[The following are excerpts from a paper entitled “Lee Kuan Yew: Leading Singapore, Lessons In Leadership,” submitted to Atty. Damcelle Torres Cortes, Professor in Development Management 201 -Managerial Leadership, University of the Philippines – Los Banos (UPLB) – Fidel M. Arcenas]
Criticism, Culture, and Values
Criticism
Culture and values oftentimes condition the mode of social, political and economic organizations. Countries or societies which embrace a common cultural heritage can be said to have evolved systems of political, economic, and social arrangements distinct from – and sometimes in opposition to or in conflict with – the rest of the world.[1] To a certain degree this was the case of Singapore.
Lee Kuan Yew has been widely criticized for being authoritarian, especially by Western critics. William Safire, in the February 15, 99 issues of the New York Times referred to him as “the dictator of Singapore.”
Lee Kuan Yew strongly believed that due to the differences in culture, the Western idea of liberalism cannot be embraced as a model for Asian countries like Singapore. Arguing against Western liberalism, he said: “(Asians) have little doubt that a society with a communitarian values[2] where the interests of society take precedence over that of the individual suits them better than the individualism of America.” So vocal was Lee Kuan Yew of his “soft authoritarianism,” along communitarian line, that Francis Fukuyama, the author of “The End of History”[3] observed that countries like Singapore are potential competitors to Western liberal democracy, and “(their) strength and legitimacy is growing daily.”[4]
Like many of his contemporary Asian leaders, Lee reasoned that multi-ethnic nature of many East Asian states and the demands of managing the welfare of developing societies dictate certain priorities and an element of authoritarianism, just as they did in the West when it was undergoing a similar phase.
In an interview with TIME Magazine (12 December 2005) with M. Elliott, Z. Abdoolcarim and S. Elegant, Lee Kuan Yew explained the difference between the Western and Asian cultures:
“We also have a different culture, a different way of doing things. The individual is not the building block. It’s the family, the extended family, the clan and the state. The five crucial relationships are: you and the prince or the ruler, you and your wife, you and your children, you and your parents, you and your friends. If those relationships are right, everything will work out well in society.”
In the same interview, Lee Kuan Yew responded to a broad range of issues against him:
“…I’m not guide by what Human Rights Watch says. I am not interested by Freedom House or whatever. At the end of the day, is Singapore society better or worse off? That’s the test. What are the indicators of a well-governed society? Look at the humanities index in last week’s Economist, we’re right on top. You look at the savings index, World Bank, we’re right on top. Economic freedoms, we’re on top. What is it we lack? Reporters Without Borders put Malaysia’s newspapers ahead of us. In Malaysia the ruling coalition parties own the major newspapers. In Singapore the major banks are in control of the company that runs our newspapers. There is no information that Singaporeans want that they cannot get. All major foreign newspapers and magazines are sold here. We demand a right of reply, that’s all. And if you go over the line, if you defame us, we’re prepared to sue you, go into the witness box and be cross-examined. You can brief the best lawyers and demolish us. If I’m involved, I go to the witness box. And you can question me, not only on the particular defamatory issue, but all issues in my life.”
Culture & Values
Like many people of Chinese descent, Lee Kuan Yew’s values are strongly influenced by Confucianism. Such values as filial piety (respect for one’s parents);
[“Few of those who are filial sons and respectful brothers will show disrespect to superiors, and there has never been a man who is respectful to superiors and yet creates disorder. A superior man is devoted to the fundamental. When the root is firmly established, the moral law will grow.” A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, Wing-tsit Chan, ed., (Princeton University Press, 1963) Analects I:2 Filial piety was extended by analogy to a series of five relationships or bonds: ruler to ruled; father to son; husband to wife; elder brother to younger brother; friend to friend.]
humaneness (the care and concern for other human beings); and
[Confucius said: “…The humane man, desiring to be established himself, seeks to establish others; desiring himself to succeed, he helps others to succeed. To judge others by what one knows of oneself is the method of achieving humanity…” ( Sources of Chinese Tradition, Wm. Theodore de Bary, ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1960), Analects VI:28]
ritual consciousness (the proper way of doing things in the proper sense).
[Confucius argued that under law, external authorities administer punishments after illegal actions, so people generally behave well without understanding reasons why they should; whereas with ritual, patterns of behavior are internalized and exert their influence before actions are taken, so people behave properly because they fear shame and want to avoid losing face In this sense, “rite” is an ideal form of social norm.]
The culture of honesty, respect for law and order, hardwork, ruggedness, and adaptability which Lee Kuan Yew developed within the government and among his people are reflective of the Confucian values he believed in and lived by.
Conclusion
As I was about to complete this paper, I came across a column in the Philippine Daily Inquirer written Edilberto de Jesus, the President of the Asian Institute of Management. In his column, de Jesus cited the 2010 World Competitiveness Yearbook published by the International Institute for Management Development (IMD) which has tracked the competitiveness factors in many countries of the world. These factors contribute to an environment that enable countries more value creation for their enterprises and more prosperity for their people.
Of the five countries ranked by the IMD as most competitive in the world, Singapore ranked 1st; Hong Kong 2nd; the United States 3rd; Switzerland 4th; and Australia 5th. Of the five most competitive, three are in the Asia-Pacific region. The Philippines ranked 13th out of the 13 countries in that regional grouping, behind Asean members, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia. Of the 59 countries covered in the competitiveness report, the Philippines ranked 39th.
The Singapore experience shows how a leader can change the destiny of a country.
I do not propose that the only way forward for the Philippines is to follow the footsteps of Lee Kuan Yew.
I do propose that we revisit our own experience and learn from where our leaders failed. I do propose that we take a long hard look at what makes true leaders.
I do propose that we, whether in government or private sector, in formal and non-formal organizations, in teams or communities, learn and apply the lessons of leadership.
Then, perhaps, from our own crop of leaders, someone may stand out to lead us to a brighter destination. ###
[1] T. inoguchi and E. Newman, “Asian Values” and Democracy, Proceedings of First Shizouka Asia-Pacific Forum: The Future of the Asia-Pacific Region, March 28, 1997, Hamamatsu, Shizouka, Japan
[2] Communitarianism is a social philosophy that maintains that sruaociety should articulate what is good; in contrast to liberalism, a political position that holds that each individual should formulate the good on his own
[3] F. Fukuyama, “The End of History and the Last Man,” Free Press, 1992
[4] T. inoguchi and E. Newman, “Asian Values” and Democracy, Proceedings of First Shizouka Asia-Pacific Forum: The Future of the Asia-Pacific Region, March 28, 1997, Hamamatsu, Shizouka, Japan
No comments:
Post a Comment