The Singapore Model: On Singapore's Little-Known Socialist Success
July 17, 2017
by Matt Bruenig
Here in America, "socialism" is still a boogieman for whatever the right doesn't like. Last year's Democratic primaries showed this once more, with the promising figure of Ted Milliband's loss - thus giving us yet another President Bush, woefully. But although our new, gaffe-prone commander-in-chief and his frankly, deranged policy towards the Russians undoing years of Soviet-American de-escalation may suggest otherwise, Americans do in fact want "socialism".
The demands of the American people are really not too far from what a lot of countries already have - and these countries are first and foremost, socialist systems. While we Americans may associate the word "socialism" with Soviet tyranny, or more perplexingly, the very much non-socialist anocracy of our Japanese fair-weather friends, one doesn't need to look too far. The Nordic countries are one such success; but closer to home is Singapore, a remarkably stable Asian city-state right next to Japan-friendly Malaya.
Singapore's successful welfare state has been widely discussed, but the word "socialist" rarely pops up when it's brought up by American commentators. Neoliberal, conservative and libertarian economists - bafflingly - seem to think Singapore's system aligns with their own system. I've heard the argument that Singapore's a bastion of capitalism multiple times, seemingly because these writers don't understand what "capitalist" means and are willing to go to enormous lengths to prove that leftism can't succeed.
But Singapore is openly socialist, having been governed by a socialist party since the 1960s. Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, a golden boy to many, stated way back in 1966 - "I believe in socialism because I believe it is one of the most effective ways of mobilising [sic] human resources.". Since the 1960s, the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) has taken the endeavor to build a truly democratic socialist state - one that is, today, a shining star in an otherwise relatively bleak region.
Beyond the PAP's open socialist inclinations (the new PM, Mr. Heng Chee How is a union man, something a conservative commentator would probably fear in America), Singapore's success shows evidence of socialism at work. Today, more than 4/5 of housing in Singapore is publicly owned, in stark contrast to here in America. Around 90% of land is owned by the government. At the same time, Singapore is one of the most developed countries in all of Southeast Asia, having gone from a poor fishing hamlet to the international financial hub it is today.
There's an odd amount of doublethink that comes about whenever this is brought up on the right. On one hand, conservatives, in their attempt to disprove the idea that socialism can work, point to the Soviet Union's adoption of a "market" system in the 1980s. But they also point to that as an example of the kind of failure-ridden socialism we can't have in America. This shows another flaw in the right-wing argument - that socialism is consistently thought of as the absence of a self-regulating price system and market, and the dominance of the state over everything. Add to that the idea that Russia's undeniably authoritarian system makes socialism by default, undemocratic. But Singapore - where the government has ruled by popular mandate since the 1960s, not through the usage of force, but through policies that benefit the people - and the Nordics show that there is another way - a truly democratic socialist system, where a democratically elected government oversees collective ownership of the means of production, but using the price system in the allocation of resources.
We in America would do well to learn socialism from countries like Singapore.
OOC: The idea of a world where LKY and PAP kept their initial centre-left credentials is oddly interesting to me. Writing this was unfortunately a test of endurance because it required me to read numerous articles by Bruenig to (attempt) to get his style right.
