Politics and Society in Southeast Asia. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2018. 74 pp. CAD$20.95, paper. ISBN 978-1-108-46046-0.
When Singapore makes an appearance in print, be it in the social sciences or the media, it is often in highly caricatured form. At times it is cast as a de facto Disneyland with the death penalty, where behind a thin façade of glittery cosmopolitanism lies a draconian, harshly repressive, and authoritarian state. At other times, Singapore is offered as the paradigmatic benevolent dictatorship, in which, freed from the strictures of democratic consent, an elitist leadership has single-handedly leap-frogged the country into unprecedented wealth and prosperity, in the process defying modernization theory and demonstrating an alternative model for political order.
There is no question that the city-state’s compact size invites facile characterizations of a kind that would not so readily be thrust upon larger countries. Another factor is the relative dearth of resources that provide an accessible, comprehensive, and objective overview of the country. Kenneth Paul Tan’s Singapore: Identity, Brand, Power goes a long way towards filling that gap. The short book—one of the first in the new Cambridge Elements – Politics and Society in Southeast Asia series—provides a much-needed broad-based yet critical introduction to the country that will appeal to generalists and specialists alike.
Tan argues that Singapore’s many contradictions trace back to its dual nature as both a small postcolonial nation-state and a cosmopolitan global city. These competing natures require different and at times seemingly incompatible state responses, as the state must simultaneously foster legitimacy among an often inward-looking “heartland” population while also cultivating an outward-looking, business-friendly, global city brand. The tensions inherent in this balancing act produce the pragmatic, if sometimes paternalistic, mode of governance that has become associated with Singapore.
Tan opts to focus the book on Singapore’s ideological and cultural negotiations, rather than its institutional or policy environment. He suggests a Gramscian lens to better understand the relationship between Singapore’s state and society. Within this, the state’s hegemony relies on perpetual and dynamic negotiation to build consensus between competing interests, rather than on the application of brute force, which appears only as a last resort. Legitimacy is built on three pillars: regular, multi-party (though not necessarily competitive) elections; the continued improvement of material living conditions through a relentless pursuit of economic growth; and claims by the dominant People’s Action Party of moral authority to rule. Unlike in the early post-independence period where repression was at times overt, resistance is now contained through sophisticated and highly targeted pressure, which engenders what Tan calls “a low-frequency culture of anxiety that nudges many to constrain themselves in a mode of self-censorship” (3).
The book is structured into eight short sections. Following the introduction, the second provides an accessible review of the ideological sources of the state’s legitimacy. This section is perhaps most valuable to readers unfamiliar with Singapore, as it provides a brief overview of the country’s institutional structure, as well as several other elements central to its developmental model, including its model of meritocracy, its “administrative state,” and the ubiquitous survival narrative. The third chapter reviews the multiracial, multilingual, and multi-religious nature of the nation; while it does not offer any new perspectives, it effectively captures the many ways that diversity shapes the country’s political dynamic and provides a brief snapshot of the state’s policy approaches to managing that dynamic. The fourth section examines the tension emanating from being simultaneously a cosmopolitan global city—in which non-Singaporeans make up nearly half of the population—and a small, post-colonial state with a significant population of relatively inward looking and conservative “heartlanders.” The fifth section engages the growth of civil society and its increasing skepticism with aspects of the state-society relationship. The next section reviews the nation and city branding exercises that emanate from those tensions. The seventh section covers the state’s usage of soft power to punch above its weight in international affairs, before the final section offers some brief parting thoughts on Singapore’s future, suggesting that the PAP may well continue to successfully renegotiate its hemogenic position for the foreseeable future.
Reading this book will do much to counter the all-too-ubiquitous, one-dimensional characterizations of Singapore, as it covers a wide range of caricature-busting ground in a mere 75 pages. Nearly all of it is in simple, jargon-free prose appropriate for a general audience or university classroom. Moreover, it largely avoids the pronounced pro- or anti-establishment overtones that mark much of the academic work on Singapore. But while this format makes for a highly accessible introduction, it imposes obvious constraints on depth. Many external observers of Singapore are drawn to the case precisely because of its numerous innovative and nuanced institutional and policy approaches to universal problems; Tan’s well-referenced book will point such readers towards appropriate resources, but it does not provide the sought-after detailed insights themselves. On the other end of the spectrum, scholars already familiar with Singapore will find some new insights from Tan’s critical analysis, but not without connecting some of the dots themselves as the book moves rapidly from topic to topic. Ultimately, no book can satisfy all ends. Singapore: Identity, Brand, Power is highly effective as a starting point for understanding Singapore and as a reference for those already familiar with the country.
Kai Ostwald
The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada