Economic Freedom and Political Liberty
November 21, 2009 by Our Correspondent
Filed under Columnists, Economics, Louis Lim, Opinion
By Louis Lim
The time has come for to raise serious issues of economic and political freedoms which we take for granted at our peril.
Many excellent points have been raised from a Western perspective as regards the erosion of democratic principles vis-à-vis economic freedom as proposed outside Western viewpoints. There is nothing wrong with this but the world as evolving currently requires an understanding of an Eastern perspective, in particular, a Chinese one. This is so because unlike the previous wealthy Chinese empire of the nineteen century, this emerging one would have a great impact (which it previously never had), on how the social-political-economic nature of the world is going to evolve.
I mention this because no other than the big Russian nation is now studying seriously whether a Chinese style (which John Naisbitt described as a form of ‘vertical democracy’) of government is more efficacious than an often disruptive and counter-productive, bicameral, Westminster style one.
No one who understands freedom could argue that a Western democracy is not the best form for individual freedom. In recent years, however, the advent of unfettered capitalism has seemingly made very questionable, the benefits of Western style democratic governance. It’s as though, the powerfully vested few could high-jack the system for their narrow interests alone, leaving the rest unprotected from wholesale skull-drudgery.
The strangest irony is that real democracy and unfettered capitalism (or true laisse faire) are, as Marx would describe, natural opposites. Democracy, in the simplest term is the will of the democratic majority, as expressed in individual ballots. Capitalism, on the other hand, is by nature autocratic, representing the will of a powerful minority. And when democracy becomes a captive of uncontrolled capitalism as in the US recently, democratic considerations takes a back seat, as it were, and the capitalist-autocrats take over and the common man suffers. Albeit, for only awhile (and this is the safeguard of democracy) but eventually, “he who holds the purse, controls the world”.
This is what the Chinese realised when Deng Xiao Ping, looked around in the eighties. You can have the longest, existing civilisation in the world but without money you are nothing. It did not take long before the pragmatic Chinese saw what needed doing; i.e. create a capitalist-type economy.
The question of compatibility was quickly resolved when Deng visited Lee Kuan Yew; he saw how an authoritarian regime sits well with capitalism and thrives. He got the answer of how you can control the population completely, at the same time provides them the means to be wealthy.
The rest, as they say is history. Confucianism, which provides the basic framework of Chinese society, and Communism, has fundamentally to do with respect of authority and allowing it to function without question; the provision being that it must do well in furthering the welfare of the people. It is thus clear that capitalism and autocracy are natural partners; nobody elects the leaders; the leaders elect themselves.
It is never understood, particularly in the right-wing West, why the Chinese people would not rise against the many human rights violations that the Westerner can see. The answer is that the Chinese view it differently. If your government has lifted ‘400 million’ or more of you out of abject poverty and your life is so much better in the last twenty years and there are opportunities to be fabulously rich, why would you object?
The assumption in the West is often that the individual generally knows what he wants and when enough numbers have the same wants they form the majority to elect the government they want. Off course, the rights of the minority, which can be a considerable number is often ignored.
This naturally results in a bicameral situation where one side is engaged endlessly in undermining the other, to the detriment of all. This fundamentally is the weakness. And when public opinion is controlled by a few press barons which represents only the interests of the few rich, democracy meaning free speech is often undermined.
Free speech becomes only free for opinion makers in the major newspapers. The voice of the ordinary man is often left unheard. Thus the warning of the sub-primed danger, the raising of Madoff’s schemes, the plight of the uninsured for health care and such, are like voices crying in the wilderness. The result is that the Chinese system now seems much better. Much of the world is now looking to China to lead it out of their economic crisis.
Those of us who treasure freedom have better wake up. Capitalism without social justice cannot endure as Communism with social and economic justice can. The enemies of Obama as reflected by the mean and vehement opposition of insurance companies in the US to the Health reforms, is a stark indication of the malaise of unfettered capitalism; it destroys democracy as we need it!
About the Author:
Louis Lim is a highly qualified certified management consultant who promotes entrepreneurship as a set of basic human skills for financial security! With them, anyone can always feel secure of making a living with or without a job. Louis has identified Internet Marketing as the latest opportunity for those seeking financial independence. He has decades of experience consulting for many firms and mentors many business people. He is sharing his skills in business on the internet. Louis Lim is also an Expert Author on Entrepreneurship in the top Ezine Business and Motivation magazines in the internet and Google.
Loading ...
antipap on Sat, 21st Nov 2009 4:37 pm
Sorry .
This article is part true and a very large part false.
” Chinese people don’t rise up and blah blah blah ”
Are you so sure ? what do you think the TS massacre was all about? Will you and the Commies you admire so much sweep that under that carpet too ?
And it is not as if it is easy to protest in China – the education is doctored, internet censored, media is state owned, public protest is not allowed, not forgetting that to protest may cost your life too.
I suppose you’d say ” oh but that is the price of success “.
Success ? my lan. Lifting 400 m out of poverty ? says who ? are these stats independently verified ?
And what about the other 800 m who still live in 19C backward farmlands ? Is that success too?
What about fact that despite all the Hoopla , PRC Per Cap GDP is still 50 places BELOW even Malaysia.
What about the 10’s of millions of your own citizens deaths sacrificed for this ” success ” ? I know of no country that would claim this as a ” success ”
What about about Taiwan ? per capita 10 x better than PRC and that was done with very few civilian casualties. Compared to them PRC is an utter failure.
Yes, you may be free to do the small petty things in PRC like buy porn or engage a whore, but you’d better not squeek 1 word against the regime or you’re dead.
So it’s great if you are a parasite foreigner and have no stake in the country but if you are a local you are nothing but a neo serf for the PRC and their cronies.
Doesn’t that sound like another place we know ? And no wonder that short fart Deng loved Sg so much.
Ballocks to the CCP , Ballocks to Mao.
Hail the great Sun Yat Sen the true founder of modern China , without him there would be NO PRC.
cy on Sat, 21st Nov 2009 4:58 pm
Let me start with a quote from an autocratic Churchill
“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”
yes,indeed democracy can be hijacked by unfettered capitalism if left unchecked. But, in the age of internet, there are more checks and balances against any hijacking.
Unfettered capitalism is due to an absence of morals. As they said “you can’t serve god and mammon”
autocratic rule may check unfettered capitalism by stressing good morals but without democracy, who is there to check on the successive autocratic rulers?
during the great depression of 1930s, ppl in usa also admired USSR due to its economic growth. in the end, time proves them wrong.
of course, china is now running a half-baked market economy with demographic tailwinds unlike USSR central planned economy, thus the growth may lasts longer. But is it substainable in the long term w/o political reforms? is there really social justice in China, you can read the numerous unjust stories from a website epochtimes.com.
ppl who want to abandon democracy just because of setbacks in capitalism must be careful of what they are wishing for.
george on Sat, 21st Nov 2009 5:49 pm
LKY and his pappies must pay for their political crimes against singapore:
http://fashionablefacistdictator.wordpress.com/
Fleeing Dogman on Sat, 21st Nov 2009 5:55 pm
“The result is that the Chinese system now seems much better. Much of the world is now looking to China to lead it out of their economic crisis.”
I think the world is not so wise afterall.
China’s growth is because it used to be closed to the world. Now its open. It forms a huge market. Its nothing nobel.
a simple supply and demand. no magic.
this does not mean china model is the best.
USA is still the best in my opinion.
All great ideas basically come from USA. It will continue to be created from there. People will continue to copy and innovate base on USA.
Its the wars and decisions during that war that resulted in their debts. USA was attacked directly in a huge way.
In short, the Debts were inflicted.
We should look at things from a long term perspective of say 50 years at a time.
It would be myopic to look at growth figures and assuming these will last forever. China never opened up. It now has, thats all. Obviously its economy will grow. what is so big deal?
