Hacker News Reader

Comment by joubert | Hacker News Reader

Economic freedom isn't worth squat if you have no human rights.

Economic freedom is a human right.

...but not the only one. For instance, #2 on the list there is Singapore, which is somewhat infamous as a semi-authoritarian society with, for instance, many restrictions on freedom of speech and laws criminalizing various types of undesired behavior, such as littering, jaywalking, chewing gum, and not flushing toilets. (cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Singapore#Criminal_law )

On the other hand, they have little corruption and low crime rates, so hey, if it works for them...

See also, the State of World Liberty index: http://stateofworldliberty.org/report/results.html http://stateofworldliberty.org/report/rankings.html

They attempt to get a broader view of freedom by including other indices.

Their tops, from 2006: Estonia, Ireland, Canada, Switzerland, Iceland, Bahamas, United Kingdom

And then, finally, United States

Singapore is ranked 49th, on account of being ranked 95th in the "individual freedom" category.

Less important that the ability to vote, the ability to marry, freedom of speech, ability to move freely, freedom of association, etc.

Without any of these, there can be no economic freedom.

I'm as big of an advocate for justice and human rights as anyone, but this just isn't true. Hong Kong and Singapore are the obvious examples.

Do you mean that economic freedom is meaningless without broader human rights?

I'm saying that economic freedom is predicated on these other (more basic) human rights. For example, if you don't have the right to associate freely, your economic freedom is severely curtailed. Conversely, if you have a high degree of economic freedom, you probably have the right to freedom to associate.

This is an insightful analysis of HK and Singapore's so-called high degree of economic freedom: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/08/opinion/08iht-edbowring.ht...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com