The passing of Mr Lee Kuan Yew has generated a huge nationwide grief. Newspapers have printed tributes, op-eds and features on Mr Lee throughout the week, while major TV networks have run talk shows and news pieces on Mr Lee daily since his passing on Monday (Mar 23).
Lee Kuan Yew, the founding father of Singapore is well-known around the world for transforming a tiny island outpost into a thriving metropolitan economic powerhouse with a resounding success. Much has been said and written about Lee all over the world in books, mass media and world dignitaries paid tribute to the achievements of Singapore’s founding Prime Minister Lee.
When Lee came to power in 1959, world circumstances were radically different. The US led industrialization and capitalism’s domino effect which carved the way to developing Singapore.
While it may seem nothing short of a miracle for a small resourceless state to achieve economic powerhouse status, the perceptional effect of this miracle is sadly not permanent. Lee Kuan Yew was a successful leader, economist and politician of his time and on his part has delivered the goods. However, Lee is only as as good as his last deal.
Singapore’s measures of income (median family and median household income, and poverty levels), and measures associated with income status (educational level and employment levels) have been a failure over the last decade. The reason for this failure is the inability of Lee’s regime to change, leave old ideas behind and adapt to changing conditions. Lee’s regime makes the same mistake most multi-national corporations did which led to their demise. However, in this case, the PAP corporate regime being a government has the upper hand of retaining its power through mandate and pushing the social cost back to its voters.
The city state is known for a general lack of democracy, lowest disposable incomes and purchasing power, workplace rights, minimum wages and an inefficient retirement scheme, all of which bear the hallmarks of third world nations. Beyond the details, Asia’s richest country has to come to reconcile the fact that its economic compact poorly serves the sustainability of a first world country, regardless of Lee’s achievements.
Such messy mishmash of social and economic policies just thrown together in a small island will have no common direction, no purpose and no common objective. There is simply no miracle in Singapore. Lee Kuan Yew was a temporary success but a permanent failure.
One has to guard against this complacency of viewing Lee’s economic miracle as a foundation and a resounding permanent success without factoring the long term implications of Singapore’s socioeconomic mirage. Lee has not left any sustainable legacy behind. He has only left his successful history. The future may be very different from the past.
Having said that, one can easily cast doubts on Singapore’s economic miracle and to safely conclude that the Singapore miracle may be just a temporary mirage. The days ahead look bleak and Singaporeans need to prepare for the worst is yet to come.
Wee from Down Under