would choose.
Are we nothing more than cattle or something more?
Ai is objectively racist so it would be terrible by modern standards
A lot of the reason Singapore experienced 'good' authoritarianism comes down to the circumstances of its independence (and luck).
When we were separated from Malaysia in 1965, Lee Kuan Yew cried, he did not jump for joy thinking about the possibilities of his power now as the head of his own small country. He literally weeped for the struggles he foresaw in such a tiny island with no resources and then went into depressed isolation for a month and a half.
So, it was a really strange circumstance, with a strange (that's a compliment), highly intelligent, and non-dictatorship-seeking man, and it produced really strange results.
Those that judge the heights we attain must remember the depths from which we came. As someone who looks on with great admiration at the achievements of the Lee Kwan Yeuw dynasty, I dare say, money in your pocket is the greatest form of freedom and democracy there can ever be.
This video doesn't do justice to the great achievements of LKY and PAP but smears them, the criminals who were sued for defamation could not defend their offensive allegations in a nation whose judiciary has been ranked as among the most fair and transparent in the world. If nations like my own had half the quality and depth of Singaporean leadership I believe the sky would be the limit. There's some attempt to be objective but the position you take is needless and counter-productive.
Great content, very informative. However, I'd strongly disagree with one statement in the video "Delivering economic growth is a fairly weak source of legitimacy", which is a pretty Western-centric view about political legitimacy I.M.O. The ethnic Han Chinese people are perhaps the most secular and realistic bunch, and in their history for the past couple of centuries, they've struggled with poverty and underdevelopment, this created a very different value compass from the Western one which puts so much emphasis on individual freedom and civil liberties. It is hard for a Westerner to understand in these societies how strong the drive is towards a better life with better living conditions and social welfare, and how much legitimacy it has given those Asian governments that are on the Authoritarian side of the political spectrum, such as Singapore and China.
true i aint caring about democracy if i got no food on the table
The point would be that rising living standards deliver legitimacy.
Under a competent leadership, economic growth translates to a rise in living standards like China experienced in the last 50 years.
But you can very well make the case that that stopped in the last 10-15 years in China, and instead economic growth was invested in prestige projects and militarization for the vanity of the leadership.
Poverty stopped being combatted and was eliminated by definition instead of eliminating it in reality.
Even if China had twice the GDP, if the Chinese People don't profit from it, who cares? The leadership has demonstrated that it cares more about it's own prestige then the livelihood of the Chinese people.
One can only hope that the Chinese will one day again get a competent leadership that cares about it's people.
I guess the difference is caused by different history.
The Chinese suffered because of political chaos (rebellions, civil wars, etc), while the Westerners suffered because of totalitarianism (kings imposed huge taxes, clergymen abused their power, communist dictators brought calamities to the people).
@Thomas L. The CCP managed to get 800m people out of poverty. Chinese people are free to travel out of the country and they are relatively happy. I don't see what's so bad about it
As a Singaporean, our country isn't perfect but most of us can talk shit about the government (happens every day in every taxi) without much consequences and we also enjoy a strong efficient government. Hopefully we can open up more going forward.
@Peas 7567 no lah. U post anything bad about PAP, they will find all ways to get u into jail.
@DarthNoward Hm.. Amos yee?
@DarthNoward actually you can’t do that in china or north korea , big difference
Singapore is the most ideal country in the world for common people.I am not living in singapore ,It seems that I can not buy a house for one my life ,I never go to hospital unless I am seriously ill.I only can buy the cheapest vegetables as my daily food.
wrgg
PolyMatter: "Elections in Singapore are free..."
Also PolyMatter: The ruling party disappeared political opponents in the past and now uses all its power to censor the opposition and limit campaigning.
Me: Mr. Narrator, blink twice if the government is holding your family hostage.
@Ironboy32 the worlds fertilizer comes from China, not USA which doesn't even have the ability to produce the precursors to produce the fertilizer
@Biking With Panda don't change the subject, you were crowing over how China's economy was larger than America's. I simply proved you wrong with facts and logic. Also, China sells that fertiliser to the Americans willingly, that's how you increase your GDP, by exporting shit. With their acute water scarcity below the Yangtze River, it's not like China itself can use it all.
