Advertisement

Singapore’s Totalitarian Mass Society

  • Michael Haas
Chapter

Abstract

Although Singapore has elections and political parties and procedurally appears to be democratic, the government gradually undermined civil society and became totalitarian, leading to a gradual exit from the country by the educated population seeking to live under true democracy. The chapter describes in detail how one-party rule has been established, pressure groups have been outlawed, the media is controlled by the government with considerable censorship, efforts at thought control have been undertaken, the educational system and the military are tightly controlled, courts are politicized, and the government has even sought to control marriage practices. The result has been corporatist government, corruption, criminal injustice, deviant behavior, brainwashing, inequality and poverty, insultocratic behavior, racism, sexism, and out-migration. Even housing is under the thumb of the government. Danger lies in the fact that the Singapore case is being used as a model for China and that many of Singapore’s methods for undermining democracy describe how Donald Trump has operated as president of the United States.

References

  1. Ash, Timothy Garton (2017). “Is Europe Disintegrating?,” New York Review of Books, 64 (1): 24–26.Google Scholar
  2. Asia Watch (1989). Silencing All Critics: Human Rights Violations in Singapore. Washington, DC: Asia Watch.Google Scholar
  3. Asia Yearbook (1987). “Singapore.” In Asia Yearbook 1986. Hong Kong: Far Eastern Economic Review.Google Scholar
  4. Austin, W. Timothy (1989). “Crime and Control.” In The Management of Success: The Moulding of Modern Singapore, ed. Kernial S. Sandhu and Paul Wheatley, pp. 913–927. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  5. Baratham, Gopal (1994). The Caning of Michael Fay. Singapore: KRP Publications.Google Scholar
  6. Bell, Daniel A. (2015). The China Model and the Limits of Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bello, Walden, and Stephanie Rosenfeld (1990). Dragons in Distress: Asia’s Miracle Economies in Crisis. San Francisco: Food First.Google Scholar
  8. Bellows, T. J. (1970). The People’s Action Party of Singapore: The Building of New States. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bernstein, Dennis, and Leslie Kean (1997). “Singapore’s Blood Money,” The Nation, October 20: 11ff.Google Scholar
  10. Betts, Russell (1975). Multiracialism, Meritocracy, and the Malays of Singapore. Cambridge, MA: Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  11. Bhaskaran, Manu, Ho Seng Chee, Donald Low, Tan Kim Song, Sudhir Vadaketh, and Yeoh Lam Keong (2012). “Inequality and the Need for a New Social Compact,” Singapore Perspectives 2012. lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads. Accessed January 3, 2017.
  12. Brown, David (1993). “The Corporatist Management of Ethnicity in Contemporary Singapore.” In Singapore Changes Guard: Social, Political and Economic Directions in the 1990s, ed. Garry Rodan, Chap. 2. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  13. Browning, Christopher (2017). “Lessons for Hitler’s Rise,” New York Review of Books, 64 (7): 10, 12, 14.Google Scholar
  14. Buendia, Hernando Gomez, ed. (1989). Urban Crime: Global Trends and Policies. Tokyo: United Nations University.Google Scholar
  15. Buruma, Ian (1995). “The Singapore Way,” New York Review of Books, 52 (October 19): 70ff.Google Scholar
  16. Busch, Peter A. (1974). Legitimacy and Ethnicity: A Case Study of Singapore. Lexington, MA: Heath.Google Scholar
  17. Chan, Heng Chee (1989). “The PAP and the Structuring of the Political System.” In The Management of Success: The Moulding of Modern Singapore, ed. Kernial S. Sandu and Paul Wheatley, Chap. 3. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  18. Chan, Heng Wing (1994). “There Are Limits to Openness,” Straits Times (Weekly Edition), December 31: 23.Google Scholar
  19. Chan, Robin (2014). “Income + Wealth Inequality = More Trouble for Society,” Straits Times, February 11.Google Scholar
  20. Cheng Tun-Jen (1990). “Is the Dog Barking? The Middle Class and Democratic Movements in East Asian NIC’s,” International Studies Notes, 15 (1): 10–16, 40.Google Scholar
