8 ms·

Why am I not surprised that it is Singapore doing this. That country is an authoritarian nanny state disguised as Disney Land. I have visited many times and h

Why am I not surprised that it is Singapore doing this. That country is an authoritarian nanny state disguised as Disney Land. I have visited many times and have lots of friends there. Nobody cares about freedom of the press because they are well paid and comfortable. They have truly figured out how to placate the masses.

qwtel 7y ago
> Nobody cares about freedom of the press because they are well paid and comfortable that's because freedom of press and similar rights are a uniquely western phenomenon that are --- despite what droves of its proponents will tell you --- derived from christian values that didn't and don't exist anywhere else. Many in the broader region don't care about freedom of press, while also being poorly paid and uncomfortable. No placation of masses needed.
- vorpalhex 7y ago
  > derived from christian values This is not quite correct. Christian values would be a strict theocracy with no freedom of the press. Liberal values descend from a robust view of agency, eg humanism which is more or less incompatible with strict interpretations of Christianity. Compatible with deism though.
  - diveanon 7y ago
    You are confusing catholicism with the teachings of christ. Two very different messages. Love your neighbor and judge others as you would judge yourself.
    - vorpalhex 7y ago
      No, I'm quoting directly from several hundred if not thousands of years of Jewish teachings which make up over half the bible. Christ mentioned very little on political structures, he certainly didn't vouch for democracy.
- flomble 7y ago
  > freedom of press and similar rights are a uniquely western phenomenon that are ... derived from christian values This is incorrect. Europe is quite unique in that since the advent of Christianity there has always existed a church separate from the state acting as a counterbalance thereto, and offering an alternative foundation of moral authority. Despite this, brutal suppression of all dissent and criticism of the political structure was almost always supported by the Church, which generally allied itself with dominant regimes (i.e. feudal rulers). It wasn't until the flurry of neoclassicist-inspired philosophising of the Enlightenment and the emergence of monied elites in a position to pressure the state to grant them rights that said rights were slowly granted. They often couched their arguments in terms of Christian doctrine, but this is just the incidental result of the dominance of the Christian religion in society at that time.
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    To be fair that was the Roman Catholic church, which also procecuted the former Christian communities all over Europe. It is mostly this consolidated form that supported suppression.
  - foldr 7y ago
    > They often couched their arguments in terms of Christian doctrine, but this is just the incidental result of the dominance of the Christian religion in society at that time. I wouldn't say that it's entirely incidental. Christianity is compatible with individualism in a way that some other religions are not.
rolltiide 7y ago
> That country is an authoritarian nanny state disguised as Disney Land. This was my observation about Monaco too. If people were poor and fighting for opportunities in that hamlet they would call it authoritarian. But since it isn't and is free from adversity it is viewed favorably (and the poor people can live across the street in France). Just a fascinating look into relative morality, or masquerading disdain of certain forms of government as a moral issue while ignoring others, as opposed to just the authoritarian nature of a particular government.
dehrmann 7y ago
Singapore strikes me as another outcome of a China-like single-party state. It's somewhat authoritarian, somewhat free. It's big on national unity, but unlike China, fully acknowledges the distinct cultures there. It's a very unique place.
- azernik 7y ago
  I have heard a China expert claim that this is the long-term goal of the Chinese Communist Party - a rich, authoritarian state with economic and (non-political) personal freedoms.
  - archibaldJ 7y ago
    A friend of mine in China talked about how Alicloud is pitching blockchains to the Chinese government for some internal uses. And the interesting thing is that the Singapore gov has already launched a blockchain marketplace for renewable energy and it's not a fintech PR move but a happening phenomenon right now where I've got friends moonlighting as energy salesman. So yeah, that's definitely what's happening now - a rich, authoritarian state with economic freedom in the making. Every year there are a number of selected Chinese officials that would visit Singapore as exchange students to study about city planning and the art of governance.
    - archibaldJ 7y ago
      Even this comment got fluctuated between upvotes and downvotes. Intriguing what the karma inflation does now. I've noticed the downvote behaviour is context-sensitive i.e. in regards to the article's content and the general sentiment around the reception.
  - humanrebar 7y ago
    ...for the Han Chinese? Seems like they could start with some more personal freedoms for the Uighurs fairly quickly if the goal was that magnanimous.
    - 7y ago
ulfw 7y ago
It's interesting to see people in the west often lauding Singapore for that and vilifying China if they do the same.
- Peckingjay 7y ago
  Most likely because Singapore is not also putting huge amount of people in detention camps and harvesting their organs. Maybe if they had the scale to do so they would, but that's not really the question when it comes to public opinion.
  - hopefulcynic 7y ago
    > Most likely because Singapore is not also putting huge amount of people in detention camps and harvesting their organs. To be fair, the chinese call it de-radicalization/re-education centers, which they set up after a few extremist separatist attacks which killed hundreds of people. And as for the organs, much of the west ( especially in europe ) take people's organs without their explicit consent (it's called opt-out organ "donation". > Maybe if they had the scale to do so they would, but that's not really the question when it comes to public opinion. Nonsense. It's called political expediency and the trade war. A decade ago, when china was our "friend", we were talking about "chimerica" and praising their handling of muslim extremists in xinjiang and china's help with our war on "muslim terrorists". A decade later and we are in the midst of a trade war and the propaganda changes.
    - ajscanlan 7y ago
      > And as for the organs, much of the west ( especially in europe ) take people's organs without their explicit consent (it's called opt-out organ "donation". I feel like equating the forcible harvesting of organs to opt out organ donation is extremely disingenuous.
      - hopefulcynic 7y ago
        I have a feeling that "forcible havesting of organs" is just propaganda. I remember hearing about "forcible harvesting of organs" of the falun gong 20 years ago when the west and china were going through a difficult period of china's ascension to the WTO. And once the "difficulties" were overcome, nothing about falun gong and the "organ harvesting". I also remember the propaganda about iraqi soldiers killing babies in hospitals which turned out to be a manufactured lie. I'm sure the chinese government does a lot of bad things, like every major government, but the 24/7 ridiculous "news" we are getting now, is just propaganda. I'm not a psychic, but I predicted the following when the trade war began. 1. "organ harvesting" ( to be fair I mistakenly assumed it would be tied to tibetans or the falun gong ) 2. hong kong protest ( just like during the pivot to asia 5 years ago ) 3. "chinese spies" or "politicians" magically defecting with outlandish stories 4. "international" awards ( nobel peace, think tank awards, whatever ) being awarded to politically expedient people And if things really escalate, then I'll make another prediction - yellow peril style propaganda. And of course, the chinese will also escalate their propaganda.
AceJohnny2 7y ago
> That country is an authoritarian nanny state disguised as Disney Land. (1993) "Disneyland with the Death Penalty", by William Gibson: https://www.wired.com/1993/04/gibson-2/ https://www.wired.com/1993/04/gibson-2/
Meph504 7y ago
>>"Nobody cares about freedom of the press because they are well paid and comfortable. They have truly figured out how to placate the masses." Could this not equally be applied to America?
- humanrebar 7y ago
  Any time Americans complain about the government, it's "freedom of the press". Given how much we are sick of Twitter nonsense, it seems the freedom is well established and heavily used.
- diveanon 7y ago
  I hate America as much as the next Mexican, but to compare the two speaks to how little you have traveled. The US has freedom of the press, Singapore does not. It really is that simple. I worry about my ability to enter Singapore after posting comments like this, which is a real concern that impacts my livelihood.
  - Meph504 7y ago
    Somehow you've mistaken a statement about the complaince of Americans due to the level of comfort we have, with the actual legal structure and rights available in two countries. Additionally, I don't hate America but readily admit we have our faults. Your statement about my travels, is equally inaccurate.
buboard 7y ago
Are they being forcefully held in the country?

