Advanced
And a little divided
After 41 years, Singapore's no longer an entity that can be ruled
by Lee Kuan Yew's old ways.
By Seah Chiang Nee, littlespeck.com
Aug 13, 2006
If Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had indeed been groomed for
leadership during his teens, as popularly believed here, nothing
could possibly have prepared him for the Singapore that he leads
today.
In fact, the island republic, its people and the world around him
have changed so dramatically since his schooldays that his job has
been made more complex compared to his father Lee Kuan Yew's.
One of the characteristics of the modern, globalised Singapore is
that society has become more diverse - and divided.
After 41 years of independence, national cohesiveness, one of its
early pillars of strength, is showing signs of erosion.
Kuan Yew presided over a poorly educated and unquestioning
population by offering it a better - but authoritarian - life that
was accepted. He was helped by an Asian value of obedience to
authority and reluctance to take a forceful position on any
matter.
Today's better-educated Singaporeans with whom Hsien Loong has to
work with are largely individualistic, self-centred, more
argumentative and have values that often run counter to the
previous generation's.
Words like "discipline", "consensus" and "authoritarianism", which
were once tolerated as necessary - if not admired - no longer stir
up the same emotions when used by Hsien Loong.
Then there is the Internet, which has propelled Singapore into an
advanced nation but which is also helping to promote diversities
(which is good) and divisiveness (which is bad).
Besides, Singapore has become a more international city, with many
citizens having newly arrived from abroad armed with admiration but
little loyalty towards this place.
Most youths - local or abroad - do not feel as beholden or bonded
with the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) as the previous
generation.
"If you raise any subject - casinos, or hanging, or politics,
anything at all - you're likely to run into disagreement with
somebody who has other ideas," said a retired architect.
Lee Kuan Yew's "consensus" society is largely gone, he added.
It is not just people-versus-government but also
people-versus-people.
The elite social clubs are not spared, and some would say they are
particularly prone to differences of views. Some of their personal
quarrels have ended up as defamation court cases.
Whether it is the outcome of better knowledge, uniformity has
become a casualty. Singapore has become more divided although not
as much as in America, where every statement has detractors.
Not all consider it a bad thing for Singapore. In a creative,
global economy, some consider that contrasting opinions, well
argued, are a big plus.
On Wednesday, PM Lee led Singaporeans to celebrate the republic's
National Day, marking its separation from Malaysia in 1965, when he
was a 13-year-old secondary schoolboy.
As a student, Hsien Loong learned Russian in anticipation of the
Soviet Union emerging as a global economic (and political) power,
which would benefit any Asian leader who could speak the
language.
It didn't happen that way, of course, which shows how global
developments can waste the best-laid plans. So can changing
technology and new consumer tastes.
Forty-one years ago, Singapore had much of what it lacks today but
in some things, life was better and simpler.
In those years, Kuan Yew and his PAP colleagues had governed a
cohesive population, never needing any incentive - or disincentive
- to win elections.
The first generation under their charge was less knowledgeable but
people were uniformly responsive to Lee's policies, even unpopular
ones.
Both the governed and the governing enjoyed a deep trust and
natural bond, which are not so evident today.
"In the past, the PAP did not hand out pre-election budget surplus
or use estate upgrading or resort to group constituencies, yet the
votes kept coming in," said an old-timer. "Elections were
one-against-one and the PAP always won with big majorities."
It is unlikely that such a relationship will return.
Whereas Kuan Yew relied on superior logic and tough punishment to
rule, his son cannot do that. Hsien Loong still needs logic, but he
can't use the cane to gain support. Persuasion, yes, but not
force.
He faces a difficult task, his predecessor Goh Chok Tong once
observed, because smallish Singapore would encounter increasing
competition from larger, smarter countries.
The following difficulties lie ahead for Hsien Loong, or whoever is
in charge, who wants to re-establish cohesion: -
* A widening gap between rich and poor as the city moves towards
higher tech and greater affluence.
* Gaps also exist between an elite class and the rest of society
and this may widen as meritocracy is rewarded with huge salary
schemes, while the unskilled ends up struggling at the bottom
without a safety net.
* Now within manageable limits, the resentment of Singaporeans over
foreigners taking over local jobs may worsen in the future. The
government is inviting more "foreign talents" to come and make
Singapore their home.
* In future, the generational rift between old and young may
worsen, steadily eroding the Asian values of respect for the
elderly and filial piety.
(Thankfully, the race-religion divide, once Singapore's biggest
threat, has faded somewhat, although it will probably never
disappear.)
* More Singaporeans may be preparing to emigrate. Despite growing
wealth, some 53% of the people say they are prepared to migrate to
a foreign country, a higher figure compared to others in the
region.
For Lee Hsien Loong, failure in moulding a united nation may be
very serious. A divided America may still flourish because of its
size and knowledge, but for a small city of four million, disunity
could be life threatening.
unfortunately the old man is still clinging on. sigh.......