@Ironboy32 hilarious
it's monopoly, they really run the government like a company
wrgg
The problem is that “democratic” countries have separation of powers, but still fuse democracy and dictatorship in their governments. This is more important than the existence of a “President” office or multiple legislative chambers. For all the millennia democracy has been known in theory or practice, one would think separation of democracy and dictatorship ought to have been tried in a democratic government by now. However, no democratic government existing currently does this.
That was fantastic! I always sorta suspected that dictatorships could work if the party or person was benevolent enough, but that the risk was too high that one day it would inevitably dissolve. As you say, the cost is maintaining control, while the benefit is lack of constraint. For me, I started thinking about this when I heard (in passing) that Socrates was an open critic of democracy, but ultimately begrudged that it was the least worst option.
To a large extent, it is also because Singapore is so small and has no natural resources. So we don't really have a choice. If we want to attract capital, business and talent, there must be protection of property rights, fair and just judicial, no corruption... ... see where I am going here?
I once lived there and recognized the country as an western one. It felt like the capital of the world, tall skyscrapers, fancy cars and luxurious shopping malls. Never did I think of the actual government or anything else regarding the countries politics.
Correction: Only 1 school is named after LKY - the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. LKY was very particular about not being immortalised. He even wanted his home to be destroyed after his death to prevent it being enshrined as a place of veneration.
@Kenny you... are entitled to your own opinion but pls don't disrespect the dead
@Kenny if its so easy tell me howd you do it. And why it would work? I mean surely youre qualified unless youre just talking out your ass.
@Kenny Not really, Singapore being small, may mean it has some benefits, but do note that being small also have many disadvantages
@Devilishlybenevolent >Hitler likes this comment
@Kenny Try to run a country yourself then. Build a party, lead a campaign, then make good on your promises. If you think leading any small country is so easy any party can do it then form a party of your own.
As a Singaporean your video just presents things without the deeper context. We do not blindly believe everything the Government says . We are also not stupid enough to allow our country to burn.
Travelled to over 20 countries and I think Singapores government is the most forward looking. Majority of things are planned 20years ahead and the government delivers its promises thats why they are constantly revoted in because they do their jobs.
Would you live there?
@Yossi Allen as a singaporean, free education = yes
IMO, Singapore isn’t like other countries, who want power. It focuses on wealth instead
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The end goal of democracy is to fix a mistake like Trump when there is one, but if the incumbent is doing fine, you DON'T HAVE TO vote them out just for the sake of proving "we are not a dictatorship". If one day the PAP can no longer fulfill their social contract to the voters but refuses to give up power, that's when it would be called a dictatorship.
Saying "the inly thing getting in the..." is a far fetched and arguably inappropriate reduction of national politics/economics. Singapore allowed itself to be a work center for the West and excluded the rest of Malaysia in doing so. There are plenty of international coties around the world that have had similar positions. Shanghai, Lagos, etc... Singapore is located in the center of the global export hub that is East Asia and thus is a prime location for businesses to set up headquarters/outposts. Singapore has benefitted from relative regional stability. It is small and thus has a lower GDP/cap:HDI ratio than most nations (it's far cheaper/more profitable to build public transit in a city-state than to do so through a rural country). Asian nations (the confucian point) are far less revolutionary in character than Western or African nations, with respect for authority deeply ingrained in their cultures, meaning a dictatorship doesn't have to spend as many resources oppressing their populace and putting down rebellions as they would have to in another country. Singapore was lucky that it's dictators wanted to build a powerful nation instead of being like Sri Lanka and intentionally destroying their country.
Politics isn't an obstacle to progress. It's a method of doing things, progressive and counter-productibe things. It certainly slows everything down if consensus isn't reached, but there are ways around this/ways of running a country so that people don't want to throw out the government everytime there's an issue. Some of those things are vaguely fascistic - silencing the media, charging those who levy false allegations or incendniary accusations against the regime, purging corrupt officials, but fundamentally, it involves three things.
1). As you mentioned, is ensuring that you deliver for the population.
2). Is preventing malignant forces from gaining a foothold in your country to begin with. (Mafias, disloyal businesses, etc...)
3). Is helping your populace to understand the government's role in crises resolutions before they happen. "Yes, there is a bad drought and food prices have increased. We are working on reallocating funds from research into etc... to help pay for hunger relief programs. We expect to lower food prices at the point of purchase by 7% by this November. We are in this together."
