So the Singapore thing is only a puzzle for those who refuse to accept that Confucian values had been working pretty well as a political ideology for hundreds o

So the Singapore thing is only a puzzle for those who refuse to accept that Confucian values had been working pretty well as a political ideology for hundreds of years in Asia (until the world flipped upside down in the past two centuries). For example, if you look more closely at Japan, while their politics is arguably more democratic, the culture has an obvious authoritarian slant as well. Mostly unnoticeable to foreigners but it's there. Some of what you described regarding Singapore also applies to Japan, albeit sometimes those things might be enforced culturally and not necessarily in law. (But then, look up their criminal conviction rate if you want to be scared.) China is another example. People often have strong (and often irrationally emotional) opinions about politics in China, but I suppose we can agree that the past narrative about the Chinese government having to implement democratic reforms or perish has lost much credibility by now. I mean, everyone has their own opinions about what is a "moral" way to run a country, but if we're talking about achieving objective results with Confucian-style-paternalistic-authoritarian governments, Singapore isn't really an exception. (In fact, it might be the only way East Asian countries know how to properly run a country. There's more to public administration than democratic elections)