Mutually Exclusive on Sat, 21st Nov 2009 7:08 pm
While political systems can affect economy,
certain political systems seems to not affect economy.
1. HK, TW, SKorea are great economies and their political systems are more similar than different when compare to singapore’s.
What does this signal me? Well, it seems that they are mutually exclusive in the sense that a more liberal democracy cannot hurt the economy and i suspect can improve it on certain ways.
Different Perspectives on Sat, 21st Nov 2009 10:16 pm
China seems to be imitating Singapore, some may argue. However, if that is so, Singapore has already gone through that road, while China is just starting along the same road.
Today, Singapore is going downhill but China has yet to reach that stage; she is at the stage where Singapore once was, producing double digits growth.
So, I would not give that much credence to the so-called “success” of China “that everybody is look towards to lead them out of the economic ….” that Louis Lim seems so confident of.
As I see it, his arguments are derived from his personal motivation, i.e. making money. He sees making money as the most important thing in life and in society; and he sees that in order to make lots of money, one should embrace autocratic leadership so that there is a centralised monopoly of power to provide stability that will help businessmen to make money and more money; and as an off-shoot the citizenry, the masses, are also enriched in the process.
His idea of a system of government is not different from that of the ancient systems of Kings, Emperors, Monarchs, Warlords, only that he argues it in a different way. Such systems have been exhaustively debunked and replaced be the modern Democratic System (and in a few countries, Communism or Socialist).
As I perceive, China is actually moving towards the Democratic System but it cannot simply switch over too quickly. USSR has tried, it failed and resulted in total disintegration because she did it too fast. I believe the Chinese are smart people. They must have studied both the Communist and the Democratic Systems thoroughly. They have experimented with Communism in various forms. They know their weaknesses and their strengths. They have also seen the ills and the strengths of Democracy being practised in the West. They will refine both the Communist and the Democratic Systems. I believe they will evolve a system that merge the strengths of both Communism and Democracy to suit their own people’s aspirations, their culture, their history, as well as economic and infrastructure development and progress, AT THEIR OWN PACE.
To grab upon an idea and try to sell it hastily is like selling a new product in the business world. But a new idea for the governance of a country cannot be simply sold in the way a new commercial product is done. Governance is dealing with the intangibles (feelings, opinions, desires, aspirations, etc.), while business is on the tangibles (products, services and money). For a system of governance to be successful, it takes time – a very long time. The Chinese experiment is only just the beginning.
Let us not be too hasty to conclude and judge.
People Power on Sat, 21st Nov 2009 11:39 pm
Some may feel very confident that the chinese are not bothered about politics or democracy as they just want prosperity.
I disagree with this assumption.
The Chinese are very Gungho and want a lot of freedom.
The Tian An Men incident showed how strong the chinese can want change and freedom.
If we look at things from a really long term horizon, no one would dare say the chinese dont want freedom and democracy.
All signs are showing that the chinese new generation cannot live without western technology the internet , gadgets and lifestyles and material goods.
Its no brainer that china will evolve into a democracy based on Freedom of expression for 1 simple truth of the universe.
No leader is immortal. I mean, when leaders change, usually a younger one takes over with different mentality or perspectives and background. When leaders change as inevitable as it is, china change.
ITs only fair to say that China will Change.
Its myopic to look at the current status to forecast for the future to be like the present. When china eventually becomes as big as USA, the problems faced by a wealthy nation and populus nation will also be facing China. Everything will change. Growth is not Forever.
Robox on Sun, 22nd Nov 2009 5:42 am
1. Re: “Filed under Opinion By Louis Lim”
Louis Lim Beng Tat YOUR OPINION SUCKS! Please don’t be ashamed of your true roots as a coolie/labourer and tell us what your real southern Chinese peasant name is.
And here’s why your opinion sucks.
2. Re: “Democracy, in the simplest term is the will of the democratic majority, as expressed in individual ballots.”
Where did you learn about democracy from? Ching Chong China? The Lee Kuan Yew School for Public Policy. Well, it shows.
