- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 519 Hour
- Reading permission
Liononthehunt Post time: 2017-11-7 12:52
The crooked politicians were punished in ROK, but damages have been done, which means democracy fa ...
Singapore is not a democracy at all, and the authoritarian leaders have run the country very very well.
Philippines' democracy failed
Regardless of political system, any country needs rule of law and good governance in all levels.
Democracy in Philippines has failed because the country does not have those qualities. Singapore has succeeded despite not having democracy, because it does have those qualities.
Singapore is also very compact city state, where regional differences simply do not exists. It does not have to keep the country united with strong government oppression same way as China for example - or Philippines, or even UK (at least in past).
There is the question, WHY does some region or group of people not want to stay united with rest of the country completely voluntarily. And from that we get back to the importance good governance and rule of law. Without those of the highest quality, there are always some separatist ideas, which then lead to oppression.
If China would have first, long ago, implemented rule of law and good governance, much fewer people in west would criticize Chinese socialism. Now they take failures in those aspects as failures of socialism.
Meanwhile, Chinese also make the same mistake - they boast about benefits of socialism, when improvements in rule of law and governance in general are the things to boast about.
For discussing political ideologies, the questions should be:
1. Which system is better in delivering or upgrading the rule of law and good governance, either in theory or in historical review?
2. Assuming a state has achieved good rule of law and governance, which system is best for the people to run the country long term?
With those question, personally I think the answer bends toward democracy, and I believe that Chinese argument (which I naturally expect to be opposite) arises from fear of going backward in those aspects. The fear that whatever rule of law and governance China has gained in last couple for decades, could be lost without their totalitarian leadership.
But important part of rule of law and good governance is, that they are designed so that they are resilient to any turmoils. If a country has achieved some degree in those, but has to apply strong controls to keep it that way, then there is still something to improve. Only when rule of law and good governance become self-sustaining, are you getting somewhere.