And you force any station that calls themselves news to air that statement whenever they address the issue of inflation in food prices. If a channel does not, or they make incendiary comments claiming that the government is ignoring the food crisis and not doing enough to relieve inflation but they do not back this up with hard evidence that there are solutions that government officials are choosing not to pursue, you fine them, you refuse them interviews, you force them to remove "News," from their name, because they are exploiting a crisis for personal gain. That's not politics. That's business.
A good example of the problem is the US, where school shootings are played all over television and Democrats take the opportunity to proclaim that they can solve that problem and then discuss gun control policies that would not do much to change the number of gun deaths in the country. Republicans and Democrats taking different positions on gun control isn't a problem. Republicans and Democrats discussing policies openly and backing them up with data isn't a problem. The problem is that Democrats have a large mafia backing and the illegal firearms market will benefit them and Republicans get funding from legal gun manufacturers, the NRA and the like, so preventing gun control benefits them, thus there is no intended solution being discussed, only corruption without accountability.
It is possible to prosper while being authoritarian: that’s the very spirit of enlightened despotism. But it is a gamble: you’re placing a lot of power to very few hands, and you can only hope that those hands are indeed competent and prioritizes the greater good.
@Temo990 No. Misinformed by political parties. They make up so many bullshits if you actually lived in a country that has democracy.
More educated you're more persistant you'd believe in those bs. Because after all, we're all humans.
All these systems are still flawed. I can't even say one is better than others. We're all fucked up.
I hate this word authoritarian or dictatorship. Its not a word to be use lightly. Communist China or Russia back in the 80s or North Korea. Fine we can call them dictatorship because they literally have no freedom. Singapore isnt even close. In fact if they want to they can vote the opposition and who knows, maybe one day they will even have a different goverment. You can criticize the government much as u want. You will not get arrested if you publicly criticize them. In other words Singapore is a free country but they have strict law enforcement. You steal you go to jail, sell drugs you got the death sentence. There is consequences for every bad decisions you made. That is a concept that is lacking among western countries these days
they are small enough and in the right place to be a shipping hub for china and a tax evasion hub for China's wealthy or foreigners who don't really want to live in china so they take a break there
their economic growth didn't come until Chinas did and grew right along with China's exports
its like being in the real estate market in new york in the 80's no matter how horrible you are at it its just so profitable its hard to screw it up you really have to be trying
Exactly. Singaporean here. I believe that if LYK didn't solidify his power, he wouldn't have been able to execute any long-term plans he had to build the country as it is today. It really takes just one good leader and government to set things right. Having the power change hands all the time is like making small bets all the time and the best outcome is winning more than you lose but it will never be better than betting the entire pot and getting a win out of it.
Like you said, if the power is in the hands of a competent leader then it doesn't matter how it is done, being authoritarian or even just dictatorship.
That is exactly true, an authoritarian rule is the most stable type of government but the problem is its leader, since one man has absolute control, how can we assure that certain leader will be committed to working our country for the greater good? I like authoritarianism but only if we have chosen the right leader but that, unfortunately is extremely rare which is why we all have to resort to Democracy, to protect our freedom and rights.
Damn your analysis and prediction was really on point. PAP gave in to the opposition slightly by “electing” a leader of the opposition. At the same time it also enacted a anti foreign interference rule.
US: oh no, how we gonna manipulate them now.
Nicholas, do you know and understand What FICA is about?
Or are you saying that Foreign Interference is Ok? Or is it where got?
As a Singaporean, this is very accurate. Finally I can show a video that is accurate to show my friends about Singapore because sometimes I don’t know how to explain Singapore.
yeah its a weird construction singapore.. a britihs colonial creation.. the lack of democracy in singapore is a direct product of the british and thier system..not the work of the P.A.P. thejust simply followed on on the shame of freedom in exchange for improvement of living conditions they british already had created. the emergency powers.. the control of news papers.. the control of wages and the labour market ect ect. nothing much changed with singapore after independence.. just no queen on the money.. but then again its why during the british period the colony was growing in living standards very rapidly compared to other british colonies.. its not good but its the system the british created to keep the state stable.. as theres just to many unstable elements nearby . for now it works..
Singaporeans are a bit... hard-headed.
dictatorships very often work well when they manage small states. the larger the size, the more difficult it becomes to manage for a small group. democracy and free market are both ways that make population management easier. people often confuse them as inherently good, but they are just useful tools, a means, and not an end of itself.
