8 ms·

Oops, the cool, tax-saving getaway is a fascist dictatorship. Who could have known.

damoncali 13y ago
Singapore has an interesting government in that it's a single party, rigged system (by US standards) where the leadership is generally very popular. A true "benevolent dictatorship" if you will. On the other hand, I would not want to be anywhere near the place if the ruling party actually loses an election, as freedom is not high on their agenda.
- nubela 13y ago
  It isn't popular. Gerrymandering win seats.
  - damoncali 13y ago
    I overstated that. I should have said "popular enough that nobody does anything about it". I've only been in Singapore once, and found it odd that I felt more "watched" by the government than I did in places like Vietnam, where they really were watching me. Very cool place, but I wouldn't want to live there permanently.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
mseebach 13y ago
It's generally well known that Singapore has no political freedom and only limited freedom of speech. However, financial freedom is in short supply in the world, and Singapore is one of the nicer places that have it. To call Singapore a "fascist dictatorship" is only true in the most literal senses of the words. It's by no means perfect, but Singapore has a much better record on human rights than anyone generally considered "fascist dictatorships". I'm not suggesting they should get a free pass, but it's not exactly Belarus there.
- PeterisP 13y ago
  If a place "has no political freedom and only limited freedom of speech", as you say, then how it is better than Belarus?
  - potatolicious 13y ago
    This is a salient question. I'm not familiar with human rights abuses in Belarus, but some cursory research indicates that there's a high degree of intersection between their abuses and Singapore's abuses. For one, they both take political prisoners. They both abuse the judiciary as a means of silencing opposition. Show trials and trumped up charges against political opponents? Yep, and yep. Saliently, from the Wikipedia article on this subject[0]: > "International documents reflect that the Belarusian courts that are subject to an authoritarian executive apparatus, routinely disregard the rule of law and exist to rubber-stamp decisions made outside the courtroom; this is tantamount to the de facto non-existence of courts as impartial judicial forums." This is pretty similar to the claims that have been leveled at Singapore in the past. The use of trumped-up criminal charges to silence and even imprison political dissidents. They're even similar in the Press Freedom rankings (147th vs. 151st). The only major difference is that Belarus has been frequently accused to racist oppression of their ethnic minorities, whereas Singapore's abuses do not seem to be race-based. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Belarus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Belarus
  - mseebach 13y ago
    The oppression is much broader, more random and much more heavy handed in Belarus. There are political prisoners as of right now in Belarus, if there are any in Singapore, they are not known to the public (Yes, I know they have a history, but we're talking about the present). Since everything is state controlled in Belarus, if you fall out of favour with the government, you place the careers of yourself and your family in jeopardy, and university admission and apartment waiting lists etc get a lot more complicated - again, subject to total randomness. This would be summarily impossible in Belarus: http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/05/mayday-protest-at-hong-lim-park/ http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/05/mayday-protest-at-ho...
- 13y ago
rayiner 13y ago
