With regards to the current topic being discussed in class, are non-democracies better or worse at producing broad based prosperity, I thought that the reading on authoritarian Singapore was a very helpful follow-on from the lecture.
The debate about what kind of regime stimulates the most economic growth in a country is a complex one, that will probably never be comprehensively answered due to the various models around the world that support different claims. During a discussion about whether democracy was better for prosperity than dictatorships, I was surprised to hear that there were some good arguments made against democracy in the name of economic growth. I had always assumed that political competition and democracy equated to a fairly wealthy country, by looking to the obvious evidence of western countries such as Britain and New Zealand who are constantly shouting from the rooftops how democratic they are. However it seems that the democracy model could be wrong for some countries.
I enjoyed reading 'Does Authoritarianism Pay?', because although it outlined how Singapore had become so prosperous under a repressive authoritarian government, it also made a clear argument about the price that Singaporean citizens had to pay for their countries rapid economic growth. I think this article will help alot for the 'Economic performance' essay for looking at whether economic benefits can outweigh the costs of repressive dictatorships.
Could the father and son team of Lee Yuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong merely be establishing a strong state before the introduction of democracy or are they just grooming the country for fully fledged dictatorship?
As for Lee Sr. and Jr., I don't see them trying to promote democracy in Singapore anytime soon. The argument of continued economic prosperity has been the main justification for the PAP (Peoples Action Party) to remain in power since independence. Frankly, I think this idea isn't going to hold much sway anymore especially among the newer generation of Singaporeans. Many Singaporeans are more critical of the government than they were 30 years ago. More and more people are exercising their political rights. Perhaps democracy in Singapore will take a bottom-up approach, rather than a top-down one?
ReplyDelete