The Singapore Story- Part 2 – Social Controls

I love Singapore because it’s a mind-bender.

On my very first visit in 2004, I spent most of the time wondering how such a place exists and what makes it work. By 2005, I was living in Singapore and had ample time and ability to come to understand the strange orderliness and success of this little multicultural island city-state with its almost eerie utopian feel.

Singapore is almost unnerving in that it feels somehow fake. Most Westerners complain that it has no soul, people feel robotic, it’s a little too clean. There’s no angst, nothing goes wrong, everything is systematized. Perhaps because we typically complain about societal tensions, dysfunctional systems, political problems and other social ailments – the absence of these things not only scares Westerners, but almost makes a place feel empty.

Until you see the carefully crafted utopia of Singapore, you never fully know how much the rough edges of life are in fact, part of the enjoyment of it. Indeed, our art, literature, theater and music are all reflections of the dissonance and imperfection of our world. Our “problems,” human failings and struggles are in fact what bring meaning to our lives. Through the arts, we turn them into expressions of beauty.

Singapore has only recently begun to throw money into arts schools and music venues in the attempt to create arts in a place that produces none. In a system that strives – and in many ways succeeds – at eliminating human strife and struggle through a careful system of controls, nothing flowers.

Reactions to the Singaporean social-political experiment range widely. I’ve heard everything from brilliant to abhorrent. In some ways it’s a mixture of things crossing the spectrum.

Here’s how it works.

One of Singapore’s first challenges was reducing tensions between its three ethnic populations – Chinese, Tamil Indians, and Malays. The little resource-less island cut loose from both Malaysia and Britain would go nowhere fast if its people were constantly battling among themselves.

Singapore’s leaders understood this. The multi-cultural, highly educated group of leaders that founded Singapore were Oxford educated economists, lawyers and political scientists. They decided to use a system of economic incentives to lead people into choices that were “good for them.”

The move toward homeownership using the Housing Development Board (HDB) government built condos and the Development Bank of Singapore (DBS) which supplied the easy-to-obtain, low-interest loans eliminated homelessness and caused people to become attached to their new country. By mandating that an HDB condo block can have no more than 70 percent of any one ethnicity, Singaporean leaders began breaking down racial divides.

Given this was successful, it went further.

Singapore’s leaders – including its atheist prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew – believed religion is valuable because it instills morals and values. The government decided that it would find construction of places of worship for any and all religious groups, with one catch: places of worship could only be constructed in neighborhoods not traditionally of a religion’s core ethnicity.

In other words, Chinese Taoist temples could only be constructed in traditionally Malay or Indian neighborhoods and Hindu Temples could only go up in Chinese or Malay neighborhoods.

People became forced to mix – and to recognize each other’s right to worship. The hope was that eventually, there would be not just tolerance, but appreciation for the fact that all Singaporean ethnicities had important traditions and religious values.

Initially, Singapore allowed private schools to instruct in the ethnic languages of Singapore. There were a number of Chinese schools. After a decade, leaders realized that because public schools students were receiving English-medium instruction and some private school students weren’t, it contributed to divisions that were classist and well as racial. Despite painful political arguments, private schools were mandated to teach all subjects in English.

Similarly, at one time students were required to take their ethnic “mother tongue” as a second language. In the 1990s, this requirement was loosened to allow anyone to take any “mother tongue” – which allows Indians to study Mandarin and Malays to study Tamil if they so choose.

To prevent discrimination in the workplace, only English may be spoken within government agencies and major enterprises. The only exception to the rule is that employees may speak a “mother tongue” language to accommodate elder citizens who have poor English skills. All business and government paperwork must also be in English except for government forms designed to assist non-English speaking elders.

Singapore also accommodates it Muslim population with prayer rooms in all workplaces and office buildings and special adaptation to workplace uniforms that include head scarves for Malay women.

But the real twists start to occur in the system of financial incentives designed to create socialist outcomes using capitalist methods.

Singapore’s version of Social Security is called the Central Provident Fund (CPF). Like Social Security, everyone contributes via deductions from their pay or through tax payments. Only instead of paying the costs of other people currently receiving benefits, Singaproeans’ contributions go into a CPF account in their own name – like a savings account. Through the guidance of DBS, the government bank, Singaporeans can choose how they will divide their CPF monies between health care, retirement and downpayment for their first and second homes.