  21. Chew, Macdougal Sock Foon (1982). Ethnicity and Nationality in Singapore. Ann Arbor: Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  22. Chua, Beng-Huan (1995). Communitarian Ideology and Democracy in Singapore. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Chua, Beng Huat (2007). “Singapore in 2006: An Irritating and Irritated ASEAN Neighbor,” Asian Survey, 47 (1): 206–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Chua, Beng Huat (2008). “Singapore in 2007: High Wage Ministers and the Management of Gays and the Elderly,” Asian Survey, 48 (1): 55–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Chua, Mui Hoong (1994). “PM: No Erosion of My Authority Is Allowed; Respect for Office Must be Upheld,” Straits Times (Weekly Edition), December 10: 1.Google Scholar
  26. Clammer, John (1992). “Deconstructing Values: The Establishment of a National Ideology.” In Social, Political and Economic Directions in the 1990s, ed. Garry Rodan, pp. 34–51. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  27. Davies, Derek (2014). “The Press.” In The Singapore Puzzle, 2nd edn., ed. Michael Haas, Chap. 5. Los Angeles: Publishinghouse for Scholars.Google Scholar
  28. Deck, Richard A. (2014). “Foreign Policy.” In The Singapore Puzzle, 2nd edn., ed. Michael Haas, Chap. 7. Los Angeles: Publishinghouse for Scholars.Google Scholar
  29. Durkheim, Émile (1893). The Division of Labor in Society. New York: Free Press, 1949.Google Scholar
  30. Durkheim, Émile (1897). Suicide: A Study in Sociology. New York: Free Press, 1951.Google Scholar
  31. European Institute for Crime Prevention and Control (2010). International Statistics on Crime and Justice. Helsinki: European Institute for Crime Prevention and Justice.Google Scholar
  32. Far Eastern Economic Review (1988a). “An Interview with the Young Mr Lee,” Far Eastern Economic Review, June 2.Google Scholar
  33. Far Eastern Economic Review (1988b). “Regional Performance Figures,” Asia Yearbook, 1988: 6–7.Google Scholar
  34. Far Eastern Economic Review (1989a). “Cut and Thrust,” Far Eastern Economic Review, October 12: 17.Google Scholar
  35. Far Eastern Economic Review (1989b). “Lee States His Case,” Far Eastern Economic Review, October 12.Google Scholar
  36. Fetzer, Joel S., and Brandon Alexander Millan (2015). “The Causes of Emigration from Singapore: How Much Is Still Political?,” Critical Asian Studies, 47 (3): 462–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Frank, Beatrice S., Joseph C. Markowitz, Robert B. McKay, and Kenneth Roth (1990). The Decline in the Rule of Law in Singapore and Malaysia. New York: Lawyers Committee for Human Rights.Google Scholar
  38. Gabowitsch, Mischa (2017). Protest in Putin’s Russia. Cambridge, MA: Polity.Google Scholar
  39. Gamer, Robert E. (1972). The Politics of Urban Development in Singapore. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  40. George, T. S. C. (1973). Lee Kuan Yew’s Singapore. London: Deutsch.Google Scholar
  41. George, T. S. C. (1984). Lee Kuan Yew’s Singapore, 2nd edn. London: Deutsch.Google Scholar
  42. Haas, Michael, ed. (1999). The Singapore Puzzle, 1st edn. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  43. Haas, Michael, ed. (2014d). The Singapore Puzzle, 2nd edn. Los Angeles: Publishinghouse for Scholars. Citations May Refer to Several Chapters Written by the Editor.Google Scholar
  44. Haas, Michael (2016). How to Abolish Racism: Lessons from the State of Hawai’i. Lanham, MD: Lexington.Google Scholar
  45. Haas, Michael (2017a). International Relations Theory: Competing Empirical Paradigms. Lanham, MD: Lexington.Google Scholar
  46. Haas, Michael (2017b). Political Science Revitalized: Filling the Jigsaw Puzzle with Metatheory. Lanham, MD: Lexington.Google Scholar
  47. Hassan, Riaz, ed. (1976). Singapore: Society in Transition. Singapore: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Hassan, Riaz (1977). Families in Flats: A Study of Low Income Families in Public Housing. Singapore: Singapore University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Hassan, Riaz (1983). A Way of Dying: Suicide in Singapore. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Hiebert, Murray (1997). “Ring in the Old,” Far Eastern Economic Review, January 16: 16.Google Scholar
  51. Hill, Michael, and Lian Kwen Fee (1995). The Politics of Nation Building and Citizenship in Singapore. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ho Khai Leong (2000). The Politics of Policy-Making in Singapore. Singapore: Singapore University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Hooi, Joyce (2012). “Singapore’s Emigration Conundrum,” Business Times, www.sgclub.com/singapore, October 6. Accessed January 2, 2017.