qwtel 7y ago

> Nobody cares about freedom of the press because they are well paid and comfortable that's because freedom of press and similar rights are a uniquely western phenomenon that are --- despite what droves of its proponents will tell you --- derived from christian values that didn't and don't exist anywhere else. Many in the broader region don't care about freedom of press, while also being poorly paid and uncomfortable. No placation of masses needed.

vorpalhex 7y ago
> derived from christian values This is not quite correct. Christian values would be a strict theocracy with no freedom of the press. Liberal values descend from a robust view of agency, eg humanism which is more or less incompatible with strict interpretations of Christianity. Compatible with deism though.
- diveanon 7y ago
  You are confusing catholicism with the teachings of christ. Two very different messages. Love your neighbor and judge others as you would judge yourself.
  - vorpalhex 7y ago
    No, I'm quoting directly from several hundred if not thousands of years of Jewish teachings which make up over half the bible. Christ mentioned very little on political structures, he certainly didn't vouch for democracy.
flomble 7y ago
> freedom of press and similar rights are a uniquely western phenomenon that are ... derived from christian values This is incorrect. Europe is quite unique in that since the advent of Christianity there has always existed a church separate from the state acting as a counterbalance thereto, and offering an alternative foundation of moral authority. Despite this, brutal suppression of all dissent and criticism of the political structure was almost always supported by the Church, which generally allied itself with dominant regimes (i.e. feudal rulers). It wasn't until the flurry of neoclassicist-inspired philosophising of the Enlightenment and the emergence of monied elites in a position to pressure the state to grant them rights that said rights were slowly granted. They often couched their arguments in terms of Christian doctrine, but this is just the incidental result of the dominance of the Christian religion in society at that time.
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  To be fair that was the Roman Catholic church, which also procecuted the former Christian communities all over Europe. It is mostly this consolidated form that supported suppression.
- foldr 7y ago
  > They often couched their arguments in terms of Christian doctrine, but this is just the incidental result of the dominance of the Christian religion in society at that time. I wouldn't say that it's entirely incidental. Christianity is compatible with individualism in a way that some other religions are not.

rolltiide 7y ago

> That country is an authoritarian nanny state disguised as Disney Land. This was my observation about Monaco too. If people were poor and fighting for opportunities in that hamlet they would call it authoritarian. But since it isn't and is free from adversity it is viewed favorably (and the poor people can live across the street in France). Just a fascinating look into relative morality, or masquerading disdain of certain forms of government as a moral issue while ignoring others, as opposed to just the authoritarian nature of a particular government.

