Lee Kuan Yew: A Legend Who Broke the Mold

Lee Kuan Yew: A Legend Who Broke the Mold
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 24, 2015

Executive Summary: Lee Kuan Yew has passed on. This superstar of history has fallen. His life was dogged by controversy. But when all is said and done, he was without a doubt one of the great men of history. Lee Kuan Yew plus Singapore appears to be an accident of history. But this accident provided a unique solution to the political, economic, and social problems every nation is sure to encounter and cannot ignore. One may praise Lee or condemn him. But Lee's death spells the end of a legend, one whom the world will not see again.

Full Text Below:

Without Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore would not have become the miracle it is today. Conversely, without Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew would not have achieved the standing he enjoys today. Lee Kuan Yew led Singapore to independence. That was his first chess move. That move paved the way for the Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew we see today. Singapore was an ethnic Chinese society that Malaysia expelled from the federation. Lee Kuan Yew successfully transformed Singapore's Chinese society into an "English speaking society".  This involved two paradoxes. One. Lee Kuan Yew took advantage of the expulsion. He did not advocate independence on his own initiative. Had he done so, Singapore today would be very different. Two. Following independence, Lee Kuan Yew retained English as the primary language. He took advantage of the fact that ethnic Chinese were the majority, to make English an instrument of Singapore's globalization. Had Lee Kuan Yew indulged in Chinese Chauvinism, had he acceded to majority calls for Mandarin Chinese, Singapore would undoubtedly be very different from what it is today. The policy choices made by Lee Kuan Yew during Singapore's founding revealed his extraordinary magnanimity.

Lee Kuan Yew's political philosophy has a number of notable features. One. Elitism. He often invoked "genetic determinism" and "eugenics first”. For example, he openly advocated that men with university educations should marry women with university degrees, He encouraged women with university degrees to bear more children. Two. Social Darwinism. He advocated fairness and the protection of the poor and underprivileged. In Singapore 84% of the population lives in government housing. But he also advocated social competition, and opposed populist social welfare policies. Three. Platonic Utopianism. Lee Kuan Yew denied any Platonist influences. But Singapore's political and economic structure differs little from Plato's ideal state. It features a philosopher king, Lee Kuan Yew, and a ruling elite. It features soldiers and teachers who protect the nation. It features businessmen and ordinary people. It even features “slaves”. There is of course no current equivalent to slaves. But among the 5.4 million people in Singapore, 1.3 million have the right to work but lack citizenship. Four. Machiavellianism. Lee Kuan Yew agrees with Machiavelli. He said Machiavelli was right about the choice between being loved and being admired. He said that if no one was afraid of him, he would have no value. Five. Paternalism. Lee Kuan Yew created "one-party dictatorship style democracy" in Singapore. Singapore holds regular elections. But it features a special form of partisan politics. The electoral system in Singapore enables Lee Kuan Yew and the PAP to win 60% of the vote, yet occupy 99% of the seats in parliament. This leads to "one-party dictatorship style democracy", under which opposition parties may have 40% of the votes but none of the power. The strict rule of law and generous salaries ensure clean government, with restrictions on freedom of speech. Singapore has a special form of elections and accountability, but lacks changes in the ruling party. Lee Kuan Yew has openly predicted that if Singapore ever implements Western-style political parties, it will inevitably descend into mediocrity.

In summary, politically speaking, the "Lee Kuan Yew model" does not repudiate democracy, but has reservations about democracy. It does not reject the rule of law and accountability. Socially speaking. It emphasizes social competition, embraces elitism, provides for social welfare, but rejects populism that panders to the poor and under-privileged. Singapore does not pander to either left or right oriented major powers. It treats the whole world as its hinterland, making possible the "Lee Kuan Yew miracle."

Lee Kuan Yew has global and historic stature. Obama called him an Asian legend. Kissinger said there is no other national leader who is a better strategist. Lee's role in the Taiwan Strait was also prominent. He visited Taiwan over 25 times. The first Koo-Wang talks in 1993 took place in Singapore. Beijing acknowledges that Deng Xiaoping's determination to embark upon reform and liberalization, began in 1978, when Deng visited Singapore. In fact, the Chinese mainland's political and economic reforms have long been aimed at transforming the Mainland into a "larger scale Singapore".  This may be difficult to achieve. Lee Kuan Yew deeply concerned about the relationship between Taiwan and the Mainland. But during his twilight years, many on Taiwan were angry with him, and pessimistic about Taiwan's future. Lee Kuan Yew is gone. Taiwan has lost a close friend willing to speak the truth.

Lee Kuan Yew said Singapore was too small. He said it was so small it could not change the world. But he changed Singapore, making it into a nation that commanded the world's attention. Lee Kuan Yew's rule was a unique and unprecedented combination of democracy and authoritarianism, market competition and social welfare, elitism and populism, globalization and localization. It was the product of Singapore plus Lee Kuan Yew. One may ajudge Singapore a success or a failure. Either way, it is probably impossible to replicate. Having lost Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's prospects are now uncertain.