Retirement money can be invested in a list of approved securities and financial investments so that their money grows faster, but within the bounds of what Singapore considers safe.

The government tutors people through the process of building financial security – ensuring they become homeowners and provide for a healthy retirement.

Everyone in Singapore has insurance coverage through their government plan – but their CPF money funds their plans. So, when Singaporeans seek healthcare, their insurance accounts get debited.

So, how do they avoid going poor from healthcare?

Hospitals offer tiered service. People can choose to have a first-class private air-conditioned suite for a premium nightly rate, or stay in an 80-bedded open, fan-cooled ward for a much lesser rate. They see the same physicians and get the same quality nurses. Surgeries and medicine are the same. It’s like an airplane – the first class, business and coach passengers all get to the same destination, but pay different prices.

But what if someone can’t pay even the lowest rate?

Family members can transfer money to one another. So, if Grandma needs surgery but doesn’t have enough in her CPF account, the kids and grandkids can each kick in a little from theirs. If Grandma has no one, then she qualifies from the Singaporean version of Medicaid – the ultimate catch-all used by less than two percent of the population.

Everyone gets care, but through the choices and responsibility of private citizens. It’s all a part of Lee Kuan Yew’s “No beggar bowl” society. Everyone provides for themselves.

So much does Singapore believe in this, that it created, among other things, ice cream sandwich carts throughout the city for elders and those who don’t speak great English to operate. My favorite mango ice cream sandwiches are part of a plan for those who don’t have access to better jobs to still have employment.

Singapore cares for its environment and quality of life using a stick and a carrot. It builds fantastic, cheap public transportation backboned by its fantastic, clean and efficient subway system. Taxis too are plentiful and very reasonable for those who want extra convenience.

However, car-ownership is very costly. Singapore issues only 500,000 or so license plates for private cars. If no plates are available and a person wants to register a car in Singapore, they can buy a license plate from someone else who has one.

Additionally, through heavy taxation, cars cost about double what they do in the United States and all cars must be retired after seven years. Singapore also has a system of tolls that increase with the amount of traffic in an area aimed at discouraging congestion.

The result is that people can have cars, but they have to really want them. They can pay less than a Singapore dollar to get around, if they choose public transportation. Subways are even wired to allow mobile phone and wireless Internet use. For most Singaporeans, the choice is obvious – because the government wants it to be.

Then there are the rules. Everyone has heard of Singapore’s heavy fines for things that seem almost silly. The government fines people up to 500 Singapore dollars for infractions such as spitting, urinating in public, spitting out gum on the sidewalk (it used to be gum was banned), littering, J-walking, urinating in an elevator, public defecation, failing to flush a toilet and failure to wash hands in a public restroom.

Shocking and abhorrent by American standards.

However, you have to look at it in context. Singapore was trying to bring together three ethnicities into one Singaporean people. Each had their bad cultural habits. Chinese spit nasty red betelnut juice on the sidewalks. Indians were a little free with the public toileting. No one was big on washing hands.

Singapore not only needed to get people off each other’s nerves, but it needed to reduce communicable disease in a tropical country that sits one degree north of the equator. In an effort to form new, more considerate and healthier habits, the government became strict. Today, fines are rare – however, police gave fines rampantly during the 70s and 80s until the culture changed.

The thing is, that there’s not a fine for an action you or anyone likes.

Restrictive? Yes. Free? Not so much? Acceptable here? Absolutely. It’s a system of benevolent Asian patriarchy which people readily accept and respect.

The benefits are also staggering – particularly in the disease and sanitation department.

The clean, high-functioning city state and its fantastic economic success – a median annual income of $29,000 per year with a goal of $45,000 by 2020. The United States reported $39,000 in 2009.

Is the quality of life better? Are people programmed? Is it free? It depends on your standards and point of view. These remain debates – especially as many of the concepts are difficult and sometimes distasteful to foreigners. I can say it’s enjoyable – and more importantly, I can say it’s extremely civilized.

Sent from my iPad