Advertisement

New Politics and Old Managerialism: Welcome to the New Normal

  • Michael D. BarrEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The 2015 General Election in Singapore has confirmed that the ruling elite’s hold on the country after the death of ‘founding father’ Lee Kuan Yew is as strong as it ever was, and that electoral politics is unlikely to produce dramatic political change in the medium term—perhaps not even in the long term. The death of any prospect of democratic renewal does not, however, mean that nothing has changed. I argue that a very important shift has taken place in the basis of the regime’s claims to legitimacy. Singapore has been operating as a technocratic authoritarian regime since the early 1990s, using the rhetoric, rationale and regeneration methods derived from the claims and logic of professionalism and technocratic perfection. This rationale has grown alongside and become intertwined with a growing cult centred on Lee Kuan Yew. I argue that since 2011, the ruling elite has been relying less on technocratic rationales for regime legitimation and regeneration, and more on populism built around the Lee family, resulting in a system of populist managerialism centred on minimal standards of performance and the centrality of the Lee family in the national mythology. The likely implications of this shift include a slide from high standards of governance and the degeneration of the body politic into commonplace managerialism and authoritarianism underpinned by the power of the Lee brand.

Bibliography

  1. Bloomberg. (2011, April 21). Singapore’s Lee Says Immigration Policy Benefited Citizens.Google Scholar
  2. Barr, M.D. (2016a). Ordinary Singapore: The Decline of Singapore Exceptionalism, Journal of Contemporary Asia, 46(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barr, M.D. (2016b). The Lees of Singapore: A quality brand, South East Asia Research, 24(3), 341–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barr, M.D. (2014a). The Ruling Elite of Singapore: Networks of Power and Influence, London: I.B.Tauris.Google Scholar
  5. Barr, M.D. (2014b). The Bonsai under the Banyan Tree: Democracy and Democratisation in Singapore, Democratization, 21(1), 29–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barr, M.D. (2008). Singapore: The Limits of a Technocratic Approach to Health Care, Journal of Contemporary Asia, 38(3), 395–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barr, M.D. (2006). Beyond Technocracy: The Culture of Elite Governance in Lee Hsien Loong’s Singapore Asian Studies Review, 30(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barr, M.D. (2000). Lee Kuan Yew: The Beliefs behind the Man, Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press.Google Scholar
  9. Channel NewsAsia. (2015, August 23). NDR2015: No easy choices on immigration and foreigners, says PM Lee.Google Scholar
  10. Channel NewsAsia. (2015, September 4). Shanmugam “very troubled” by report questioning shift to populist measures.Google Scholar
  11. Channel NewsAsia. (2016, March 16). Guidelines issued on use of name and image of Lee Kuan Yew.Google Scholar
  12. Chua B.H. (2007). Political Culturalism, Representation and the People’s Action Party of Singapore, Democratization, 14(5), 911–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Han, F.K., Zuraidah, I., Chua M.H., Lim, L., Low, I., Lim, R. and Chan, R. (2001). Lee Kuan Yew: Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going, Straits Times Press.Google Scholar
  14. Harper, T.N. (2001). Lim Chin Siong and the Singapore Story. In Tan J.Q. and Jomo K.S. (Eds), Comet in our Sky: Lim Chin Siong in History (pp. 3–55) Kuala Lumpur: Vinlin Press.Google Scholar
  15. Jeyaretnam, K. (2015). Interview on election night, Channel NewsAsia, 11 September.Google Scholar
  16. Josey, A. (1980 [2013 edition]). Lee Kuan Yew: The Critical Years (1971–1978), Singapore: Marshall CavendishGoogle Scholar
  17. Josey, A. (1968 [1980 edition]). Lee Kuan Yew: The Crucial Years, Singapore; Kuala Lumpur: Times Books International.Google Scholar
  18. Koh, E. (2010). Singapore Stories: Language, Class and the Chinese of Singapore 1945–2000, Amherst, New York: Cambria Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kwa C.G., Heng, D. and Tan, T.Y. (2009). Singapore: A 700-year History from Early Emporium to World City, Singapore: National Archives of Singapore.Google Scholar