Lee Kuan Yew plus Singapore appears to be an accident of history. But this accident provided a unique solution to the
political, economic, and social problems every nation is sure to encounter and cannot ignore. One may praise Lee or condemn him. But Lee's death spells the end of a legend, one whom the world will not see again.

聯合／李光耀逝世：一個無可複製的傳奇之句點
2015-03-24 01:40:07 聯合報 聯合報社論

李光耀去世。這是歷史天體中的巨星殞落。他的一生充滿爭議性，但加加減減之後，應當無損其足當被視為歷史偉人的評價。他的成就不僅反映在新加坡的治理，也反映在歷史與全球的高度上。當然，他受到的批評亦復如此。

新加坡沒有李光耀，不會有今日奇蹟；李光耀若不在新加坡，亦難有今日地位。李光耀領導新加坡獨立的第一手棋，即奠定了新加坡與李光耀的今日。新加坡當年是因「華人社會」而被馬來西亞「逐出」聯邦，但李光耀卻成功地以「英語社會」改造了新加坡的「華人社會」。此處有兩個吊詭：一、若李光耀不是善用「被逐出」的氛圍，而是主動鼓吹獨立，新加坡的外在情勢發展必不同於今日；二、獨立後，李光耀堅持以英語為主要語言，藉此將華人的優勢加以概平，英語並成為新加坡全球化的利器；若李光耀當時沉溺在華人優勢的思想，而順從多數主張以華語為國語，則新加坡今日的內部情勢亦必不同於今日。僅就新加坡建國時期的此類政策抉擇言，李光耀已流露出不同凡響的格局。

李光耀的政治哲學有幾點顯著的特徵。一、菁英主義：他常發表類似「基因決定論」及「優生至上」的言論。例如：他公開倡議大學以上學歷的男士應迎娶大學以上學歷的女士，並鼓勵大學以上學歷的女性多生育。二、社會達爾文主義：他雖倡導公平與保護貧弱，例如新加坡有八十四％人口住在政府興建的組屋中。但他更支持社會競爭，反對民粹媚俗的社會福利政策。三、柏拉圖式理想國：李光耀否認受到柏拉圖的影響，但新加坡的政經架構卻幾與柏拉圖的理想國無異：「哲君（李光耀）／金質人（菁英統治）／銀質人（軍人或教師等護國者）／銅質人（工商百業及庶民）／奴隸（不宜今昔相比，但新加坡五百四十餘萬人口中，有約一百三十萬僅有工作權而無公民權者）」。四、馬基維利主義：李光耀不諱言認同馬基維利。他曾說：「在被敬愛及被敬畏之間，我認為馬基維利是對的。如果沒有人怕我，我就沒有價值了。」五、家長式政治：李光耀在新加坡創造了「一黨專政的民主政治」。新加坡有定期選舉，也有特殊形式及內涵的政黨競爭；但新加坡的選舉制度，可使李光耀所屬的人民行動黨雖僅得六十％的選票，卻幾占九成九的國會席位。這種容許呈現四十％的反對者選票的「一黨專政的民主政治」，以嚴明的法治與優渥薪酬維持廉能政府，緊縮言論自由，雖說亦有特殊形式的選舉與問責，卻迄無政黨輪替的表現。李光耀更公開預言，新加坡如果推行西方模式的兩黨政治，「必然走向平庸」。

綜上所論，這種「李光耀模式」，在政治面，他不諱言質疑民主，對民主有保留，但不棄法治與問責；在社會面，強調社會競爭，以高薪收攬菁英，亦維持基本社福，但不以民粹籠絡貧弱。再加上新加坡不在列強之間左偏右袒，而以全世界為腹地，因而成就了「李光耀奇蹟」。

李光耀的地位是全球性的，也是歷史性的。歐巴馬稱他是「亞洲的傳奇人物」，季辛吉稱他為「再沒有比他更好的策略思想領導人」。李光耀在台海兩岸的角色也十分突出，他曾訪台逾二十五次，一九九三年第一次辜汪會談亦是在新加坡舉行；而北京也不諱言，鄧小平的改革開放思想與決心，肇始於他一九七八年的訪星之旅。其實，中國大陸在政經改革上，始終以成為「大一號的新加坡」為目標，但恐難效顰複製。李光耀原對台灣與大陸的競合關係甚表關切，但暮年對台灣的應對不以為然，並對台灣的未來表示悲觀。李光耀走了，台灣失去了一位摯友及諍友。

李光耀曾說，新加坡太小，小得無法改變全世界；但他卻改變了新加坡，使之成為全世界矚目的國家。李光耀的國家治理，將「民主／專制」、「競爭／福利」、「菁英／平庸」、「全球／在地」作成了史無前例的特殊比例組合。但畢竟這是新加坡與李光耀的組合，因而，無論視其為成就，或加以批評，恐怕均不可能再複製，甚至失去了李光耀的新加坡之前景如何，亦是未定之數。

李光耀與新加坡的組合，看似歷史的一場偶然；但這場偶然卻為所有的國家社會必然會遭遇到的政經難題，提供了令人無法忽視的特殊解答。李光耀辭世，這似乎是一個無可複製的傳奇之句點，無論你推崇李光耀或抨擊李光耀。