Stayed in SG for 24 days. It was amazing. So clean and safe. You see kids age 10 going to school by themselves. I barely saw any police but Cc TV everywhere. I was walking late at night at 2am by myself with no fear or harassment. No homeless people. Really interesting place to live and work in.
The police there are so nice. I approached some to ask questions, professional guys.
You must be walking and staying only in orchard Road
"no homeless people" lmao typical ang moh
@Neo Lix People will behave without CCTV only after centuries of conditioning. Singapore reached it in few decades only. Of course cultivated discipline is better than imposed discipline, but Singapore didn't have that privilege (hundreds of years of conditioning).
@Mr Reedawn the homeless people get homes from the goverment
Singaporeans:
It's not about electing a different party, it's about sending a message
@pousXB But not for the president leh. So what multi million company that halimah helmed before? A multi million nasi lemak empire? Or she used to manage Milo?
@WizardSoon You forget about TCB also. West Coast GRC is also a PAP stronghold but it had the biggest vote swing towards oppositions last year. It really shows that people are getting unhappy with the 4G.
@Akila No use talking sense to a PAP diehard. They don't understand what democratic society means. Their PAP put in a president which we never voted for and they still blindly supported it.
That is actually quite dumb. I hope Singaporeans will soon get more politically astute that they realize that voting means serious business and demand actions. Not whining about sending a message.
So basically japanese voter.
Interesting discussion, very much an example of what I've always said: the advantage of dictatorship is the fact that it can get shit done. The disadvantage of dictatorship is that it can get shitty things done.
The choice hinges entirely on the choices of one ruler and the favour of a small handful of power brokers who help maintain that rule. (In typical dictatorships, these are groups like the military leadership because the maintenance of power is done through violent suppression of the public or threats of same; in old medieval European kingdoms, these would be the king's direct vassals and the Catholic Church; in Singapore, I don't know who these people would be, but I'm sure the Prime Minister knows exactly who they are.)
Generally, the biggest problem with dictatorships where the leader's choices are good for their country at large is succession: It's very common for dictatorship to be inherited, passed down from father to son. This works fine when the son is raised to have a solid understanding of their role and generally wants to be a responsible leader, but wait long enough and you inevitably have a son who'd rather just enjoy the luxury of ultimate power or you lose a dictator early before their successor can be properly trained, and they make terrible mistakes that disrupt the very fine balance of a prosperous dictatorship and in their attempts to stabilize things, almost always manage to destroy everything that made their realm special. Or you just have some jackass who wants personal power assassinate the dictator and his family and declare himself ruler, which kicks off a civil war that runs the country into the ground (see the Roman Empire, repeatedly).
Singapore's veneer of democracy might actually serve another purpose: distributing power just enough that leaders can be cultivated and selected based on their ability to meet the standards of the party as a whole. If you're selecting leaders based on how well they fill the shoes of the previous leader, rather than through arbitrary means like primogeniture, the odds of winding up with a leader who isn't suited to the task are greatly reduced. Or it might be just as unstable as every other dictatorship, just waiting for the right (wrong) leader to bring it all crashing down.
For everyone saying that Singapore has no resources: Singapore's "resource" is being in such a strategic point for world trade. It's easier for countries to trade with each other there, instead of sailing all the way from China to Europe or vice versa. Before Singapore, there was another rich trading city in the straits called Melaka.
But Trade is a different "resource" to oil or minerals - in the latter, your country only needs unskilled, poor citizens to work the mines. For Trade, you need a stable business environment and educated workers at any cost. That's why Singapore keeps its population rich enough to not disturb the business.
It's still a great place to live, but it's not like every country can get this wealthy with the same policies, Rwanda already tried that.
As a Singaporean, I was initially peeved by the video title, saying Singapore is a ‘dictatorship’. Singapore isn’t a dictatorship the same way Belarus or North Korea is. Singapore is more of an authoritarian democracy. We do have a form of democracy that requires ALL adult citizens to vote. You are absolutely right about the use of gerrymandering and crippling and disadvantaging opposition party candidates trying to run for office. Singaporeans can criticise the government (the ruling PAP party) and its policies openly. But it gets risky when criticism is directed at individual politicians. Suing and bankrupting critics, both individuals and organisations, seems to be the go to MO for PAP politicians who feel their reputation has been unfairly mischaracterised. Most Singaporeans like me do want the PAP to continue governing Singapore. We believe they have been doing a good job so far. But we also want more TRANSPARENCY, accountability and stopping ALL UNFAIR practices that disadvantage the opposition party candidates/ politicians. That includes redrawing of electoral boundary lines. The content of your video is mostly spot on.