Singapore and China are proof of two things: 1) Freedom is not a necessary condition for economic prosperity (which undermines a lot of American rhetoric of the last 50 years); 2) The global business community doesn't give a shit about democracy, as demonstrated by its rush to embrace China, the Middle East, etc, and the corresponding apologizing about their political systems. I nearly puked on Metro North the other day (like a drunk Westchester teen after too much fun in Manhattan) reading an article where some commentator with business interests in China tried to downplay the free speech situation in China as "cultural differences."
- revelation 13y ago
  China is also our enemy, so you will be hearing lots and lots of their human rights violations. Nobody seems to particularly care about Singapore. Then we also have the UAE, where women can't drive cars. But they are our friend and supply our oil, so we'll never hear about that. You will even find documentaries on job opportunities in Dubai et al on TV.
  - mseebach 13y ago
    You're confusing the UAE and Saudi Arabia.
- javert 13y ago
  > Freedom is not a necessary condition for economic prosperity (which undermines a lot of American rhetoric of the last 50 years) That is demonstrably false. Everywhere you look, throughout history, the more free a country is, the more economically prosperous it becomes. In fact, _every single example_ fits this pattern. There is not a single exception. China and Singapore are much more economically free than the US (and most other places), and that's why they have seen economic "miracles." If your argument is, "You don't have to have 100% freedom to have economic prosperity," _that_ is true, but it's not an interesting observation. No country in history has (quite) been a utopia of freedom. > The global business community doesn't give a shit about democracy, as demonstrated by its rush to embrace China, the Middle East, etc, and the corresponding apologizing about their political systems. You're treating the "global business community" like it's a "class," in the Marxist sense: a bunch of people who all think alike. In fact, there are just a bunch of individuals. Most businessmen have similar values and ideas to the rest of the culture. Which is to say, not great, not horrible. I plan to go into business eventually in some form, and I hope you don't justify punishing _me_ on the basis of your characterization of the "global business community."
pod4369 13y ago
Singapore is comparable to Nazi Germany? Get help.
- rayiner 13y ago
  Nazi Germany was a fascist dictatorship, but that does not mean that all fascist dictatorships are comparable to Nazi Germany. The U.S. and Bangladesh are both democracies--that does not mean that Bangladesh is comparable to the U.S...
  - pod4369 13y ago
    "Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism[1][2] that came to prominence in mid-20th century Europe. Fascists seek to unify their nation through a totalitarian state that promotes the mass mobilization of the national community,[3][4] relying on a vanguard party to initiate a revolution to organize the nation on fascist principles. Hostile to liberal democracy, socialism, and communism, fascist movements share certain common features, including the veneration of the state, a devotion to a strong leader, and an emphasis on ultranationalism, ethnocentrism, and militarism." Yeah, Singapore is nothing like that. The fact that 20%+ of its population are immigrants, and how it embraces immigration, disproves your pet theory. Singaporeans don't have statues of their leaders in their homes, and they're not mobilizing anyone to fight some greater evil. Singaporeans are more devoted to their iPhones than their prime minister. Using "fascism" loosely is just ignorance.