“Democracy” broken down to its Greek root words is “demos” (ie. people) and “kratos’ (ie. will/power/force). In other words, democracy is about the will of the people – within reason, and there are provisions for that in all modern democracies – expressed through the institutions of state.
It is not, according to the “democracy” that you learnt from your Ching Chongland ‘the will of the democratic majority, as expressed in individual ballots’.
Can your crass coolie/indentured labourer mind grasp the difference?
The will of the majority is just code for the tyranny of the majority, and an excuse to further the tyrannies of Chinkapore, Ching Chong China, and a Russia that is clueless about democracy. As a Ching Chong who, as you mentioned, learnt ‘a lot about democracy’, don’t you know that Constitutions are part of modern democracies and Constitutions are there to protect the rights of ALL citizens, and not only the majority of the?
3. Re: “I mention this because no other than the big Russian nation is now studying seriously whether a Chinese style (which John Naisbitt described as a form of ‘vertical democracy’) of government is more efficacious than an often disruptive and counter-productive, bicameral, Westminster style one.”
And who in the world has any respect for Russia other than totalitarian regimes? US? Canada? Australia? New Zealand? UK? France? The EU?
And you say that the Westminster-style democracy is often ‘more efficacious’ and ‘disruptive’ and worse, ‘counterproductive’?
Well, maybe only to dictators in their unbridled zeal for steamrolling over unselfrespecting populations perhaps, with not a care to the feelings or the real circumstances of that population.
But I can tell you this with full confidence, NO ONE ELSE IN THE WORLD wants your fascism disguised as a neo-intellectual pseudo-critique of democracy.
Otherwise provide CONCRETE proof of the lack of efficacy and disruption, and of productiveness, or go back to Ching Chong China if you don’t want any democracy in Singapore.
4. Re: “The strangest irony is that real democracy and unfettered capitalism (or true laisse faire) are, as Marx would describe, natural opposites.”
If by ‘real democracy’ you mean the democracy as postulated in Greece 200 years ago, I agree with you. But you are also behind the times by those same 2000 years.
Not surprising for backward Ching Chongs.
Dear Ching Chong Louis Lim Beng Tat, fast forward 2000 years and there is something called Modern Democracy, a democracy that attempts to maximize participation by the largest number of citizens so as to produce the most well rounded laws, policy etc. Modern democracy is not about the exclusion that China’s and Chinkapore’s political cultures are all about; it’s about inclusiveness.
And when that happens in Chinkapore, you are actually copycatting from the more advanced modern denmocracies of the West. Again.
Not the other way around. And claiming Ching Chong as the source.
It’s your head that is twisted the other way around.
Send it for examination!
Give me liberty or give me.. on Sun, 22nd Nov 2009 11:29 am
‘I curse the day I was born a Singaporean’
By Olinda Brazil from Malaysiakini
It is very amusing to see how Malaysians (probably of the minority races) have spasms of ecstasy when referring to Lee Kuan Yew (LKY) in Malaysian forums. From across the border in Malaysia, Singapore seems like Wonderland and LKY like a benevolent god.
As a Chinese Singaporean, born of Malaysian parents who took up citizenship here in Singapore, I can understand why they feel this way. The grouses are familiar: NEP, corruption and ineptitude in governance.
Let me provide an insight on how it is like to be a Singaporean. I must first stress that new immigrants or Permanent Residents (PRs) from Malaysia (like my parents) will not experience any disadvantages. It is the children of these people (like me) or new PRs’ children (who will be Singaporean) who will feel the disadvantages most sorely, and curse the fact they were born in Singapore.
http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/06/30/i-curse-the-day-i-was-born-a-singaporean/
Give me liberty or give me.. on Sun, 22nd Nov 2009 11:31 am
The hidden ugly side of Singapore
By Vijay Kumar from Malaysiakini
In between the glamarous buildings and shoppings complexes of this city state, there is huge suffering that the world has never seen. Something that the Singapore government or media will try to hide from the rest of the world. And this is the lives of 80 percent of ‘true’ Singaporeans who live in the republic’s Housing Development Board (low cost) flats.
