On Tue, 14 Oct 1997, DR. PHUA KAI LIT wrote:
> Singapore and China are becoming increasingly close allies.
> My prediction is that as the reality of Chinese capitalism
> and the current ideology of "Socialism with Chinese
> Characteristics" becomes even more untenable, official
> Chinese ideology will surreptitiously change to resemble that
> of Singapore's.
I agree, but I would point out that the "surreptitious change"
already basically took place circa 1980, not 1997. Most Westerners are
not prepared to recognise, and the Chinese leadership certainly is not
prepared to admit, that "socialism with Chinese characteristics" has no
substantively distinct content. Ever since Deng Xiaoping returned to
power, the elements in Zhongnanhai have interpreted "socialism" as
nothing more than economic growth and an income structure based on "merit"
rather than ascription. Even the "spiritual civilisation" that is
supposed to balance economic brutality does not go beyond discouraging
public spitting (a worthy goal, as anyone who has visited China will
attest, but hardly a societal model). Believe me, "ideologically correct"
Chinese get tied in logical knots if you press them on the implications of
China's current path.
> > Singapore's ideology: elite rule by scholar-bureaucrats/technocrats,
> (Revival of the traditional Chinese scholar-bureaucrat Mandarin)
> "We deliver the goods and you shut up and follow orders"
> Western values are decadent and are responsible for
> its decline. Asians ought to turn to "Asian Values".
> Singaporean version of the American Dream - Singapore as
> a true meritocracy (notwithstanding the fact of subtle discrimination
> against its Malay population).
> State-sponsored capitalism.
>
> Having worked in Singapore for 2 years, I can testify to the
> fact that Weber's prediction of the "iron cage of rationality"
> certainly applies to Singapore!
I deeply take issue with any comparison between Confucian and
Singaporean ideology. Confucius would spin in the grave to imagine that
traditional Chinese thought was being appropriated by the unsavoury likes
of Lee Kuan Yew and Zhu Rongji. Technocratic authoritarianism
fundamentally contradicts all the core tenets of Chinese political
philosophy, including the sociomoral content of "merit," elite social
obligation, primacy of society over economy, etc. "Xiang4 qian2 kan4"
("looking forward," or "looking towards money," a play on words often used
to describe the current entrepreneurial mood) hardly qualifies. The
Singaporean and Chinese leadership should trace its intellectual heritage
back to Kemal Ataturk, because their appeal to superficial cultural
assertion masks the huge discontinuity that they in fact are introducing
to East Asian society and thought. Calling the Sino-Singaporean route
"Confucian" makes about as much sense as calling Wall Street "Christian."
A revolutionary challenge to the Greater Chinese segment of the
transnational elite thus must take it to task on that count, and cease the
"social democratic" attacks on its supposed "continuation" of Confucian
"authoritarianism," for such an approach only plays into the hands of the
superficial cultural nationalists. Rather, we must seek to appropriate
the Chinese philosophical legacy--as well as its counterparts
elsewhere--and turn it to purposes that resonate more with its genuine
content. Turn the hypocrites' hypocrisy against them....
Regards,
"Wei Yadang"
===============================================================================
Adam K. Webb
Department of Politics
Princeton University
Princeton NJ 08544 USA
609-258-9028
http://www.princeton.edu/~akwebb