First, harmoniously infuse the Malay, Chinese and Indian state of mind. Second, pack a population of 5.6 million into an area one fifth of the state of Rhode Island. Third, add in a few culinary establishments specializing in Tiger beer and chili crab. Do these three steps right, and you are well on your way to replicating the miracle that is Singapore.
All facetiousness aside, there is more nuance to the country’s essence than the items mentioned above. The miniscule metropolis historically known as temasek (derived from the old Javanese word tamasik, meaning sea town) earned its name due to its role as a bustling trading hub for merchants around the region. That term was coined during the 14th century. Seven centuries later, the identity of Singapore as a mercantile magnet has yet to fade off. It has arguably only strengthened.
What created such a success story for the small island? Was it natural resources? No, the country has none. Was it limited government, free speech, and maximum liberty for the people? Quite the opposite. Ironically, the free trade hub of Asia is a successful byproduct of intelligently engineered and implemented sets of top-down policies. Policies that veer closer to philosophies authoritarianism rather than liberal democracy.
A criticism that is often levied towards authoritarianism is its inevitable unfolding into political instability, economic inequality, and social strife. Mao’s China, Hitler’s Germany, and Pol Pot’s Cambodia are stark reminders of the potential horrors of overconcentration of power. But political heterogeneity and competitive elections were not the story behind Singapore’s success. Concentration of power was precisely what occurred during Singapore’s ascension from zero to hero.
Since the country’s attainment of internal self-governance in 1959, Singapore has been led by a single dominant party; the People’s Action Party (PAP) led famously by Lee Kuan Yew. For over 60 years, the PAP has democratically won at least 70% of the seats in parliament. The prime ministers of the country during that six-decade period were all members of the PAP. It would not be a stretch to assume the same pattern of events for the country’s soon-coming general election.
20 years ago, Lee Kuan Yew was questioned by CNN journalist Fareed Zakaria on the historically monopolistic nature of the Singaporean legislative and executive bodies. Zakaria barely finished asking the question when the father of Singapore interrupted and said: “It is not the business of the government to enable the opposition party to overturn us. Do you expect the republicans to help the democrats?”
Apart from the political homogeneity, the country’s stringent laws are also a reflection of its concentration of power over its citizens. This is a first world country that bans feeding pigeons in public, singing songs with offensive lyrics, and chewing gum. The country is fastidious on street cleanliness and take littering as a $10,000 offense. When it comes to their zero-tolerance policy on harmful drugs, the death penalty is a possible outcome for offenders.
Using the first principles approach utilized in the field of physics, Lee Kuan Yew envisioned and built — piece by piece — a country embodying the best that autocracy and democracy has to offer. The certainty and efficiency of autocratic regimes, as well as the dynamism and innovation of a liberal democracy. If there are two words that best describe the philosophy of the country, it is political fusion.
This fusion allows the country to make friends with practically anyone. From Nixon to Obama, Soekarno to Joko Widodo, Deng Xiaoping to Xi Jinping, Lee Kuan Yew has forged amicable relationships with his counterparts all over the world across multi-generational time spans. This is because he has built a nation that is both non-threatening ideologically and profitable economically to all parties involved. When you are both non-threatening and profitable at the same time, do not be surprised when business opportunities and friendships run your way.
The greatest asset of the first prime minister of Singapore was his ability to truly and unapologetically think for himself. The west has assumed democracy and liberty as unequivocally noble values — to the point where such concepts have been taken for granted. But this is a man who believed in discipline over democracy. It is discipline — not democracy — that leads to a country’s development. Singapore has shown that even the concept of freedom itself can be challenged and proved to be overrated.
The Singaporean paradox is this: The most worthwhile freedoms are the ones that are contained within intelligent constrictions. Without such constrictions, freedom for its own sake will lead to chaos — driven by the impulsivity and hedonism that is within every human being. Or in the words of the man himself: “The exuberance of democracy leads to undisciplined and disorderly conditions which are inimical to development.”
A land of freedom without constriction paves way for self-destructive behaviors such as drug use, gun violence, and insanitation. One only needs to look at the state of modern America to see what the Land of the Free has currently become.
“These are my choices…” said Lee Kuan Yew when asked about the stringent laws in Singapore. “I go by what is good governance, the things I aim to do.” The words “I” in that sentence hints of some form of authoritarianism, or at least what we often call a nanny state. As much of a proponent of liberal democracy and small government myself, I would have to make an exception for the efficacy of the nanny state — so long as the nanny is Lee Kuan Yew.