  54. Hua, Wu Yin (1983). Class and Communalism in Malaya—Politics in a Dependent Capitalist State. London: Zed/Marram.Google Scholar
  55. Huntington, Samuel P. (1968). Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Indexmundi (2016). “Singapore Demographics Profile 2016,” indexmundi.com/Singapore. Accessed January 3, 2017.
  57. International Herald Tribune (1991). “Lee Kuan Yew Calls Glasnost Mistake,” International Herald Tribune, September 21–22.Google Scholar
  58. International Monetary Fund (2016). World Economic Outlook. Washington, DC: IMF.Google Scholar
  59. Iranian Prisoner (1997). “Letter from an Iranian Prisoner,” New York Review of Books, 44 (April 10): 52.Google Scholar
  60. Josey, Alex (1970). Democracy in Singapore: The 1970 By-Election. Singapore: Asia Pacific Press.Google Scholar
  61. Josey, Alex (1980). Lee Kuan Yew, 2 vols. Singapore: Times Books International.Google Scholar
  62. Josey, Alex (1986). Lee Kuan Yew: The Crucial Years. Singapore: Times Books International.Google Scholar
  63. Kamm, Henry (1995). “In Prosperous Singapore, Even the Elite Are Nervous About Speaking,” New York Times, August 13.Google Scholar
  64. Kang, Friar Joachim (1989). “The Review’s Defence,” Far Eastern Economic Review, October 19: 12.Google Scholar
  65. Kim, DaeJung (1994). “Is Culture Destiny? The Myth of Asia’s Anti-Democratic Values,” Foreign Affairs, 73 (6): 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Koh, Tommy (1987). “Article Contains Serious Errors and Omissions,” Straits Times, July 4: 22.Google Scholar
  67. Kornhauser, William (1959). The Politics of Mass Society. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  68. Krastev, Ivan (2014). Democracy Disrupted: The Politics of Global Protest. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Kurian, George Thomas (1989). World Encyclopedia of Police Forces and Penal Systems. New York: Facts on File.Google Scholar
  70. Lee, Don (2017b). “Trump Suggests He Might Ignore Rulings by WTO,” Los Angeles Times, March 3.Google Scholar
  71. Lee, Frances (2009). Beyond Ideology: Politics, Principle, and Partisanship in the U.S. Senate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  72. Lee, Kuan Yew (1970). “The Socialist Dilemma,” Straits Times, November 14: 8.Google Scholar
  73. Lee, Kuan Yew (2000). From Third World to First: The Singapore Story, 1965–2000; Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew. Singapore: Straits Times Press.Google Scholar
  74. Lee, Kuan Yew (2011). Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going. Singapore: Straits Times Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  75. Leong, Andrew Phang Boon (1983). “Jury Trial in Singapore and Malaysia: The Unmaking of a Legal Institution,” Malaya Law Review, 25 (July): 50–86.Google Scholar
  76. Lerner, Gerda (1986). The Creation of Patriarchy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Lewis, Matthew (1995a). “S’pore PM Wants Decent Press But Not ‘Bootlickers’,” Reuters, July 15.Google Scholar
  78. Lewis, Matthew (1995b). “Unusual Twist When Singapore Contempt Case Reopens,” Reuters, January 15.Google Scholar
  79. Liak, Teng Kiat (1987). “The Worries and Concerns Before the ISA Decision,” Straits Times, July 30: 13.Google Scholar
  80. Lim, Catherine (1994). “One Government, Two Styles,” Straits Times, September 20.Google Scholar
  81. Lim, Linda Yuen-Ching (1989a). “Social Welfare.” In The Management of Success: The Moulding of Modern Singapore, ed. Kernial S. Sandhu and Paul Wheatley, pp. 171–197. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  82. Lim, Paul Huat (1989b). The Authoritarian State in Singapore. Louvain, Belgium: Ph.D. dissertation, Catholic University of Louvain.Google Scholar
  83. Lingle, Christopher (1994). “The Smoke Over Parts of Asia Obscures Some Profound Concerns,” International Herald Tribune, October 7.Google Scholar
  84. Lingle, Christopher (1996). Singapore’s Authoritarian Capitalism: Asian Values, Free Market Illusions, and Political Dependency. Fairfax, VA: Locke Institute.Google Scholar