@GigiH it doesn't particularly matter what your background is. It's completely irrelevant. True things remain true no matter where or who they come from. If you have something to contract what I say, then contradict it.
Also, the person you were referencing was referring to you.
@GigiH actually he is right. i m singaporean and find that singapore has no hope. They created nationalism to distract the citizen to bicker about foreigner stealing their jobs. Our education system creates citizen to have lack of critical thinking & being apolitical. our union are useless, we dont even minimum wages for all jobs. Why are ppl who job hopping to increase their salary? Thats a clear indicator that the union is either not known or useless. lky didnt like unions having power in the hands of the workers. those who were exiled & jailed are same people that were first targeted during hitler rise to power. hey another similarity is how hitler infiltrate the national socialist party and then jail/exile them when he got into power. those who were jail/exile also were from pap and left to create their own party.
"Singapore is more of an authoritarian democracy". That's an oxymoron if I've ever heard one lol.
@csward53 no it’s not. Go look up the meaning of ‘authoritarian’ and ‘democracy’. Both are not mutually exclusive. Singapore’s brand of democracy is a hybrid form of British parliamentary democracy and a nanny state. It has worked for Singapore for the last 57 years and it may have its flaws (all all types of democracies do), but the vast majority of Singaporeans approve of this hybrid version of democracy. They have voted for the same political party since 1965.
singapore is not authoritarian democracy. authoritarian democracy is something like mongolia.
Why care about democracy. You can say our Government is authoritarian, but it's efficiently run.
Our country is affluent, stable, safe,
Convenient transportation, clean, peaceful. Our people are mostly happy.
I think those countries that are so focus on democracy, cannot hold the candle to Singapore.
Singaporean here.
I think what you mentioned about the gerrymandering and legal campaign period are spot on. My home is categorised under a GRC that is literally kilometres away from me. The 'getting charged for ridiculous reasons' thing is also quite real, earlier this year there were people arrested for protesting against LGBT discrimination by the education ministry. One thing that smells a bit fishy to me, however, is the 'vote for PAP to receive special benefits' thing you talked about at 12:35. I have never heard of such a thing before, and our votes are supposed to be anonymous. I'd love to see your source on that.
EDIT: I stand corrected. Apparently that was the case in the past. Not sure if it's still the case but it used to be.
I think most of us, especially the older generation, aren't extremely bothered by the lack of opposition in politics because life in Singapore isn't THAT bad, it's actually pretty comfortable. I think most people are just alright with the status quo and fear that change may disrupt it. Personally, I'm not very bothered about politics as long as the government in power gets the job done, which they have been for quite a few decades now.
However, nowadays I think more people are better educated on our political scene and are more cognisant of the issues that have arisen as a result of the essentially one-party rule. That's probably why the PAP is starting to lose some of its voters.
Nevertheless, if it really comes to it, I think Singaporeans would gladly vote for the oppositions if it meant that we'd have a better standard of living. I don't know if I can speak for everyone but to me, as long as Singapore continues to progress, I don't care which party is in power. We still have a long way to go, but either way I'm proud to be Singaporean.
One thing I've always found funny when foreigners discuss Singapore online is that we are commonly downplayed and called names like 'Disneyland with a death penalty' or 'fine city'. I've even seen people on Reddit talk about us Singaporeans like we're some deeply oppressed slaves living in an Orwellian society. Maybe it's just me and my outlook on life but I don't think it's anywhere near as bad as that. Sure, we may have some serious issues regarding mental health and our happiness, or lack thereof it, but in general I think most of our issues stem from the cost of living and the constant rat race here. I really admire you for the amount of research you put into this video though, it's pretty solid. Good job man
Okay one last thing, for the love of god please stop calling the ruling party the PAP, it's super weird to hear it as a local. We call them the P A P. We pronounce each letter individually, hearing the acronym pronounced as it looks is disturbing
@resoluteraver we call it functional opposition
Bro why tf did you write like 7 paragraphs???
Spot on, we'll explained!
@pascal ausensi seriously, taking evidence from Lee Kuan yews book.
Do I sense a hint of... nationalism... in your post? 😂
Taiwan can be their model. In the 1980s, it was similar to Singapore, in that it was a dictatorship that successfully improved the economy. Then it managed to transition to real democracy, and still has a great economy.
