8 Feb 2005
Lee-wise democracy
RANJAN ROY
[ SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 05, 2005 11:11:39 PM ]
Voting has almost nothing to do with being a democracy. It's only one of the necessary conditions. Singapore votes regularly, but catch any serious political analyst listing the rich Asian city-state as a free democracy.
Elections are held regularly in Malaysia too. But Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew and Malyasia's Mahathir Mohammad have railed regularly against Western notions of democracy. The Lee school of thought offers authoritarian rulers legitimacy to keep opponents in jail, curb political dissent and share the spoils with the pliable. Both Lee and Mahathir, who have relinquished office but wield power, have argued that Asian values don't translate to unfettered political freedoms.
There has to be respect for the state, elders and hierarchy. Besides, too much democracy can hinder economic growth.
Functioning cacophony
India, in sharp contrast, now proves there isn't any contradiction between a healthy economy and a flourishing democracy. Read more...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
And in Singapore, they have full employment and absolutely no poverty at all.
Every country has its ills. In some countries, via protest, and trade unions, you can tell the government about those ills. And make them listen.
I thought the writer was simply saying that Lee's argument of econommic progress and tight control, is questionable.
What is needed for prosperity is good governance rather than authoritarianism, and democracy tends to be more likely to deliver that.
Unions are the curse of any society. They engage in protectionist rhetoric and economic rent-seeking.
Protests are often led by psuedo-intellectuals bereft of logic, rationality and original thinking. They often forget the reason for their protests.
Have you every been a member of a trade union?
Have you ever been fired in Singapore or worked like a horse into the ground by your boss? Have you ever worked excessive anti-social hours yet never been compensated in monetary terms?
Some view trade unions, when autonomous from the state, as good means of communication between management and the employees. It enables the employees to voice their opinion and negotiate with management in order to improve working conditions, and the overall culture of the business.
But in Singapore, everyone just votes with their feet. And job-hopping is very common. So how can conditions improve if the employees can not voice their opinion and the business, and working conditions never improve.
gk
I worked in Singapore for 5 years and moved job, twice. The staff turnover was high compared to what I had experienced in the UK. And the management in Singapore didn't seem to notice or care. All they seemed to be concerned with, was that someone, anyone was filling the gap.
Have you seen shareholder value destroyed by strikes? Have you seen companies on the verge of bankruptcy get dragged further into economic destruction by unions which are too aggressive?
India has a sluggish economy compared to communist China. While I think democracy is generally good, India is one of the worst examples I can think of.
Post a Comment