13 ms·

I'm Singaporean, and completely not surprised to see this appear on HN. As with many places, the situation in my country is a bit more nuanced than a simple "t

I'm Singaporean, and completely not surprised to see this appear on HN. As with many places, the situation in my country is a bit more nuanced than a simple "the ruling party has ruled the country since 1965". Civilisation is the surrender of varying degrees of civil liberty for security and safety, and over here we definitely surrender more degrees of civil liberty for the safety and security of our streets. As another user put it, essentially a benevolent dictatorship, emphasis on the benevolent. For the most part, the ruling party has done a good job with the administration of the government. Things are fast and efficient. Is it worth the trade? It depends on your perspective. Even as a liberal, I agree that the paternalism of the government is not without its merits. There were quite a lot of push-back on the POFMA (what the fake news law is called) among the people, though our politicians, no doubt because of their same-party membership, barely discussed anything concrete in our parliamentary debates. In the end, the law was passed because of course it would be.

rorykoehler 7y ago
I’ve lived in Singapore and agree with your post but I also have an uneasy feeling that it won’t last much longer. This government have and continue to make some big (IMO) mistakes especially in the areas of planning and mobility. Hopefully this is managed better by the next government.
- qeng-ho 7y ago
  I agree, especially with the uneasy feeling that it wouldn't last much longer; the challenge of the first 50 years of Singapore was economical, and the heavy-handedness of the government was a result of that. The challenge of the next 50, in contrast, is cultural and about her people, and I don't think the government as it is, is capable of shifting gears.
RavlaAlvar 7y ago
Genuinely asking. Do most of the population believe Singapore’s authoritarian government would stay benevolent??
- irjustin 7y ago
  As an US expat living in SG, I would say yes. Singapore is the first place where I actually began to question whether democracy was the absolute way. Democracy was how I was raised. Overall, I still believe it is the way long term, but what can you do when you have a single, unified government that cares for its people is simply amazing. Safest in the world, hands down. This can be felt in every day life. I hold tables while I get my lunch with my cell phone. I've even dared it in public "hawker centers" a number of times. My friends have had stuff stolen, but that was in the bathroom where there's no "watchful eye". My kid can run/play freely and I only worry about her running into traffic. A about 1-2 years ago, someone was stabbed to death in the central business district. It was the biggest headline for ages - murder of passion from father-in-law. That's it... nothing else. I don't think/worry about guns - ever. "Hawker Centers" are basically food for the people. Each meal can be had for US$2-4. I live in public housing, HDB, and while that sounds weird - 70%+ is public housing. i.e. only PR or citizens may purchase (I can rent as an expat). This keeps the price of homes at a relatively reasonable amount. US$250k - US$600k. Housing is not perfect but it is way better than stateside problems. There are dark sides, do not get me wrong (built on the backs of migrant workers who can never gain status - is just one. Black and Chinese built US but gained status eventually... migrants can never gain status here and continue to build this country), but they're not nearly as dark as others. Is it worth it? I say if you are willing to submit yourself, it completely is.
  - distances 7y ago
    Is the safety and honesty embedded in the culture now? That's how Nordic countries keep things straight -- not by police force, and they're indeed some of the leanest police forces in the world. I'm basically wondering if you could change Singapore to a Nordic style democracy and keep the upsides you speak of just by the force of culture?
    - 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
