Why China needs to listen to Lee Kuan Yew

[dlclong]

Dictator ，lol

 

[AndrewJin]

Lee's policies from my perspective are similar to a traditional Chinese Empire's ultra-centralised government, keeping every respect of society in tracks. I do have respect for him for establishing a Chinese-dominant country in Southeast Asia. In fact, if i need to choose from Singapore or ROC(Taiwan) in all the Chinese regions around the world, I'll choose the previous one.

 

[Yizhi]

Thanks for the recommendations of the book, very useful!

I have learned some history on Singapore and Lee, I hold high regards on Lee as well, the hard facts, the results are self-explanatory. Back in 1967 the gravity of the situation was immense, messy economics, Malay/Indonesian hostility, ethnic tension, communist threat, practically no resources, and now everyone see where it stands.

Lee always chose what's best for his country, and in between PRC and ROC the two Chinese camps, he chose the latter. That's surely was not a favorable option from PRC's point of view, hence the negative emotions grow here. However, if anyone including you and me or whoever was put is his shoe at that time, that's would be the only sensible option for the sake of the country.

Beginning from Deng, PRC leaders took a pragmatic, non-ideological approach towards Singapore. PRC leaders are humble enough to learn the experience, take advices, from this successful country comprised of same ethnicity. Waves of government officials were sent to Singapore for study and training beginning from Deng's era. Other than being an ethnic Chinese country, PRC is also interested to know one thing, how Singapore can be so properly governed without over-reliance on Western style democracy? Like China, though on a lesser extent, Singapore is repeatedly bashed by the West for being "un-democratic". Other than ethnicity, actually there are a lot more in common between the two than some PRC people might think.

View attachment 198356

List of freedom indices - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

thx for the long reply. (English)

largely agree with you, especially on the governance part. personally i respect him as a good devoted politician with true vision (hard to find these days) for his people in Singapore, and i understand that he didn't have too many options but to work for the interest of Singapore at the time.

China indeed has borrowed a lot from the model of Singapore, i think Lee and his country by their very existence contributed to debunking the 'democracy superstition' commonly found in many ethnic Chinese. the success of Singapore provided us with new terms like 'Asian Values' which was quite refreshing in the academic thinking at the time, and set a rather good example of how a developing state can transform into a rich developed one in just a few decades if the right national strategy & governance is in place, which is inspiring for all the third world countries. in that aspect, Lee was truly an independent thinker not afraid to challenge the conventional western thoughts on governance.

We actually send ALOT of our people to Singapore to learn about its bureaucracy & management style, & has adopted many things into our own policy, amongst other things a few prominent projects came to mind, such as the SG-Suzhou Industrial Park & the SG-Tianjin Eco City, a thrid project will commence in the western region soon. In short, Singapore served a microcosm of possibilities intensively studied under CCP's microscope. Regarding Singapore's China/USA policy, it's a complex matter, given their location in SEA...

exactly. the communication & interaction between both sides is quite deep already.

 

[powastick]

Lee Kuan Yew isn't anti CPC. If he were anti-China, he would have sided towards Taiwan.

 

[Jlaw]

China need to look at Qin Dynasty for governance. No need to look at others.

 

[moyandashu]

Some yong kids behavior here make me sad,they r so aggressive and overreact,uncivil. They think only they are the true Chinese nationalist.but they lack of true Chinese character and old virtues ,never be great full to someone who ever helped.never listen ,tolerate different opinion,never be humble,.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

China need to look at Qin Dynasty for governance. No need to look at others.

The Qin Dynasty was too tyrannical to its base population, so we need to avoid that, but to rule over those liberals with a pair of iron fists is a must.

Some yong kids behavior here make me sad,they r so aggressive and overreact,uncivil. They think only they are the true Chinese nationalist.but they lack of true Chinese character and old virtues ,never be great full to someone who ever helped.never listen ,tolerate different opinion,never be humble,.

lol, we weren't even the initiators, since in most of time, those anti-China trolls initiated the flame war first.

And we don't need to appease those folks who are cursing our motherland.

 

[powastick]

China need to look at Qin Dynasty for governance. No need to look at others.

Qin good for unifying China. However it didn't last long. If you have draconian law that punishes people, nobody will speak to you. All you will have are mindless underlings that cannot think. It will be sort of North Korea.

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

This whole debate on "which" dynasty to look is so passe.

