Since the Deng
Xiaoping (鄧小平) era, Singapore has been the
only country admired by all four generations of China’s leadership. Recently,
however, friction between the two countries over the South China Sea and the seizure of Singapore’s armoured vehicles
in Hong Kong has led people to wonder whether the “Singapore model” remains
relevant to China.
Singapore,
despite its small size, is known for miraculous economic modernisation,
efficient and nearly corrupt-free governance, good urban planning and a
well-behaved citizenry. Both the government and people in China have clamoured
for all these hallmarks. The Chinese leadership favours Singaporean-style
governance as a feasible model for the future, possibly for the following
reasons.
First and
foremost, Singapore’s “Asian authoritarianism” is believed to have demonstrated
the compatibility between effective economic management and one-party rule,
raising doubts about the suitability of Western-style democracy for Asian
countries.
And, to
maintain their grip on power, both governments have sought to exercise strict
control over all aspects of public discourse: whether in the education system
or, most importantly, the media. Also, the economic success of both countries
has been attributed to their one-party leadership. Both ruling parties maintain
their legitimacy mainly through raising people’s living standards under their
watch.
A
sizeable number of people in the two nations believe in the need for a strong
government capable of deciding on the best interests of society
Furthermore,
according to the doctrine of Singapore’s ruling party, the People’s Action
Party, a good government is one with the ability to convince its citizens to
compromise individual liberties for long-term collective interests. The Chinese
Communist Party apparently shares this ideology. Over the past 10 years, for
example, it has hosted big events like the Olympic Games and G20 summit, which
caused inconvenience to many, but managed to retain popular support for these
activities through preaching individual sacrifice for magnificent national
achievements.
Compared
to some other cultures, more ordinary people in both nations have traditionally
placed higher value on so-called bread-and-butter issues than individual
freedom. The “climate of fear” also makes people reluctant to fight for their
rights. Moreover, the majority of people in both nations are used to regarding
the ruling party in their respective country as the only authority capable of
governing. The ruling parties have successfully convinced people that they
represent stability, while the opposition represents turbulence.
To sum
up, a sizeable number of people in the two nations believe in the need for a
strong government capable of forging a consensus and deciding on the best
interests of society. Interestingly though, the “unique national
characteristics” of the two countries are actually opposite to each other.
China is huge and diverse, with the largest population on earth; the
authorities fear that things could get out of control if they don’t rule with
an iron fist. Singapore, on the other hand, is small and vulnerable, and an
authoritarian government is seen as necessary to protect it from being bullied
in the neighbourhood.
Public
life in both countries also shares some similarities, chiefly, the
marginalisation of liberal critics and the tightening of control over mainstream
media. Opinion leaders, including dissident bloggers, writers, filmmakers and
intellectuals, receive tougher treatment.
Watch:
Singapore prime minister answers questions on a Facebook chat
In
Singapore, the People’s Action Party did it subtly by replacing chief editors
of the most important newspapers. In China, the Communist Party has explicitly
ordered absolute loyalty of all media. Both governments are getting more
proactive in social media. In Singapore, government agencies and the party
itself are building up their social media capacities and using social media as
an instrument of surveillance. China has gone even further; it has cracked down
on independent news reporting on the web, silenced and even imprisoned some
“big Vs” – those who have a substantial following on social media.
Riding on
nationalism, Singapore in 2015 marked its 50th anniversary of independence and
the passing of its founding farther Lee Kuan Yew. The ruling party used these
occasions to sow patriotism.
Meanwhile,
in China, the Communist Youth League praised the “little pinks” (xiao
fenhong), a group of young nationalists promoting nationalism on the
internet. They are seen by many as little different from a cyberspace mob.
Although
the trend is worrisome to those who cherish individual liberties, some features
of the current “Singapore model” can still serve as a role model for China:
● Don’t
be afraid of “bad news”: In the past few years, there have been several
embarrassing scandals involving high-ranking government officials, like the
extramarital affair of the former speaker of Parliament, who stepped down
following the exposure. Moreover, public health crises like the Zika virus
outbreak were also handled with admirable transparency.
● Stop
being arrogant and be responsive to people’s demands: Singaporean politicians
have become more humble and have been listening to their constituencies.
Legislators now routinely spend at least one evening a week meeting voters face
to face. Besides, the civil service is separated from the ruling party. As a
result, there is little room for rent-seeking.
● Build
an effective legal system. The legendary orderly society in Singapore has been
built on a highly educated population and the country’s commitment to the rule
of law. For instance, spitting, littering and indoor smoking are very common in
China. But in Singapore, the fine could be as high as one month’s salary of a
blue-collar worker. An effective legal system is crucial to the success of
Singapore’s governance approach and a key reason Singapore stays nearly
corruption-free.
● Allow
people to express their opinion by voting at the ballot box: there are about 15
active parties in Singapore’s political spectrum. While the opposition forces
are not strong enough to challenge the ruling party, they provide an
“alternative option” for people to vent their dissatisfaction. Having channels
to express anger is one reason Singaporeans are not desperate to take to the
streets.
All this
is happening in Singapore while it remains stable and prosperous. China could
conceivably benefit from adopting such approaches.
Audrey Jiajia Li is a filmmaker and columnist in
Guangzhou, China. Research for this project was supported by the Asia
Journalism Fellowship in Singapore Illustration: Craig Stephens
No comments:
Post a Comment