  85. Lingle, Christopher, and Kurt Wickman (2014). “Political Economy.” In The Singapore Puzzle, 2nd edn., ed. Michael Haas, Chap. 4. Los Angeles: Publishinghouse for Scholars.Google Scholar
  86. Lipset, Seymour Martin (1959). “Some Social Requisites of Democracy,” American Political Science Review, 53 (1): 69–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Lipset, Seymour Martin (1994). “The Social Requisites of Democracy Revisited: 1993 Presidential Address,” American Sociological Science Review, 59 (1): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Machiavelli, Niccolò (1515). Discourses on Livy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  89. Mahbubani, Kishore (1992). “The West and the Rest,” The National Interest, 28 (Summer): 3–13.Google Scholar
  90. Minchin, James (1986). No Man Is an Island: A Study of Lee Kuan Yew’s Singapore. Boston: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  91. Nair, Hashim, and Chee Heng Leng (1984). “Mahathir’s Genetic Dilemma.” In Designer Genes, IQ, Ideology and Biology, ed. Chee Heng Leng and Chan Chee Khoon, pp. 14–20. Kuala Lumpur: Institute for Social Analysis.Google Scholar
  92. Neher, Clark D. (2014). “The Case for Singapore.” In The Singapore Puzzle, 2nd edn., ed. Michael Haas, Chap. 3. Los Angeles: Publishinghouse for Scholars.Google Scholar
  93. New York Times (2017). “Singapore Orders Expulsion of American Academic,” New York Times, August 5.Google Scholar
  94. Ngerng, Roy (2014). “26 Percent of Singaporeans Live Below the Poverty Line in Singapore,” thehearttruths.com. Accessed January 3, 2017.
  95. O’Kane, Maggie (1995). “Eye of a Tiger,” The Guardian Weekly, May 20.Google Scholar
  96. Pastor, Rene (1997). “Singapore ‘Arrogance’ Haunts Ties with Neighbors,” Reuters, March 22.Google Scholar
  97. Pereira, Brendan (1994). “Subordinate Court Rules Set Out in Book,” Straits Times (Weekly Edition), December 31: 5.Google Scholar
  98. Pillai, M. G. G. (1996). “Singapore Not Yet Ready for Two-Party System,” SEASIA-L, July 18.Google Scholar
  99. Przeworski, Adam, Michael Alvarez, Jose Antonio Cheibub, and Fernando Limongi (1996). “What Makes Democracies Endure?,” Journal of Democracy, 7 (1): 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Pugh, Cedric (1989). “The Political Economy of Public Housing.” In The Management of Success: The Moulding of Modern Singapore, ed. Kernial S. Sandhu and Paul Wheatley, pp. 833–859. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  101. Quah, Jon S. T. (1985). “Public Housing.” In Government and Politics of Singapore, ed. John S. T. Quah, Heng Chee Chang, and Chee Meow Seah, pp. 233–259. Singapore: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  102. Quah, Jon S. T. (1995). “Controlling Corruption in City States: A Comparative Study of Hongkong and Singapore,” Crime, Law and Social Change, 22 (3): 391–414.Google Scholar
  103. Quah, Jon S. T., and Stella Quah (1989). “The Limits of Governmental Intervention.” In The Management of Success: The Moulding of Modern Singapore, ed. Kernial S. Sandhu and Paul Wheatley, pp. 102–127. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  104. Rajendran, Raj (1997). “Singapore Polls Left Scars, Opposition Leader Says,” Reuters, January 27.Google Scholar
  105. Ramzy, Austin (2017). “Charges Cast Spotlight on Singapore’s Strict Rules on Public Gatherings,” New York Times, November 29.Google Scholar
  106. Reuters (1995). “Singapore to Humiliate Sex Molester on Television,” Reuters, March 31.Google Scholar
  107. Reuters (1996). “Lee Says Singapore Still Adjusting to New Wealth,” Reuters, January 8.Google Scholar
