Why has Singapore not achieved a full democratic transition, despite economic growth? A comparative case study of Singapore and Taiwan

• Main Author: Nur Shahira Binte Shahromey
• Other Authors: Duncan James McCargo
• Format: Final Year Project
• Language: English
• Published: Nanyang Technological University 2024
• Subjects: Social Sciences
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/175657
• Institution: Nanyang Technological University

In today’s global context, democracy is perceived as a fundamental ideal that should shape governance. According to the West, democracy is the standard that should be attained by every country that wants to be included in the liberal international order. However, some countries have still not achieved this standard, especially in the Global South. Southeast Asia specifically is a region that has a variety of political systems. Current literature shows that democratisation is often accompanied by economic growth. Thus, wealthier nations should have achieved democracy. However, Singapore, which has Southeast Asia’s highest GDP per capita, has not achieved a full democratic transition and is considered a hybrid regime. Many scholars have labelled Singapore’s political system “competitive authoritarian” or an “illiberal democracy”. In this paper, I aim to answer the question: Why has Singapore not achieved a full democratic transition, despite economic growth? I will be comparing Singapore’s political development with Taiwan’s democratisation to identify key differences in the growth of both countries. Through this comparison, I posit that Singapore has not achieved full democracy because of a mixture of factors: certain historical events influenced the leadership to impose certain ideologies, leading to a one-party hegemony that has resulted in the lack of a strong enough civil society to push for democratisation.