I, like many young youths, went looking for a better future in this Lion City of opportunity, After four years of working experience in Kuala Lumpur. It was my first experience outside Malaysia and I was very happy to be offered a job in Singapore with a basic salary of S$3,500.
Then, with huge hopes, I started looking for a master bedroom to rent being single. I finally got a master bedroom in Clementi for S$700 a month but only after being rejected by many other landlords for being Indian. The ensuing eight- month ordeal that I spent in this HDB flat really opened my mind to what Singapore is for those who can’t earn.
http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/07/07/the-hidden-ugly-side-of-singapore/
disappointed on Sun, 22nd Nov 2009 7:21 pm
reading the comments of antipap and Robox make me despair as to the quality of debate on this site.
It seems that all too often, these people grab whatever nuggets of information that they’ve read, weave it together, and then try in vain to dress it up as a so-called “rebuttal” / “argument”.
Perhaps it would be better to have an apathetic population than a population of fools who have deluded themselves into thinking they are engaged in constructive debate when all they are are the online equivalent of a bunch of mobsters with stick in hand waiting to bash anything or anyone which they misunderstand or can’t understand.
Louis Lim is not a fascist, neo serf, commie, or any other label that you might have googled, or wikipedia-ed. His article is not a pseudo-critique of democracy, because it is not a critique of democracy at all.
For the sake of Robox’s “coolie / indentured labourer” mind, the rough trajectory of his article is as such:
- The development of the political-economic climate in China is going to have a vast impact on the world.
- How? One example is how another behemoth (Russia) is watching China’s success closely to see whether it should adopt a Western-style democracy, or Chinese-styled more autocratic government
- Western-styled democracy unquestionably accomodates personal freedoms the most. But recent events have shown that the system is prone to hijack by ‘Special interest groups’ (he gives an example in the last paragraph: Powerful insurance companies opposing Obama’s healthcare reform, to the detriment of the ordinary folk)
- Democracy & Capitalism are in fact, polar opposites. (implied here is that people tend to think that one necessarily entails the other, and here he debunks that)
- Deng Xiaoping realised this (”that capitalism and autocracy are natural partners”) and proceeded to with economic reforms in China, because political reforms could be simultaneously delayed
- The next 2 paragraphs are essentially like christmas decorations. He just states that west can’t understand why the Chinese would give up their personal freedoms
- If i understand it right, in the last few paragraphs he summarizes the sorry state of democracy in the US: Split down the middle by bipartisan politics. The facts cease to matter, what matters are the emotions of one party vs. another. The press exploits this. Papers which side with the republicans demonize the democrats’ policies: (e.g. well-intentioned healthcare reform suddenly becomes a monster which will increase healthcare costs for all.)
- Amidst the fray, the voices of reason, the ones who speak objectively, are “like voices crying in the wilderness”. Torn and weakened by bipartisan politics, America has lost its moral standing in the world.
- People look towards China’s system as a model of order, and good sense. And that is fundamentally his warning to us all. He says “Capitalism without social justice cannot endure as Communism with social and economic justice can” NOT because he truly believes in communism, but because China’s model of communism with social and economic justice today seems like the well-reasoned, the RIGHT choice, the way to go. China’s moral standing in the world is increasing.
- Finally, “those of us who treasure freedom had better WAKE UP”, because unfettered capitalism is destroying democracy today! THAT is the crux of his message. He isn’t a communist, or purely “motivated by money” as some of you have suggested.
What on earth do you bring up Tiananmen Square for?!?!?
PLEASE READ AND THINK, BEFORE YOU SHOOT OFF SOME REHASHED, REGURGITATED ARGUMENTS, AND QUOTE IRRELEVANT FACTS AND HISTORY
Autocracy foster innovation fat hope on Sun, 22nd Nov 2009 9:35 pm
Autocracy stifles free flow of ideas, creativity and rejuvenation of society and the development of sustainable cultures.