Like are you serious?

You can't live with technology that is barely a 5 years old, and want to explore political systems of thousands of years back!

Today's society is fundamentally different.

Earlier there was no concept of nation states, nor of nationalities.

The Qin Dynasty was not a Chinese state. It was a precursor to a Chinese state, who was composed of many Chinese people, forming a major event in the development of Chinese history, but ultimately it was the kingdom of Qin Emperor.

Today, there are no major monarchies, and even dictatorships or oligarchies pay lip service to rule of people.

People are hyper connected and scrutinize everything.

People are the center of the Governance.

 

[powastick]

This whole debate on "which" dynasty to look is so passe.

Like are you serious?

You can't live with technology that is barely a 5 years old, and want to explore political systems of thousands of years back!

Today's society is fundamentally different.

Earlier there was no concept of nation states, nor of nationalities.

The Qin Dynasty was not a Chinese state. It was a precursor to a Chinese state, who was composed of many Chinese people, forming a major event in the development of Chinese history, but ultimately it was the kingdom of Qin Emperor.

Today, there are no major monarchies, and even dictatorships or oligarchies pay lip service to rule of people.

People are hyper connected and scrutinize everything.

People are the center of the Governance.

What?! Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. We started the "Rule of Law" thing. Go read legalism.

QIN dynasty is CHINA! China was name after the Qin State. Qin = Chin.

@Bussard Ramjet You didn't do your homework. You know why Chinese don't like you? Cause you have some political righteousness that you are not willing to drop. You want to learn is fine, don't evangelize us.

There is no true democracies either.
BBC News - Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

What?! Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. We started the "Rule of Law" thing. Go read legalism.

QIN dynasty is CHINA! China was name after the Qin State. Qin = Chin.

@Bussard Ramjet You didn't do your homework. You know why Chinese don't like you? Cause you have some political righteousness that you are not willing to drop. You want to learn is fine, don't evangelize us.

There is no true democracies either.
BBC News - Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

Broadly learning is a totally different thing, which I must say is not being done enough by members of this forum.

Some members of this forum seemed to be implying that they want to replicate a Qin Dynasty kind of system, which is absurd. You can pick and choose from the various things that have evolved through history.


And as for learning the history,

Our Celestial Empire possesses all things in prolific abundance and lacks no product within its borders. There is therefore no need to import the manufactures of outside barbarians in exchange for our own produce.

— Qianlong Emperor, Second Edict to King George III of England, 1792,
​

Do I try to evangelize?

You Bet.

Why do I do it?

Because the problem with members here, is that some are patriotic without reason, or with any significant understanding of things that can make or break a country.

This is markedly different from other forums like say twitter or quora, where I keep busting the myths of everyone. Trust me, I have had many many heated discussions with people who are sinophobic or ever China-haters.
Here, the problem is fundamentally opposite and this problem needs a fundamentally opposite response.

What?! Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. We started the "Rule of Law" thing. Go read legalism.

QIN dynasty is CHINA! China was name after the Qin State. Qin = Chin.

@Bussard Ramjet You didn't do your homework. You know why Chinese don't like you? Cause you have some political righteousness that you are not willing to drop. You want to learn is fine, don't evangelize us.

There is no true democracies either.
BBC News - Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

Also, coming to your final point.

Yes, there are no perfect democracies. But still there are undeniably some aspects like Rule of Law and Freedom of Speech.

Rather, personally I don't care about democracies as such. The only killer point is that democracies by their very nature play on public opinion, because however flawed a democracy may be, people still choose leaders, which is based on their public perception. Doing so, politicians and the system in democracies become masters in the politics of public opinion, narratives and identities.

So, in the end, the most important thing, China needs is Soft Power -- with or without Democracy.

Soft Power is the ability to

1. Manufacture and Guide Public Opinion
2. Create and Control Narratives
3. Control/Create/Destroy Identities
4. Be appealing to the Brightest People
5. Assimilate in itself any person

China doesn't have significant soft power.

Why?
(Some Examples)

1. The layman Public Opinion about China is very negative
2. China is not able to control narratives. Tibetans in exile have created a whole lot of half baked narrative, and most of the people see them as the oppressed etc.
3. China hasn't been able to create identities. Rather HK and Taiwan identity, distinct from China is getting stronger by day.

 

[powastick]

Broadly learning is a totally different thing, which I must say is not being done enough by members of this forum.