  108. Rodan, Garry (1992). “The Growth of Singapore’s Middle Class and Its Political Significance.” In Singapore Changes Guard: Social, Political and Economic Directions in the 1990s, ed. Garry Rodan, pp. 52–71. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  109. Rodan, Garry (2005). “Singapore in 2004: Long-Awaited Leadership Transition,” Asian Survey, 45 (1): 140–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Rodan, Garry (2006). “‘Vibrant and Cosmopolitan’ Without Political Pluralism,” Asian Survey, 46 (1): 180–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Ryan, William (1970). Blaming the Victim. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  112. Salaff, Janet W. (1988). State and Family in Singapore: Restructuring a Developing Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  113. Seah, Chee Meow (1985). “Parapolitical Institutions.” In Government and Politics of Singapore, ed. John S. T. Quah, Heng Chee Chang, and Chee Meow Seah, pp. 173–194. Singapore: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  114. Seah, Chee Meow, and Linda Seah (1983). “Education Reform and National Integration.” In Singapore Development Policies and Trends, ed. Peter S. J. Chen, pp. 240–267. Singapore: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  115. Seow, Francis T. (1994). To Catch a Tartar: A Dissident in Lee Kuan Yew’s Prison. New Haven, CT: Yale Southeast Asia Studies, Yale Center for International and Area Studies.Google Scholar
  116. Seow, Francis T. (1998). The Media Enthralled: Singapore Revisited. Boulder, CO: Rienner.Google Scholar
  117. Seow, Francis T. (2014). “The Judiciary.” In The Singapore Puzzle, 2nd edn., ed. Michael Haas, Chap. 6. Los Angeles: Publishinghouse for Scholars.Google Scholar
  118. Singapore, Government of (1989). Singapore 1989. Singapore: Ministry of Communications and Information.Google Scholar
  119. Singh, Bilveer (1992). Whither PAP’s Dominance: An Analysis of Singapore’s 1991 General Elections. Petaling Jaya, Malaysia: Pelanduk.Google Scholar
  120. Tammey, Joseph B. (1996). The Struggle over Singapore’s Soul: Western Modernization and Asian Culture. New York: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Tan, Chong Kee (2007). “The Canary and the Crow: Sintercom and the State Tolerability Index.” In Renaissance Singapore? Economy, Culture, and Politics, ed. Kenneth Paul Tan, pp. 159–184. Singapore: Singapore University Press.Google Scholar
  122. Tan, Sai Siong (1994). “Hang on, the Government Does Listen to Feedback,” Straits Times (Weekly Edition), December 24: 13.Google Scholar
  123. Tay, Simon S. C. (2000). “Introduction.” In A Mandarin and the Making of Public Policy, ed. Simon S. C. Tay. Singapore: Singapore National University Press.Google Scholar
  124. Tham, Seong Chee (1989). “The Perception and Practice of Education.” In The Management of Success: The Moulding of Modern Singapore, ed. Kernial S. Sandhu and Paul Wheatley, pp. 477–502. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  125. Tremewan, Christopher (1994). The Political Economy of Social Control in Singapore. New York: St. Martin’s Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Turnbull, C. M. (1989). A History of Singapore, 1819–1988, 2nd edn. Singapore: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  127. Vasil, Raj K. (1984). Governing Singapore: Interviews with the New Leaders. Singapore: Times Books International.Google Scholar
  128. Vines, Steve (1987). “The Deepening Tendency to Control,” Honolulu Star-Bulletin & Advertiser, September 1: E1.Google Scholar
  129. Weaver, James H., and Marguerite Berger (1984). “The Marxist Critique of Dependency Theory: An Introduction.” In The Political Economy and Development and Underdevelopment, 3rd edn., ed. Charles K. Wilber, Chap. 4. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  130. Wikipedia (2016). “Singapore,” wikipedia.com. Accessed December 23, 2016.
  131. Wilson, H. E. (1978). Social Engineering in Singapore. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  132. Wong, Jacqueline (1997). “Violent Youth Rebel in Singapore,” Reuters, May 7.Google Scholar
  133. World Bank (2010). “Emigration Rate of Tertiary Educated (% of Total Tertiary Educated Population,” data.worldbank.org. Accessed January 2, 2017.
  134. Yap, Mui Teng (1989). “The Demographic Base.” In The Management of Success: The Moulding of Modern Singapore, ed. Kernial S. Sandu and Paul Wheatley, pp. 455–476. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Haas
    • 1
  1. 1.Los AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations