Comment by eru | Hacker News Reader

Comment by eru | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Singapore has only recently become affluent, mostly thanks to hard work by the locals, but also partially thanks to policies that did not discourage people from putting in that hard work.

I'm not sure what you mean by monocultural? Singapore is famously multicultural.

Singapore is very open to foreigners. Almost no one's family has been here for longer than three or four generations. I'm not sure where you get xenophobic from? (However, they do like some foreigners more than others. Just like in the rest of the world, people who came from affluent places to spend money are typically the most welcome visitors.)

Authoritarian might be true, depending on your definition of the world. To call them 'borderline fascist' you'd need a rather torturous definition of fascism (or a generous definition of borderline).

Yes, Singapore is a city-state. For comparison, Berlin and Hamburg are also city states in the federal system of Germany and enjoy considerable autonomy, but with less success. I agree that more cities should become independent and be better run as city-states. London would be an interesting candidate.

> To call them 'borderline fascist' you'd need a rather torturous definition of fascism (or a generous definition of borderline).

Does hanging people arrested with small enough amounts of drugs that you'd get a relatively minor punishment in the U.S. not at least toe the borderline of fascism?

No, it's well known to everyone everywhere that trafficking drugs into Singapore will get you a death sentence. Those drugs destroy families, they absolutely destroy families.

not really. fascism isn't just "doles out severe punishments." It's a slightly tired trope to trot out Umberto Eco's definitions of fascism but suffice to say it's a name for a political tendancy that appeals heavily to imagined glorious history and family while stoking fear of a destabilising influence within society, taken to extremes. It usually also emphasises emergency needing reliance on strong leaders and distain for comittee and taking time to make right decisions that work for everyone.

Sometimes people get all upset when they hear some of these characterisations, because they personally think family ought to be more important, or that people are ignoring a proud shared history. Maybe they feel that beuracracy and comittee meetings have led to overcomplexity. It turns out as with anything else these things are perfectly fine and not bad until this way of thinking becomes the sole goal of the leading class, they become highly authoritarian, and it lashes out more and more at any percieved imperfection in society regardless of severity.

Does this fit with singapore, to a greater or lesser extent? I really don't know. But I understand why people would feel annoyed by simplifying it down to "strong laws against drugs"

Fascism is very specifically about about the subordination of all competing spheres to the State. "All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."

> Does hanging people arrested with small enough amounts of drugs that you'd get a relatively minor punishment in the U.S. not at least toe the borderline of fascism?

No. Why?

Singapore goes up to the death penalty for trading in drugs. Consumers of drugs face punishment, but not the death penalty.

In any case, harsh punishment does not make anything fascist (nor does comparatively lax punishment make something not fascist).

Eg the US is not fascist, despite them handing out harsher sentences for eg drug offenses than other parts of the world (or even the US itself at different points in time).

(Just to be clear: I like living in my adopted home of Singapore. I disagree with their drug policies, and think drugs in general even 'hard' ones should mostly be taxed, not banned. But I don't harsh punishments for some behaviour is a sign of fascism. Especially if the laws are clear and knowable, and there's a scrupulous legal system that predictably enforces these laws for all without prejudice.)

> Does hanging people arrested with small enough amounts of drugs that you'd get a relatively minor punishment in the U.S. not at least toe the borderline of fascism?

No.

Fascism, of course, tends to incorporate harsh punishments for (at least some) criminals, but that's neither central to fascism nor is it sufficient for fascism, you don't get anywhere near the borderline of fascism just with ahesh criminal punishments forbthings that are widely criminalized in liberal regimes.

It may be bad, but not all bad things are fascist.

It's authoritarian for sure, but not Fascist. Fascist regimes have historically been quite OK with drug use so long as it serves their ends.

Compare https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Panzerschokolade

Reply on news.ycombinator.com