dehrmann 7y ago

Singapore strikes me as another outcome of a China-like single-party state. It's somewhat authoritarian, somewhat free. It's big on national unity, but unlike China, fully acknowledges the distinct cultures there. It's a very unique place.

azernik 7y ago
I have heard a China expert claim that this is the long-term goal of the Chinese Communist Party - a rich, authoritarian state with economic and (non-political) personal freedoms.
- archibaldJ 7y ago
  A friend of mine in China talked about how Alicloud is pitching blockchains to the Chinese government for some internal uses. And the interesting thing is that the Singapore gov has already launched a blockchain marketplace for renewable energy and it's not a fintech PR move but a happening phenomenon right now where I've got friends moonlighting as energy salesman. So yeah, that's definitely what's happening now - a rich, authoritarian state with economic freedom in the making. Every year there are a number of selected Chinese officials that would visit Singapore as exchange students to study about city planning and the art of governance.
  - archibaldJ 7y ago
    Even this comment got fluctuated between upvotes and downvotes. Intriguing what the karma inflation does now. I've noticed the downvote behaviour is context-sensitive i.e. in regards to the article's content and the general sentiment around the reception.
- humanrebar 7y ago
  ...for the Han Chinese? Seems like they could start with some more personal freedoms for the Uighurs fairly quickly if the goal was that magnanimous.
  - 7y ago

ulfw 7y ago

It's interesting to see people in the west often lauding Singapore for that and vilifying China if they do the same.

Peckingjay 7y ago
Most likely because Singapore is not also putting huge amount of people in detention camps and harvesting their organs. Maybe if they had the scale to do so they would, but that's not really the question when it comes to public opinion.
- hopefulcynic 7y ago
  > Most likely because Singapore is not also putting huge amount of people in detention camps and harvesting their organs. To be fair, the chinese call it de-radicalization/re-education centers, which they set up after a few extremist separatist attacks which killed hundreds of people. And as for the organs, much of the west ( especially in europe ) take people's organs without their explicit consent (it's called opt-out organ "donation". > Maybe if they had the scale to do so they would, but that's not really the question when it comes to public opinion. Nonsense. It's called political expediency and the trade war. A decade ago, when china was our "friend", we were talking about "chimerica" and praising their handling of muslim extremists in xinjiang and china's help with our war on "muslim terrorists". A decade later and we are in the midst of a trade war and the propaganda changes.
  - ajscanlan 7y ago
    > And as for the organs, much of the west ( especially in europe ) take people's organs without their explicit consent (it's called opt-out organ "donation". I feel like equating the forcible harvesting of organs to opt out organ donation is extremely disingenuous.
    - hopefulcynic 7y ago
      I have a feeling that "forcible havesting of organs" is just propaganda. I remember hearing about "forcible harvesting of organs" of the falun gong 20 years ago when the west and china were going through a difficult period of china's ascension to the WTO. And once the "difficulties" were overcome, nothing about falun gong and the "organ harvesting". I also remember the propaganda about iraqi soldiers killing babies in hospitals which turned out to be a manufactured lie. I'm sure the chinese government does a lot of bad things, like every major government, but the 24/7 ridiculous "news" we are getting now, is just propaganda. I'm not a psychic, but I predicted the following when the trade war began. 1. "organ harvesting" ( to be fair I mistakenly assumed it would be tied to tibetans or the falun gong ) 2. hong kong protest ( just like during the pivot to asia 5 years ago ) 3. "chinese spies" or "politicians" magically defecting with outlandish stories 4. "international" awards ( nobel peace, think tank awards, whatever ) being awarded to politically expedient people And if things really escalate, then I'll make another prediction - yellow peril style propaganda. And of course, the chinese will also escalate their propaganda.

AceJohnny2 7y ago

> That country is an authoritarian nanny state disguised as Disney Land. (1993) "Disneyland with the Death Penalty", by William Gibson: https://www.wired.com/1993/04/gibson-2/ https://www.wired.com/1993/04/gibson-2/

Meph504 7y ago

>>"Nobody cares about freedom of the press because they are well paid and comfortable. They have truly figured out how to placate the masses." Could this not equally be applied to America?

humanrebar 7y ago
Any time Americans complain about the government, it's "freedom of the press". Given how much we are sick of Twitter nonsense, it seems the freedom is well established and heavily used.
diveanon 7y ago
I hate America as much as the next Mexican, but to compare the two speaks to how little you have traveled. The US has freedom of the press, Singapore does not. It really is that simple. I worry about my ability to enter Singapore after posting comments like this, which is a real concern that impacts my livelihood.
- Meph504 7y ago
  Somehow you've mistaken a statement about the complaince of Americans due to the level of comfort we have, with the actual legal structure and rights available in two countries. Additionally, I don't hate America but readily admit we have our faults. Your statement about my travels, is equally inaccurate.

buboard 7y ago

Are they being forcefully held in the country?