Democracy is the reverse which is why little innovation of sustainable value comes from countries infested with dictatorship.
Innovation is strongest in US, EU, Japan, South Korea and Australia while IT software is from India.
Autocracy is focussed on attainment of power and the status quo in the maintenance of power domination while democracy is focussed on change adaptation and renewal of replacing irrelevance with relevance
fair and square on Mon, 23rd Nov 2009 1:29 am
DEMOCRACY IS NOT NECCESSARILY SYNONYMOUS WITH CAPITALISM!
the rich and mighty made it so because of their “greedism” !
true democracy means equal rights but what equal rights did the poor have when the “capitalist rich” are being bailed out of the financial crisis caused by their greed?
the rich should help the poor or has globalisation change the moral equation?
i must insist democracy is an ideal yet to be achieved even by
the world’s greatest proponent of democarcy,the USA?!!!
DEMOCRACY,as it should be,is about EQUITY!
Robox on Mon, 23rd Nov 2009 3:47 am
To the stupid sliteyed, pigtailed and bucktoothed coolie, disappointed on Sun, 22nd Nov 2009 7:21 pm”
Re: “PLEASE READ AND THINK, BEFORE YOU SHOOT OFF SOME REHASHED, REGURGITATED ARGUMENTS, AND QUOTE IRRELEVANT FACTS AND HISTORY.”
It’s obvious that it is YOU who needs to follow your own advice.
This article is just another incarnation of ‘Asian’ values-based democracy. (Read: the ossified political values of feudal China based on the deeply flawed Chinese legal philosophy called “Legalism”). It’s a thinly-veiled Chinese chauvinism first inflicted on Singapore by your great Chinese supremacist Lee Kuan Yew.
Don’t just read THE lines; read between and beyond them as well.
antipap on Mon, 23rd Nov 2009 4:29 am
@Give me liberty or give me.
Mainly it’s the Indians who love LKY I am a Chinese Malaysian and I certainly have no time for him.
I told you guys to watch out for that kundut Robox who is a anti Chinese racist disguised as an anti PAP protestor.
single ward on Mon, 23rd Nov 2009 9:28 am
disappointed on Sun, 22nd Nov 2009 7:21 pm
Your elaboration of Lim’s thesis is NOT off the mark. But I feel Tiananmen Square is PERFECTLY RELEVANT because it is the China divide which could tear China apart. I have seen on countless occasions how the weak there are so cruelly oppressed that the China model is a fiction of “truth” or “success”. Have you seen those in power bashing up old ladies selling food by the roadside for “illegal” hawking when obviously they have NO means of livelihood – their land taken away by those in power for “greater economic advantages” NOT relevant to the displaced? IT IS REPULSIVE TO WATCH.
It is almost slavery in some instances outside the main cities where cruelty prevails shut from media and public eyes of foreigners? Haven’t you read in MSM slave labour in brick kiln where obedience was exact by physical beatings worse than prison? Protesters of evil were reported to have been taken to “hidden jails” and raped into submission. Men and women toil in very harsh conditions for a pittance. China is a showcase of beautiful glamour big cities with all the envious show of modern infrastructure and convenience living, just go into the countryside to see the real China where corruption and oppression rule.
Ask yourself why the rich don’t built lakeside villas to enjoy their good lives and serenity in the pollution-free quiet vacational countryside living?. They have the corrupt means to acquire land there – maybe forcibly as well. My guess is that they will need to hire a private army of bodyguards because the poor might organise raid and hold them hostages for ransom or just killing in envy.
TIC. This is China. The real thing which might explode like a volcano without warning and the rest of the world wake up to find the the autocratic model of success in China was a BIG joke. Without the oppression of the Communist Party backed by its army, it would have collapsed long ago. Mao did not know his coffin was “defecated” to this extent.
disappointed on Mon, 23rd Nov 2009 1:41 pm
@antipap: Good grief. I think you’re right about Robox. He’s an anti-chinese Nazi. moderators beware