Some members of this forum seemed to be implying that they want to replicate a Qin Dynasty kind of system, which is absurd. You can pick and choose from the various things that have evolved through history.


And as for learning the history,

Our Celestial Empire possesses all things in prolific abundance and lacks no product within its borders. There is therefore no need to import the manufactures of outside barbarians in exchange for our own produce.

— Qianlong Emperor, Second Edict to King George III of England, 1792,
​

Do I try to evangelize?

You Bet.

Why do I do it?

Because the problem with members here, is that some are patriotic without reason, or with any significant understanding of things that can make or break a country.

This is markedly different from other forums like say twitter or quora, where I keep busting the myths of everyone. Trust me, I have had many many heated discussions with people who are sinophobic or ever China-haters.
Here, the problem is fundamentally opposite and this problem needs a fundamentally opposite response.

Of course you can bully them, since most Chinese don't learn humanities and social science as much as you do because in the eye of the communist is just a waste of time. Anyway the Chinese are learning, since the decline of Qing Dynasty. However not all western ideas we accept. We need to distinguish what is good what is bad. Of course you don't us to become the next imperialist.

I prefer to have leaders that could do their job(meritocracy). See all the Chinese leaders, they all have poker face. That is why I respect them. I don't want my leaders come from a postman, doctors and actors. They just need to concentrate and good on what they do.

Words have the power to both destroy and heal. When words are both true and kind, they can change our world. Buddha.
Freedom of speech must be curtail, because speech can be destructive. Just look at Hitler.

Rule of Law? There is rule of Law in China. Too much law can be bad too. That is why American cannot persecute their bankers for causing the mortgage crisis. And recently this How Apple lost $533 million to an 8th-grade dropout patent troll - Fortune The Chinese call it excessive Legalism.

I'm not a good debate partner. I'm a pretty slow guy and terrible memory, i have no doubt you can steamroll me. Sometimes I just blank out from thinking too much. If I'm close minded, I would not have tried to understand autocratic China. I enjoy reading people ideas and thoughts as it gives more perspective to life.

On soft-power, China just has to be itself. It doesn't need to pretend. I can't elaborate this, just my opinion.

 

[Nan Yang]

Qin good for unifying China. However it didn't last long. If you have draconian law that punishes people, nobody will speak to you. All you will have are mindless underlings that cannot think. It will be sort of North Korea.

The Qin Dynasty was too tyrannical to its base population, so we need to avoid that, but to rule over those liberals with a pair of iron fists is a must.
.

Actually most people talk about the Qin state only after Qin Shih Huang unified All under Heaven and then lasted only 27 years. But the state of Qin goes back far longer. The State of Qin has a history of over 800 years. Qin Shi Huang was only one of the Kings of Qin and inherited an already strong state and there were many other leaders of Qin that contributed to the rise of the State of Qin.

State of Qin was actually founded by a horse breeder Feizi in 9 century BC in the West of Zhou Empire. It was land nobody wanted because it was the most underdevelop and backward part of the Empire and was constantly invaded by the Xirong babarians.

But its location was a natural fortress protected by mountains and large area of grassland very suitable for horse breeding. By awarding this land to the horse breeder, the Emperor solved two problems. How to reward him and how to protect its western borders.

Over the hundreds of years, under very capable and competent Government, this under developed state of Qin became, by the Warring State period, one of the strongest.

If you study the rise of Qin, you will be shocked that some of its policy that were implemented over 2 thousands years ago, will sound very familiar today.

 

[somsak]

Some rumor said he is one of the descendant from Lanfang Republic. The Hakka oversea chinese half country half mining company in Indonesia. Is that true?

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Some yong kids behavior here make me sad,they r so aggressive and overreact,uncivil. They think only they are the true Chinese nationalist.but they lack of true Chinese character and old virtues ,never be great full to someone who ever helped.never listen ,tolerate different opinion,never be humble,.

It is always better to be aggressive than passive.

Never be on the defensive. Always pose questions, always ask - why?

Otherwise, you will be prey in the jungle.

韬光养晦的后半句是有所作为。中国人之前过于强调“韬光养晦”，而最近10年强调的是“有所作为”，这种态度的转变好像让有些习惯于自卑的人感到不舒服，如同习惯于卑躬屈膝的人不习惯站起来的感觉。