Singapore has an interesting government in that it's a single party, rigged system (by US standards) where the leadership is generally very popular. A true "benevolent dictatorship" if you will. On the other hand, I would not want to be anywhere near the place if the ruling party actually loses an election, as freedom is not high on their agenda.

nubela 13y ago
It isn't popular. Gerrymandering win seats.
- damoncali 13y ago
  I overstated that. I should have said "popular enough that nobody does anything about it". I've only been in Singapore once, and found it odd that I felt more "watched" by the government than I did in places like Vietnam, where they really were watching me. Very cool place, but I wouldn't want to live there permanently.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

mseebach 13y ago

It's generally well known that Singapore has no political freedom and only limited freedom of speech. However, financial freedom is in short supply in the world, and Singapore is one of the nicer places that have it. To call Singapore a "fascist dictatorship" is only true in the most literal senses of the words. It's by no means perfect, but Singapore has a much better record on human rights than anyone generally considered "fascist dictatorships". I'm not suggesting they should get a free pass, but it's not exactly Belarus there.

PeterisP 13y ago
If a place "has no political freedom and only limited freedom of speech", as you say, then how it is better than Belarus?
- potatolicious 13y ago
  This is a salient question. I'm not familiar with human rights abuses in Belarus, but some cursory research indicates that there's a high degree of intersection between their abuses and Singapore's abuses. For one, they both take political prisoners. They both abuse the judiciary as a means of silencing opposition. Show trials and trumped up charges against political opponents? Yep, and yep. Saliently, from the Wikipedia article on this subject[0]: > "International documents reflect that the Belarusian courts that are subject to an authoritarian executive apparatus, routinely disregard the rule of law and exist to rubber-stamp decisions made outside the courtroom; this is tantamount to the de facto non-existence of courts as impartial judicial forums." This is pretty similar to the claims that have been leveled at Singapore in the past. The use of trumped-up criminal charges to silence and even imprison political dissidents. They're even similar in the Press Freedom rankings (147th vs. 151st). The only major difference is that Belarus has been frequently accused to racist oppression of their ethnic minorities, whereas Singapore's abuses do not seem to be race-based. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Belarus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Belarus
- mseebach 13y ago
  The oppression is much broader, more random and much more heavy handed in Belarus. There are political prisoners as of right now in Belarus, if there are any in Singapore, they are not known to the public (Yes, I know they have a history, but we're talking about the present). Since everything is state controlled in Belarus, if you fall out of favour with the government, you place the careers of yourself and your family in jeopardy, and university admission and apartment waiting lists etc get a lot more complicated - again, subject to total randomness. This would be summarily impossible in Belarus: http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/05/mayday-protest-at-hong-lim-park/ http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2013/05/mayday-protest-at-ho...
13y ago

rayiner 13y ago

Singapore and China are proof of two things: 1) Freedom is not a necessary condition for economic prosperity (which undermines a lot of American rhetoric of the last 50 years); 2) The global business community doesn't give a shit about democracy, as demonstrated by its rush to embrace China, the Middle East, etc, and the corresponding apologizing about their political systems. I nearly puked on Metro North the other day (like a drunk Westchester teen after too much fun in Manhattan) reading an article where some commentator with business interests in China tried to downplay the free speech situation in China as "cultural differences."

revelation 13y ago
China is also our enemy, so you will be hearing lots and lots of their human rights violations. Nobody seems to particularly care about Singapore. Then we also have the UAE, where women can't drive cars. But they are our friend and supply our oil, so we'll never hear about that. You will even find documentaries on job opportunities in Dubai et al on TV.
- mseebach 13y ago
  You're confusing the UAE and Saudi Arabia.
javert 13y ago
> Freedom is not a necessary condition for economic prosperity (which undermines a lot of American rhetoric of the last 50 years) That is demonstrably false. Everywhere you look, throughout history, the more free a country is, the more economically prosperous it becomes. In fact, _every single example_ fits this pattern. There is not a single exception. China and Singapore are much more economically free than the US (and most other places), and that's why they have seen economic "miracles." If your argument is, "You don't have to have 100% freedom to have economic prosperity," _that_ is true, but it's not an interesting observation. No country in history has (quite) been a utopia of freedom. > The global business community doesn't give a shit about democracy, as demonstrated by its rush to embrace China, the Middle East, etc, and the corresponding apologizing about their political systems. You're treating the "global business community" like it's a "class," in the Marxist sense: a bunch of people who all think alike. In fact, there are just a bunch of individuals. Most businessmen have similar values and ideas to the rest of the culture. Which is to say, not great, not horrible. I plan to go into business eventually in some form, and I hope you don't justify punishing _me_ on the basis of your characterization of the "global business community."

pod4369 13y ago

Singapore is comparable to Nazi Germany? Get help.

rayiner 13y ago
Nazi Germany was a fascist dictatorship, but that does not mean that all fascist dictatorships are comparable to Nazi Germany. The U.S. and Bangladesh are both democracies--that does not mean that Bangladesh is comparable to the U.S...
- pod4369 13y ago
  "Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism[1][2] that came to prominence in mid-20th century Europe. Fascists seek to unify their nation through a totalitarian state that promotes the mass mobilization of the national community,[3][4] relying on a vanguard party to initiate a revolution to organize the nation on fascist principles. Hostile to liberal democracy, socialism, and communism, fascist movements share certain common features, including the veneration of the state, a devotion to a strong leader, and an emphasis on ultranationalism, ethnocentrism, and militarism." Yeah, Singapore is nothing like that. The fact that 20%+ of its population are immigrants, and how it embraces immigration, disproves your pet theory. Singaporeans don't have statues of their leaders in their homes, and they're not mobilizing anyone to fight some greater evil. Singaporeans are more devoted to their iPhones than their prime minister. Using "fascism" loosely is just ignorance.