      Singapore has lot more underlying tensions than a Nordic country: massive wealth inequality, different races with different languages and religions, a huge barely-human migrant worker underclass, etc. The ruling party uses this as an convenient excuse to justify everything they do, but there's a grain of truth to it as well. That said, yes, I think safety and honesty are fairly embedded. Yesterday, the case of somebody trying to bribe a condo rentacop to overlook their (illegal) AirBnB guest made the news: the guard refused the $50, reported the bribery attempt to the police, and the offender was sent to jail for a week: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/pacific-mansion-condo-tenant-jailed-bribe-security-guard-airbnb-12133824 https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/pacific-mansi... In most neighboring countries, if this kind of thing made headlines, the news would have nothing else.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
mclightning 7y ago
>> Civilisation is the surrender of varying degrees of civil liberty for security and safety. That's a pretty reductivist way to define civilisation... From this definition; It sounds to me like there is a certain character/type of people who are redeemed as Civilized based on Govt definition. Thus justifies heavy control over society. "As a liberal", wouldn't it be more favourable to design the system around liberty of choice for the individual rather than control of a central power?
- humanrebar 7y ago
  > That's a pretty reductivist way to define civilisation... Agreed. I would consider banning slavery as more civilized, but it is an expansion of civil liberties. Same with having general freedom of expression. Any thug can ban "lies" he doesn't like. Kings used to declare themselves gods and execute dissenters.
  - magduf 7y ago
    >I would consider banning slavery as more civilized, but it is an expansion of civil liberties. It's an expansion of civil liberties for one group (the enslaved), at the cost of limiting the civil liberties of another group (the former slave owners): you're preventing the slave owners from exercising their freedom to enslave people and force them to work. >Same with having general freedom of expression. Any thug can ban "lies" he doesn't like. Same here. Even a law that bans yelling "fire!" in a crowded theater is infringing on the civil liberties of people to speak freely and cause chaos. Personally, I'm perfectly happy with these infringements of civil liberty. It's better for society to avoid needless chaos from people shouting "fire!" and to prevent people from being enslaved. But they are limiting absolute freedom.
- qeng-ho 7y ago
  It is deliberately reductive because I was hoping not to get into a debate about personal freedoms. If you disagree, try telling the police that they have no right to infringe on your personal freedom when they stop you for drink-driving. Or theft. Or even jay-walking. To be in a society, any kind of society, involves giving up personal freedoms in exchange for something, usually safety or stability. We just have a different idea of what's an acceptable loss of personal freedom. I agree that it'd be favourable to design the system about personal freedom, but that system comes with its own inefficiencies and disadvantages that by large my country deem unacceptable. Unfortunately, Singapore is still largely a pragmatic and conservative society that min-maxes for economic stability, and it'd be long before this changes.
onetimemanytime 7y ago
>>I'm Singaporean, and completely not surprised to see this appear on HN....Civilisation is the surrender of varying degrees of civil liberty for security and safety ...We're just debating the word "varying" and might not agree with your conclusion.
- qeng-ho 7y ago
  To quote what I replied to another user: If you disagree, try telling the police that they have no right to infringe on your personal freedom when they stop you for drink-driving. Or theft. Or even jay-walking. To be in a society, any kind of society, involves giving up personal freedoms in exchange for something, usually safety or stability. We just have a different idea of what's an acceptable loss of personal freedom.
  - buboard 7y ago
    Ideally we d be able to switch citizenships, and let the best government win us. Unfortunately its not possible, though i would like the idea of an airbnb for citizenships
SenHeng 7y ago
I’m an ex Singaporean and I remember the good old ‘politics is for politicians and civilians should stay out’ days in the 90s. This _ruling party_ is benevolent when it suits them.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
astrobe_ 7y ago
> over here we definitely surrender more degrees of civil liberty for the safety and security of our streets It seems to me that you don't have to surrender so much, but I am totally unaware of your situation. And maybe I am desensitized to the lack of safety. I want to ask, what are the threats, and what is your exposure to them?

