HISTORY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN SINGAPORE
What were the key principles of “Asian values” introduced by Lee Kuan Yew, and how did they shape Singapore’s economic development? What are the debates surrounding the concept of “Asian values” and their impact on Singapore’s economic development? ( Please investigate different perspectives and criticisms surrounding the concept of “Asian values”, explore debates on issues such as individual rights, political freedoms, cultural relativism, and their influence on economic growth in Singapore.
Starting with the definition of the Asian Values; it is basically a political thought introduced by the Prime Minister of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew that refers to a collectivist approach to common cultural values, historical and social (ethnic) aspects through the Asian countries. It might be a good analogy to the European Union since their social and historical roots joins in a point and then it transformed to an economic agreement and cooperation among the countries who are related in those regards. Asian values emerged at the beginning of the 90s but still shows its effect although it decreased after 97 financial crises in Asia. The idea has many opposents due to being introduced by “non-democratic” leaders in Asia. Actually it is based on the philosophy in Asia that affects whole parts of life (education, civil, manufacturing) called “confucianism” and includes respecting the elders and protecting some manners in life. As a political and economic thought when it was declared in 1993 Bangkok Declaration it was giving the following messages: social coherence, common well-being socio-economically and shifting the asian manners in the production and creating a national spirit.
“Asian values” are the synthesis of Hinduism, Confucianism and Islam tribute to countries like Indonesia, Malesia, China, Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea and Japan. Tribute to close relations of Japanese economic miracle to U.S; it opened doors to Japan to be the leader of new Asia. This system was way different from liberal and totalitarian western mind-set.
Due to several reasons, “asian values” were criticized severely even by some Asians. The argument of the people who criticize is that the asian values are a say to suppress freedom of speech and human rights by cultural relativism. Also they say, those who declare that Asian values are non-democratic leaders (came with military coup or not democratically acting or dictator) and what they support must be a part of their dictatorship or dominancy policy. Lee Kuan was also a paternalist where paternalism refers to the state acting like a father and citizens as children so that fathers take care of everything and children obey.
On the other hand; he claims he promoted confucianism and sinic lifestyle which was the perception for it is positive in Western countries. No one can claim that Confucianism is against human rights but the sensitive point of western culture since the French Revolution was freedom, human rights and democracy. But this old philosophy coincided with the wrong time or leaders who as China declares “individuals must put the state’s rights before their own” in a Human Rights World Conference (1993).
When these old and historical philosophies were not accepted by the western countries they shifted their say to this; this is an “ illiberal democracy” or “semi democracy”. Actually as reported from Lee Kuan he said; “Eastern societies believe that the individual exists in the context of his family. He is not pristine and separate. The family is part of the extended family, and then friends and the wider society”. From these we may understand that the Asian way of life is based on society and common wellbeing; strong families and cooperation whereas the western way is based on individualism, freedom, liberalism and independence. Lee’s own words in that regard; “. . A country must first have economic development, then democracy may follow. With a few exceptions, democracy has not brought good government to new developing countries. Democracy has not led to development because the governments did not establish stability and discipline necessary for development. “ “. . . As an Asian of Chinese cultural background, my values are for a government which is honest, effective and efficient in protecting its people and allowing opportunities to all to advance themselves in a stable and orderly society where they can live a good life and raise their children to do better than themselves (Lee 1992, 29–30).”
When it comes to economic debate I personally think that from the readings; when Asian countries started to compete with superpowers in the world especially in 1960s and 1980s; the main reason that they rapidly developed was that this production mindset relies on cultural and historical commitment. Asian people produce more and better products when they feel that social commitment and if people are satisfied with such a lifestyle that no one can call this as “non-democracy”. When it comes to western mindset, they might promote liberalism and individualism but when they criticize a well going system and say you shall be like us; then this is dictatorship either.
We must remember that Japan developed tribute to keiratsu which is a old culture of family-business investment model, South Korea developed with such a social cooperation, Singapore launched the term itself and so on. Today singapore’s GDP as of 2022 is reached 447 billion U.S dollars pioneering many high-tech products. Although Singapore had British colonialism invasion and pressures; reached its FDI abroad to 39 billion US dollars in 1998. Singapore thank to Asian linkage, made many trade agreements and cooperation with other asian countries and eventually counted among the worlds wealthiest countries per capita by high gini coefficient and human development index (HDI / IHDI). So all these reached by that ideology even its good or bad.
When we look at the western aspect; U.S always had the biggest fear for Asian rise economically. As encounter approaches represented by this two block of countries, I think we must take into consideration that Asian values criticized most when APEC countries rose against EU and U.S. Also we see that this “Asian values” is not a scholastic ideology that tries to rise people as not questioning sheeps that Singapore has one of the highest rank for Education Index (EI) by 0,93 as 2023.
