3 ms·

> Also notice that Singapore seems to be saying: Please don't ask us to pick sides ... > The US may have fewer friends in Asia than it assumes. Isn't Singapor

> Also notice that Singapore seems to be saying: Please don't ask us to pick sides ... > The US may have fewer friends in Asia than it assumes. Isn't Singapore political system famously authoritarian capitalist and its people ethnically Chinese? It might be a mistake as viewing it too much of a representative of the rest of Asia. It sounds very similar to contemporary China, in many respects, so it may have an unusually strong affinity to it. https://www.hrw.org/asia/singapore https://www.hrw.org/asia/singapore: > Singapore’s political environment is stifling. Citizens face severe restrictions on their basic rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly through overly broad criminal laws and regulations. In 2017, the country tightened the already strict limits on public assemblies contained in the Public Order Act, which requires police permits for any “cause-related” assembly outside the closely monitored “Speakers’ Corner.”

heraclius 7y ago
> Isn't Singapore political system famously authoritarian capitalist Most of Southeast Asia is increasingly authoritarian. > its people ethnically Chinese? Mostly (this is a trivial Google), but importantly not entirely. Singapore was the last country to recognise the PRC instead of Taiwan. This was for good reason. First, Singapore maintains internal harmony by pretending to be multiracial. (It isn’t, obviously—the best candidate for the PM by far was ignored because “the people aren’t ready for a non-Chinese PM”, even though he was the most popular.) This involves insisting on English translators when visiting China, asserting independence, doing military drills in Taiwan, etc. Second, Singapore historically had to do the same thing to convince its neighbours that it was not a Chinese puppet. But the crucial difference is that Singapore optimises for minimal oppression given a certain developmental outcome, whereas China doesn’t. Repression in Xinjiang, the Tienanmen Square massacre, current crackdowns on liberal thinktanks, etc. are not necessary to secure the régime. No Singaporean government would bother. (That is why New Naratif is still around.) Singapore is in fact qualitatively distinct from almost all other authoritarian states in that it requires extremely little oppression in view of the outcomes achieved compared to any other state, where the tradeoff is much worse.

heraclius 7y ago

> Isn't Singapore political system famously authoritarian capitalist Most of Southeast Asia is increasingly authoritarian. > its people ethnically Chinese? Mostly (this is a trivial Google), but importantly not entirely. Singapore was the last country to recognise the PRC instead of Taiwan. This was for good reason. First, Singapore maintains internal harmony by pretending to be multiracial. (It isn’t, obviously—the best candidate for the PM by far was ignored because “the people aren’t ready for a non-Chinese PM”, even though he was the most popular.) This involves insisting on English translators when visiting China, asserting independence, doing military drills in Taiwan, etc. Second, Singapore historically had to do the same thing to convince its neighbours that it was not a Chinese puppet. But the crucial difference is that Singapore optimises for minimal oppression given a certain developmental outcome, whereas China doesn’t. Repression in Xinjiang, the Tienanmen Square massacre, current crackdowns on liberal thinktanks, etc. are not necessary to secure the régime. No Singaporean government would bother. (That is why New Naratif is still around.) Singapore is in fact qualitatively distinct from almost all other authoritarian states in that it requires extremely little oppression in view of the outcomes achieved compared to any other state, where the tradeoff is much worse.