As a foreigner who lived in Singapore for 4 years, I can say never before in the world there is a success demonstration of dictatorship, and yes there is Singapore. Of course many compare PM Lee and his father is another showcase of Kim family in North Korea, but Singapore is...well just too rich, and North Korea is...well just too poor. By looking at Singapore, we knew that economical wealth is not based entirely on politics, it is base on political decisions and executions.
Singapore PAP controls education hospitals media entertainment radio and food ntuc kindergarten hdb housing.
Would you ride a ship whose captain changes the direction once every five years? Where the captain REVERSES his ship so that he can tell his passengers the previous captain was wrong, and he is the right one?
Interesting video, one learns something new every day. By the way, I have a question regarding South Korea and would appreciate any insight. I remember reading an article some time ago that was describing South Korean democracy as great in principle but not really relevant. It went on to claim that South Korea is predominantly run by private business and that this was due to companies choosing to settle in a certain area (City, province etc.) and basically expand to the point that they become the single largest employer and provider of services in that area thus basically dictating how things are run.
I am just curious to know if this claim has any truth to it.
I've found that Singapore's racial policies, as well as the voting pattern is similar to South Africa's, but the opposite.
- In Singapore, you have an undemocratic, but highly efficient government, that people keep voting for non-stop.
- In South Africa, you have a democratic, but grossly incompetent government, that people keep voting for non-stop.
@l3m0ntea "I'm not a PAP supporter, now watch me quote a number of PAP talking points"
@Yongsheng Low its more the politicians are getting paid a lot so as to demotivate corruption, think about it if ur getting for example 1millon a year would you take a bribe of 2millon risking jail?
I always say this, stop wasting money on the political theater & stop choosing sides. Instead let us vote on solutions to fix problems, after goals have been set the government must just shut up and do their jobs. An energy crisis does not care if you're a democrat, liberal or communist - it affects us all the same.
@Elliot Wee I dont agree with you. you sound more like those who oppose for the sake of it
@Kh Tay finally someone who talk sense.
A very good analysis of the Singapore politics. Ironically China wants to learn how to achieve Singapore's authoritative democracy, believing it is a bag of tricks to use to both get respect in the world while not risking losing power -- witness the number of civil servants it sends to study in the LKY school of government. Singapore still controls its one TV and newspaper even though the mass media trend has long shifted online. Please do a followup story on SG, and also maybe do one about the ideal democracy.
Great video, but I have a question: you claim that Vietnam and Laos have voter intimidation, and checking through your sources I can't find an article to back this up. I always thought Laos and Vietnam had democratic centralism, and considered their electoral systems highly, can anyone direct me to any sources you used to find this information?
Wow. Great video. It's been a debate in Thailand for years too. The military regime always say they "brought peace and stability". Because they use the law against any protestors. Many people are tired of protests which often lead to eventual violence so they just let the old incompetent military rule the country... for 8 years now. The expensive lifestyle of the royals anger many people. Only the middle classers and young people come out to voice their concerns while most old people keep their silence.
Even if democracy will bring us worse leader, at least we can say it's our own choice. And we can replace him/her later too.
Well, I guess you should learn from history of tyrannical regimes. Tyrant can come from democracy. General election will not automatically kick any tyrant out.
then u will ended up with having to choose between 2 very bad candidate like many modern election. Not to mention in many modern democracy, it is difficult to actually throw out leader with low support without them doing the full term despite there r system in place that allow u to overthrow that leader.
Bavaria, the richest federal state of Germany, has the Christian Social Union (CSU, a "sibling" of the Merkel's party CDU) continuously in power since 1949. They only lost absolute majority twice, in 2008 and 2018 (although still winning the elections) and had to take on a junior coalition partner.
For Malaysian point of view: people would rather live in a skillful dictatorship than a dysfunctional democracy. But of course, both countrymen would rather live in a highly functional democracy.
3k likes and over 230 replies.Thank you!!
@Princess Azula Really? So you can tell how competent a person is by the policies he (or she) espouses? All your suggestion is promoting is a shift from a popularity contest to sloganeering. Yes, princess, that is a very good improvement.
