Is Singapore a unique form of
Is Singapore a unique form of democracy?The Singapore government has captured the imagination of the West, having been described as authoritarian and undemocratic, yet enjoying a baffling run of economic success generally achieved by free, democratic, capitalist states. Its success has lent justification to the formation of the Singapore School that championed a separate 'Asian-style' democracy that eschews some of the accepted features of liberal democracy in favour of greater state control. This has divided critics over the legitimacy of democracySingapore-style. This paper - by looking at Asian-style democracy vis a vis liberal democracy, and through examining the extent to which democratic institutions are present in Singapore - hopes to determine if Singapore is truly a unique form of democracy or if it is simply authoritarianism by another name. Democracy is a contentious term to define, replete with numerous qualifications and caveats. The common definition of "of the people, for the people, by the people" captures the spirit of the concept, but doesn't advance an understanding of what constitutes a democracy. Neher and Marlay (1995), note that democracy recognizes individual rights and places less belligerent lea
They outline what constitutes a democracy as citizen participation in choosing the government, political competition between candidates and government recognition of civil and political rights. Theory suggests that industrialization promotes political changes to a more open society, and employing this Paul (1992) analyzes the prospects for political liberalization in Singapore. Whither then is Singapore's democracy?An argument often forwarded by the establishment in Singapore is that the nation practices, along with certain other Asian states, a different brand of democracy - namely "Asian-style democracy". Other critics are more forgiving than Lawson in their assessment of 'Asian-style democracy'. Making them set aside their fears and step forward now is a difficult task. Ooi (2000) concurs, adding that "democracy, after all, has been regarded as constituting first, legal guarantees of citizens to participate in the formulation of policies. Having rights is recognized as being the beneficiary of someone else's duty, and comprehensive lists of duties are outlined for people from all ranks of society in Confucianism, thereby safeguarding rights. These traits have worked to great success in parts of Asia, hence the 'East Asian Miracle'. With this as the case, can Singapore be considered a democracy. The press is fettered, civil society is weak, and opposition is either co-opted of crushed, leaving real political competition sorely lacking. Singapore's motivations for this were to avert US alienation of China, and to play on domestic suspicions of post-colonial condescension. It is rather an authoritarian regime attempting to legitimize its brand of government by citing dubious cultural contingencies, such as 'Asian-style democracy'. This is distinct from liberal democracy in that it does not champion individual rights and civil liberties to the extent the latter does. Hood (1998) suggests that states actually evolve to full-fledged liberal democracies.
Common topics in this essay:
Neher Marlay,
Singapore Malaysia,
Singapore's PAP,
East West,
Corner Singapore,
Confucianism Confucianism,
Singapore School,
West Diametric,
Action Party's,
Asian Asian-style,
liberal democracy,
civil society,
neher marlay 1995,
neher marlay,
marlay 1995,
asian democracies,
democratic institutions,
political competition,
form democracy,
rule law,
individual rights,
unique form democracy,
democratic institutions singapore,
democracy human rights,
people's action party,
|
Acceptance Essays