  20. Lee H.L. (2013). Singapore Perspectives 2013 – Panel IV: Dialogue with Guest of Honour Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. Institute of Policy Studies, Singapore. Available on YouTube.Google Scholar
  21. Lee H.L. (2016). Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong Apology Speech – Nurses as Low Skilled Worker, YouTube.Google Scholar
  22. Lee H.L. (2015). English Speech by Secretary General Lee Hsien Loong (9 September), available on YouTube. Uploaded by PeopleActionPartyHQ.Google Scholar
  23. Lee H.L. (2007). Speech by Mr Lee Hsien Loong, Prime Minister, at Parliamentary Debate on Civil Service Salary Revisions, 11 April. Available at National Archives of Singapore.Google Scholar
  24. Lee H.L. (2005). Speech by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at the 2005 Administrative Service Dinner, 24 March 2005. Available on Sprinter [Singapore Government news service].Google Scholar
  25. Lee, T. and Tan, K.Y.L. (eds) (2016). Change in Voting: Singapore’s 2015 General Election, Singapore: Ethos Books.Google Scholar
  26. Lee W.L. (2016). Facebook posting of 25 March 2016 at https://www.facebook.com/weiling.lee.980/posts/214054645616853. Accessed 26 September 2016.
  27. Micklethwait, J. and Wooldridge, A. (2014). The State of the State: The Global Contest for the Future of Government, Foreign Affairs, 93(4), 118–32.Google Scholar
  28. Rodan, G. (2016). Capitalism, Inequality and Ideology in Singapore: New Challenges for the Ruling Party, Asian Studies Review, 40(2), 211–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rodan, G. (2012). Consultative Authoritarianism and Regime Change Analysis: Implications of the Singapore Case. In Richard Robison (Ed.), Routledge Handbook of Southeast Asian Politics (pp. 120–134) London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Rodan, G. (2009). New Modes of Political Participation and Singapore’s Nominated Members of Parliament, Government and Opposition, 44, 438–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rodan, G. (1989). The Political Economy of Singapore’s Industrialization: National State and International Capital, Kuala Lumpur: Forum.Google Scholar
  32. Schedler, A. (2006). The Logic of Electoral Authoritarianism. In Andreas Schedler (Ed.), Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition (pp. 1–26) Boulder, CO and London: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  33. South China Morning Post. (2015, March 30). The Lee Kuan Yew Dividend.Google Scholar
  34. Tan, K.P. (2009). Who’s Afraid of Catherine Lim? The State in Patriarchal Singapore, Asian Studies Review, 33(1), 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tan, K.Y.L. (2005). An Introduction to Singapore’s Constitution, Singapore: Talisman, 2005.Google Scholar
  36. Tan, K.Y.L. and Lee, T. (eds) (2011). Voting in Change: Politics of Singapore’s 2011 General Election, Singapore: Ethos Books.Google Scholar
  37. The Financial Times. (2017, June 14). Singapore’s first family feud over “big brother”.Google Scholar
  38. The Straits Times. (1994, December 4). PM Goh Remains Committed to Consultation and Consensus PoliticsGoogle Scholar
  39. Today. (2011, May 3). George Yeo too important for Cabinet to lose: SM Goh.Google Scholar
  40. Today Online. (2015, September 8) Why AHPETC is a national issue in 2015.Google Scholar
  41. Vadaketh, S.T. (2017). Musings from Singapore: some final thoughts on Oxley. https://sudhirtv.com/2017/07/21/some-final-thoughts-on-oxley/. Accessed 21 July 2017.
  42. Yap, S., Lim, R. and Leong, W.K. (2009). Men in White: The Untold Story of Singapore’s Ruling Political Party, Singapore: Singapore Press Holdings.Google Scholar

News Services

  1. Bloomberg, 2011Google Scholar
  2. Channel NewsAsia, 2015, 2016Google Scholar
  3. South China Morning Post, 2015Google Scholar
  4. The Financial Times, 2017Google Scholar
  5. The New Paper Online, 2015Google Scholar
  6. The Online Citizen, 2015Google Scholar
  7. The Straits Times, 1994Google Scholar
  8. The Straits Times Online, 2015Google Scholar
  9. Today, 2011Google Scholar
  10. Today Online, 2015Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Business, Government and Law, Flinders UniversityAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations