Sizing Up Singapore

In 1993, when novelist William Gibson called Singapore “Disneyland with the death penalty,” the phrase struck a chord. Nearly twenty years later, Gibson’s formulation is still around, but the bite it once struck seems to have worn off. In those intervening years, Singapore has risen to become a model state in the eyes of the West—one whose economy, society, and even features of its political system are signs of success worth replicating. The praise remains effluvious, but it is no less well deserved. What makes Singapore so enviable to thinkers, commentators, and visitors alike is not just the city-state’s remarkably efficient economy, orderly society, or productive political system, but rather the resultant ability to be something for all its citizens.
What Makes Singapore Singapore
One of Singapore’s defining characteristics lies in its multiculturalism. Though a majority of the population is of Chinese descent, there remains strong influence from Malay, Indian (particularly Tamil), and post-colonial British cultures. Several nationalities enjoy their own ethnic neighborhoods, forming a stark contrast with the city’s highly Western glass-and-steel downtown. Nonetheless, people of every ethnicity remain constant presences on the city’s sidewalks. Given such diversity, the Singaporean government offers widespread respect for the population’s various cultures; Singapore has four official languages, and the government erects signs in all of them. To an outsider, the combination of a heterogeneous society and a strong social fabric seems improbable, but this accommodation allows Singaporeans to feel nationalistic identity without abandoning their ethnic pride, thus reinforcing the city’s multiculturalism.
The state’s unique social fabric further enables the high standards of living which the government sustains. Some 85 percent of citizens live in public housing, and the state provides universal healthcare. Generous benefits mean a population with comparatively little reason to disapprove of their government. Further, the vast social safety net does not hinder economic productivity. As New York Times journalist Thomas Friedman pointed out in his January column on Singapore, these and other features of the government-controlled social structure contrast with the city’s exceptionally free market economy. While providing for citizens of all ethnicities, Singapore also hosts a large number of Western financial institutions and boasts wealth, visible in luxury cars and designer clothing, no less than that of London or Paris.
Perhaps the most notorious feature of Singaporean culture is its kiasuism, the fear of losing face, or more broadly, of losing at all. Unique even among the stereotypically disciplined and competitive cultures of East Asia, kiasuism drives the country toward its own goals. As the philosophy argues, without these high standards, all of the aforementioned socioeconomic achievements might not be possible. Yet the obligations under kiasuism extend to more than self; Singapore also strives to show off its country to others. Kiasuism implies immense pride in what Singapore can accomplish, combined with a distinct eye toward giving a positive impression to outsiders, hence the infamous draconian policies toward chewing gum. And hence the nickname of Disneyland.
What We Can Learn
Friedman argues that Singapore’s greatest lesson for the United States is “about taking governing seriously.” It is true that pragmatism has assisted Singapore’s economic success, although Singapore’s ability to adapt quickly stems as much from the nation’s small size. Nonetheless, while the country’s smallness has enabled it to quickly change course, its leaders have taken full advantage of such opportunities. The ability of Singapore’s ministers perhaps owes in part to the nation’s rewarding of public service; its ministers enjoy million-dollar salaries, the highest in the world. Nonetheless, the state’s munificence extends beyond the walls of the Cabinet room.
Like any high-powered business in the twenty-first century, Singapore recruits aggressively from among the academically talented. Federally funded scholarship programs ensure that the country never risks a brain drain. The government offers numerous merit scholarships to students from elsewhere in Southeast Asia and around the world. In return for their high quality education, of course, students must commit to becoming residents, or in some cases citizens, of Singapore. The nation’s higher education policies have contributed substantially towards recruiting the best and the brightest, and keep them working for Singaporean companies, domestically or abroad.
For all its unusual flaws and surprising merits, then, Singapore manages to be something for everyone. People from different cultures and different parts of the world see something familiar in Singapore, and rightly so. Unlike the United States, where the “melting pot” blends and changes the cultures that meet here, Singapore preserves them. The population is South and East Asian, but the most common language is Western. Typical cuisine is a mélange of Asian dishes, but shopping centers and the brands that populate them are European. The country is simultaneously unique and familiar, which more than anything else contributes to its goal of being visitor friendly. Singapore’s greatest lesson for the West, especially Europe, but also the United States, lies in its delicate balance between integration and assimilation, between diversity and conformity.
Where the Parallels Stop
The “death penalty” side to Singapore persists: the nation remains a one-party authoritarian state. Severe punishments do as much as culture to keep the country virtually drug-free and public spaces, especially the subway, remarkably clean. While many of Singapore’s practices may be inspiring to the West, Singapore’s success may ultimately prove difficult to replicate. One of the keys to the country’s unparalleled growth still remains its diminutive scale. As pluralistic a society as Singapore is, a strong social fabric exists because it is a country of just a few million. Singapore’s political geography is equally defining: much of the land on which the island city-state is built is imported sand, and the adjacent peninsula is occupied by Malaysia, a historic rival.
Singapore will always be attractive to the West. Compared with Japan, Taiwan, and certainly new China, Singapore is not just developed and an economic powerhouse, but it is a bastion of familiar culture borne of its colonial heritage. For admirers, it is something of a cultural and economic Petri dish—a source of ideas and inspiration for reform. When observers put Singapore on a pedestal, then, they should not forget the country’s unique history and conditions that have allowed it to thrive. Singapore’s desire to be a model for visitors and outsiders is laudable, and the fact that it has so many admirers in the West shows that it succeeds in this respect. However, many of the policies it uses to achieve this coveted status could not succeed without Singapore’s unique demographic and geographic position and should not be adopted because of their inconsistency with democratic principles.
Alec Barrett ‘11 is a Senior Writer. He recently returned from a trip to Singapore.