rorykoehler 7y ago

I’ve lived in Singapore and agree with your post but I also have an uneasy feeling that it won’t last much longer. This government have and continue to make some big (IMO) mistakes especially in the areas of planning and mobility. Hopefully this is managed better by the next government.

qeng-ho 7y ago
I agree, especially with the uneasy feeling that it wouldn't last much longer; the challenge of the first 50 years of Singapore was economical, and the heavy-handedness of the government was a result of that. The challenge of the next 50, in contrast, is cultural and about her people, and I don't think the government as it is, is capable of shifting gears.

RavlaAlvar 7y ago

Genuinely asking. Do most of the population believe Singapore’s authoritarian government would stay benevolent??

irjustin 7y ago
As an US expat living in SG, I would say yes. Singapore is the first place where I actually began to question whether democracy was the absolute way. Democracy was how I was raised. Overall, I still believe it is the way long term, but what can you do when you have a single, unified government that cares for its people is simply amazing. Safest in the world, hands down. This can be felt in every day life. I hold tables while I get my lunch with my cell phone. I've even dared it in public "hawker centers" a number of times. My friends have had stuff stolen, but that was in the bathroom where there's no "watchful eye". My kid can run/play freely and I only worry about her running into traffic. A about 1-2 years ago, someone was stabbed to death in the central business district. It was the biggest headline for ages - murder of passion from father-in-law. That's it... nothing else. I don't think/worry about guns - ever. "Hawker Centers" are basically food for the people. Each meal can be had for US$2-4. I live in public housing, HDB, and while that sounds weird - 70%+ is public housing. i.e. only PR or citizens may purchase (I can rent as an expat). This keeps the price of homes at a relatively reasonable amount. US$250k - US$600k. Housing is not perfect but it is way better than stateside problems. There are dark sides, do not get me wrong (built on the backs of migrant workers who can never gain status - is just one. Black and Chinese built US but gained status eventually... migrants can never gain status here and continue to build this country), but they're not nearly as dark as others. Is it worth it? I say if you are willing to submit yourself, it completely is.
- distances 7y ago
  Is the safety and honesty embedded in the culture now? That's how Nordic countries keep things straight -- not by police force, and they're indeed some of the leanest police forces in the world. I'm basically wondering if you could change Singapore to a Nordic style democracy and keep the upsides you speak of just by the force of culture?
  - 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
    Singapore has lot more underlying tensions than a Nordic country: massive wealth inequality, different races with different languages and religions, a huge barely-human migrant worker underclass, etc. The ruling party uses this as an convenient excuse to justify everything they do, but there's a grain of truth to it as well. That said, yes, I think safety and honesty are fairly embedded. Yesterday, the case of somebody trying to bribe a condo rentacop to overlook their (illegal) AirBnB guest made the news: the guard refused the $50, reported the bribery attempt to the police, and the offender was sent to jail for a week: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/pacific-mansion-condo-tenant-jailed-bribe-security-guard-airbnb-12133824 https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/pacific-mansi... In most neighboring countries, if this kind of thing made headlines, the news would have nothing else.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

mclightning 7y ago

>> Civilisation is the surrender of varying degrees of civil liberty for security and safety. That's a pretty reductivist way to define civilisation... From this definition; It sounds to me like there is a certain character/type of people who are redeemed as Civilized based on Govt definition. Thus justifies heavy control over society. "As a liberal", wouldn't it be more favourable to design the system around liberty of choice for the individual rather than control of a central power?

humanrebar 7y ago
> That's a pretty reductivist way to define civilisation... Agreed. I would consider banning slavery as more civilized, but it is an expansion of civil liberties. Same with having general freedom of expression. Any thug can ban "lies" he doesn't like. Kings used to declare themselves gods and execute dissenters.
- magduf 7y ago
  >I would consider banning slavery as more civilized, but it is an expansion of civil liberties. It's an expansion of civil liberties for one group (the enslaved), at the cost of limiting the civil liberties of another group (the former slave owners): you're preventing the slave owners from exercising their freedom to enslave people and force them to work. >Same with having general freedom of expression. Any thug can ban "lies" he doesn't like. Same here. Even a law that bans yelling "fire!" in a crowded theater is infringing on the civil liberties of people to speak freely and cause chaos. Personally, I'm perfectly happy with these infringements of civil liberty. It's better for society to avoid needless chaos from people shouting "fire!" and to prevent people from being enslaved. But they are limiting absolute freedom.
qeng-ho 7y ago
It is deliberately reductive because I was hoping not to get into a debate about personal freedoms. If you disagree, try telling the police that they have no right to infringe on your personal freedom when they stop you for drink-driving. Or theft. Or even jay-walking. To be in a society, any kind of society, involves giving up personal freedoms in exchange for something, usually safety or stability. We just have a different idea of what's an acceptable loss of personal freedom. I agree that it'd be favourable to design the system about personal freedom, but that system comes with its own inefficiencies and disadvantages that by large my country deem unacceptable. Unfortunately, Singapore is still largely a pragmatic and conservative society that min-maxes for economic stability, and it'd be long before this changes.

onetimemanytime 7y ago

>>I'm Singaporean, and completely not surprised to see this appear on HN....Civilisation is the surrender of varying degrees of civil liberty for security and safety ...We're just debating the word "varying" and might not agree with your conclusion.

qeng-ho 7y ago
To quote what I replied to another user: If you disagree, try telling the police that they have no right to infringe on your personal freedom when they stop you for drink-driving. Or theft. Or even jay-walking. To be in a society, any kind of society, involves giving up personal freedoms in exchange for something, usually safety or stability. We just have a different idea of what's an acceptable loss of personal freedom.
- buboard 7y ago
  Ideally we d be able to switch citizenships, and let the best government win us. Unfortunately its not possible, though i would like the idea of an airbnb for citizenships

SenHeng 7y ago

I’m an ex Singaporean and I remember the good old ‘politics is for politicians and civilians should stay out’ days in the 90s. This _ruling party_ is benevolent when it suits them.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

astrobe_ 7y ago

> over here we definitely surrender more degrees of civil liberty for the safety and security of our streets It seems to me that you don't have to surrender so much, but I am totally unaware of your situation. And maybe I am desensitized to the lack of safety. I want to ask, what are the threats, and what is your exposure to them?