Advanced
And a little divided
After 41 years, Singapore's no longer an entity that can be ruled by Lee Kuan Yew's old ways. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Aug 13, 2006

If Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had indeed been groomed for leadership during his teens, as popularly believed here, nothing could possibly have prepared him for the Singapore that he leads today.

In fact, the island republic, its people and the world around him have changed so dramatically since his schooldays that his job has been made more complex compared to his father Lee Kuan Yew's.

One of the characteristics of the modern, globalised Singapore is that society has become more diverse - and divided.

After 41 years of independence, national cohesiveness, one of its early pillars of strength, is showing signs of erosion.

Kuan Yew presided over a poorly educated and unquestioning population by offering it a better - but authoritarian - life that was accepted. He was helped by an Asian value of obedience to authority and reluctance to take a forceful position on any matter.

Today's better-educated Singaporeans with whom Hsien Loong has to work with are largely individualistic, self-centred, more argumentative and have values that often run counter to the previous generation's.

Words like "discipline", "consensus" and "authoritarianism", which were once tolerated as necessary - if not admired - no longer stir up the same emotions when used by Hsien Loong.

Then there is the Internet, which has propelled Singapore into an advanced nation but which is also helping to promote diversities (which is good) and divisiveness (which is bad).

Besides, Singapore has become a more international city, with many citizens having newly arrived from abroad armed with admiration but little loyalty towards this place.

Most youths - local or abroad - do not feel as beholden or bonded with the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) as the previous generation.

"If you raise any subject - casinos, or hanging, or politics, anything at all - you're likely to run into disagreement with somebody who has other ideas," said a retired architect.

Lee Kuan Yew's "consensus" society is largely gone, he added.

It is not just people-versus-government but also people-versus-people.

The elite social clubs are not spared, and some would say they are particularly prone to differences of views. Some of their personal quarrels have ended up as defamation court cases.

Whether it is the outcome of better knowledge, uniformity has become a casualty. Singapore has become more divided although not as much as in America, where every statement has detractors.

Not all consider it a bad thing for Singapore. In a creative, global economy, some consider that contrasting opinions, well argued, are a big plus.

On Wednesday, PM Lee led Singaporeans to celebrate the republic's National Day, marking its separation from Malaysia in 1965, when he was a 13-year-old secondary schoolboy.

As a student, Hsien Loong learned Russian in anticipation of the Soviet Union emerging as a global economic (and political) power, which would benefit any Asian leader who could speak the language.

It didn't happen that way, of course, which shows how global developments can waste the best-laid plans. So can changing technology and new consumer tastes.

Forty-one years ago, Singapore had much of what it lacks today but in some things, life was better and simpler.

In those years, Kuan Yew and his PAP colleagues had governed a cohesive population, never needing any incentive - or disincentive - to win elections.

The first generation under their charge was less knowledgeable but people were uniformly responsive to Lee's policies, even unpopular ones.

Both the governed and the governing enjoyed a deep trust and natural bond, which are not so evident today.

"In the past, the PAP did not hand out pre-election budget surplus or use estate upgrading or resort to group constituencies, yet the votes kept coming in," said an old-timer. "Elections were one-against-one and the PAP always won with big majorities."

It is unlikely that such a relationship will return.

Whereas Kuan Yew relied on superior logic and tough punishment to rule, his son cannot do that. Hsien Loong still needs logic, but he can't use the cane to gain support. Persuasion, yes, but not force.

He faces a difficult task, his predecessor Goh Chok Tong once observed, because smallish Singapore would encounter increasing competition from larger, smarter countries.

The following difficulties lie ahead for Hsien Loong, or whoever is in charge, who wants to re-establish cohesion: -

* A widening gap between rich and poor as the city moves towards higher tech and greater affluence.

* Gaps also exist between an elite class and the rest of society and this may widen as meritocracy is rewarded with huge salary schemes, while the unskilled ends up struggling at the bottom without a safety net.

* Now within manageable limits, the resentment of Singaporeans over foreigners taking over local jobs may worsen in the future. The government is inviting more "foreign talents" to come and make Singapore their home.

* In future, the generational rift between old and young may worsen, steadily eroding the Asian values of respect for the elderly and filial piety.

(Thankfully, the race-religion divide, once Singapore's biggest threat, has faded somewhat, although it will probably never disappear.)

* More Singaporeans may be preparing to emigrate. Despite growing wealth, some 53% of the people say they are prepared to migrate to a foreign country, a higher figure compared to others in the region.

For Lee Hsien Loong, failure in moulding a united nation may be very serious. A divided America may still flourish because of its size and knowledge, but for a small city of four million, disunity could be life threatening.

(This was first published in The Sunday Star, Malaysia).