The Development Of Singapore’s Neo-authoritarianism Politics Since The 1980s

Political development is an important issue in the political science research, and the realization of the political system from autocracy to democracy is one of the goals of every country’s modernization. Authoritarian countries adopted different modes in the process of the transition to democracy, but most ended with political turmoil. Since the 1980s, the new development of Singapore authoritarianism has reflected distinctive characteristics, which have aroused widespread concerns.Singapore had long suffered from the British colonial rule. After independence, it established a democratic form of government. However, due to the impact of Confucian thought in East Asia, the People’s Action Party relied on the Neo-authoritarianism to govern the country and achieve great economic growth. In the face of the surging the third democratization wave and louder voice of domestic democracy, the People’s Action Party began to conduct moderate political reform under the premise of maintaining the ruling status and domestic stability. In the 1980s, Singapore began to relax restrictions on social regulation and construct the deliberative democracy. In the 1990s, it expanded space of the opposition and increased political pluralism; in the 21st Century, it updated the governance pattern and improved the political participation ability. The changes of economy, society and politics led the development of Singapore’s Neo-authoritarianism. Economic development resulted in the development of society, and promoted the social stratification. Cultural development popularized the consciousness of democracy and brought more political participation, which triggered changes of the tension between the consent structure and the authoritarian structure. Under the pressure of structural changes, the political elites of Singapore chose to reform the politics, moderated social claims on democracy and cemented the legitimacy of the government. Singapore’s political development eased the social demands for democracy, improved the level of political system, promoted the development of political democratization, deepened the degree of political integration, and helped the Singapore government to improve its ruling ability.Notably, despite the good results of political and social stability, the Singapore political development is full of uncertainty, not only the law degree of social autonomy, but also the limited space of opposition political party and such problems of voters’decreased attention on political and uncertain future facing elite politics bringing doubt about whether the future political development will remain sustainable and stable.