@Kaixuan Jaw colonies made Netherlands rich in the past, but not anymore everything was destroyed in the world wars basically and Europe had to grow its economics again and from themselves basically but the head start in industrialization was the most important factor. I understand if your feeling nationalistic feelings but what you are saying is not really true regarding wealth, stagnant economies arise from developed economies with low growing populations. Also with the India vs China economics debate people never look more than just a simple look. China is basically a unified nation with a clear leading and homogenous population, India does not have that and has been trying to build it up. Secondly China had opened up around 20 years before India did to any extent to the global economy and even then if you compare the GDP of China 20 years ago with India today, India ranks higher.
Malaysians could thrive in a flawed democracy and amid the pandemic... can't imagine if the country changed to better one
Wow...don't let Dr. M hear about this....
@ I would argue the reason for Europes high standard of living despite free elections comes from a mixture of culture, education and infrastructure that has been build over centuries.
Our governments largely fail getting anything done in a good timeframe or from a bang-buck perspective. It is just that they don't need to do anything to keep the standard as it is.
This strongly reminds me of my home state of Bavaria, where the christian-social party (CSU) ruled for decades with an absolute majority of up to 62%. Similarly its promise was stability and economic growth and admittedly this was mostly delivered. Opposition parties were present, but so weak that if one wanted to change politics, one had to join the CSU and do opposition from the inside. The cons were also quite similar: Authoritarian politics exploiting nationalist and racist tendencies, as well as this special kind of corruption that happens almost invisible to the common people.
Just a quick question for anyone who can and would reply. So basically Singapore is kinda like a dictatorship because the same party has been elected ever since the 1960s, but technically isn't because there exist elections. The problem is the election always results in PAP winning because of censorship. Please correct me if I'm wrong I'm just having trouble understanding this. Any help would be appreciated.
15:12 Actually Singapore's government has previously cited the country's reliance on international trade to lower some political expectations e.g. by arguing against protectionism by saying that it'll be futile, & also that with more remote work now due to the pandemic, we can't 'bubble-wrap' locals from competition posed by immigrants, or that the government can't control inflation much as much of it is imported (since we import quite a lot of stuff, such as 90% of our food). Government supporters would probably just tell us that we need to practise more austerity instead, which would be less deleterious to the economy in Singapore than other countries since the former rely less on domestic consumption (since many consumer goods we buy here are imported). The government has also argued that it can't have a welfare state too because our country lacks natural resources
This video speaks as if it's an uncontested fact that (a) democracy is the ideal form of government, (b) Western countries are democratic, and (c) changing Singapore's system into a typical Western democracy would do more good than harm.
I have strong doubts about all three of those assumptions.
Where did he say that? And everyone with a brain knows B is true so it doesn't need to be said. Is the West fully democratic? No, of course not.
@John Smith I didn't say he says those things, I said he speaks a if those things are uncontested facts. And, yes, that Western countries are actually democratic, as opposed to being merely nominally so, is a contested fact.
@Seventy-Three Elephants The Earth being round is also contested. As I said it's partially not fully democratic. This fact is not mystifying nor is this guy's video.
@John Smith The Earth is an oblate sphere, true, but the deviation from sphericity is so slight, you wouldn't notice it using mere eyesight. The deviations from democracy of alleged democratic states are so glaring that serious minds have wondered whether real democracy ever exists at all.
Anton Ego - 2021-07-09
“Protests are illegal unless pre-approved by the government” that’s hilarious 😂
John David - 2022-07-15
Thank god it's not a law in Sri Lanka
Zes - 2022-10-09
wrgg
tinateh - 2022-10-10
A protest is not a strike. You can conduct a strike without holding a public protest. Lee Kuan Yew was very effective in squashing strikes though. He spared no expense in ensuring the economy would not be crippled by any group. You can have organised protests, you just need a permit to hold one. I grew up in Malaysia, it’s the same there. Both countries have the security act, a relic of a British colonial past.
tinateh - 2022-10-10
@Yohannes Sulistyo you forget religion. No one is allowed to denigrate other religions. Race, religion, sensitive due to early history of racial and religious riots and violence. Destabilises the country, scares away investors. Your country played a role in deliberately trying to destabilise Singapore through the madness of your Konfrontasi, bombing and killing civilians, through guess what? Stirring up religious and ethnic sensitivities.
CombinatioNova - 2022-10-16
The reason for this law is the emphasis the government has on disruption. There's a set area too that protesters can show up at, but you just can't block traffic or the flow of things. If Singaporeans believe in the cause, the protest will gain traction