Hacker News Reader

Comment by brnt | Hacker News Reader

Singapore's repression isn't exactly a secret, and if freedom is not a purpose to use your wealth for, then I don't see the point of wealth.

Counterculture is healthy and natural for many reasons, and its absence is a concerning indicator for any nation.

View on HN

Singapore isn't noticeably more repressive than other countries in South East Asia. All things considered, I'd say it probably leans on the more open side, but these things are hard to judge. If people want to avoid South East Asia altogether because it's systems are too different, they're welcome to. But I don't think it makes sense to expect everyone to write off the entire region.

As for culture, Gibson is dismissive of their music and gets bothered that people in music stores don't recognize the Japanese punk band he likes. Rather than being open to the local music (which I personally have enjoyed), he's bothered that the people he meets aren't following along with the same global cosmopolitan trends he's accustomed to.

Repression is a set of vicious laws that strictly punish people who step out of line, not a vibe. It's alright to enjoy a repressive culture, but odds are it because the laws are directed at people who are not you, to keep them from bothering you. That's why a good sign of repression is presidents-for-life and political dynasties.

You didn't need the laws unless you had a population who wanted to do the things.

I'm not sure where you're getting "vibes" from. Some things are pretty noticeable, like how often you come across blocked websites in different countries, what countries limit you from bringing in (such as bibles), mandated public national anthems, public political ideology, mandated social laws, structure of government, etc. If you're familiar with the region, you're going to come into contact with a lot of these, and Singapore isn't one of the more repressive states in the region from my experience.

You can even look at capital punishment, which the article headline highlights. Most countries in the region have it.

The laws exist to keep the minority of counter culture people from disrupting the orderly society enjoyed by the majority. Elevating the “rights” of the minority over the comfort of the majority is not a universal value.

Eh, if you look at the history of the current state of Singapore, it's quite obvious that the repression was in no means put in place for any kind of high-minded weighing of the needs of the many against the few. It was put in place by the regime of Lee Kuan Kew, which was every bit as morally bankrupt and shamelessly brutal as the man himself.

Protecting minorities from the majority is precisely what democracy is about. Might is not right!

This is a very western viewpoint! For most Asian societies, “freedom” is a means to an end, not an end in itself. Some level of counterculture is inevitable and must be tolerated. But folks in Tokyo, for example, wouldn’t be happier if their society were more like NYC!

The Japanese constitution would beg to differ.

> Article 11. The people shall not be prevented from enjoying any of the fundamental human rights. These fundamental human rights guaranteed to the people by this Constitution shall be conferred upon the people of this and future generations as eternal and inviolate rights.

It can’t get any clearer than this. Even suggest replacing that with “freedom is just a means to an end,” and Tokyo, or rather, the entire country is going to be pissed.

It's true but current Japanese constitution is originally written by US. Here in Japan, people tend to think that freedom is given thing, rather than gained thing. So maybe there's no very strong preference for freedom like US, but also think grouping "Asia" is too rough. PRC is quite different at least.

Sure, the US did draft the constitution, but the only people making any fuss about it is the Japanese far right. While Japanese people certainly don't talk about their constitution as much as Americans do, it's still safe to say that it has widespread acceptance. The majority of the population wouldn't accept a major overhaul of the constitution, let alone any attempt to have their freedom taken away. The only source of any serious controversy in the Japanese constitution is article 9, which prohibits Japan from having their own military. But that's a different kind of topic from individual freedom.

Human rights are not Western, they are universal. Don't eat the propaganda so willingly.

The notion that folks in NYC have figured out some “universal” truth that folks in Japan haven’t is the propaganda.

Nothing says "I'm a westerner" more than speaking about "Asia".

Never been to NYC btw.

I’m Bangladeshi (but born in Thailand and raised in the US) so I’m not unfamiliar with the general contours of “Asian” cultures. While south Asians, East Asians, and Southeast Asians, in particular are vastly different culturally (as well as massive cultural differences within each of those groups), it’s fair to characterize Asian cultures as placing far less emphasis on individual “freedom” than western ones.

Until 2019 Tokyo schools required all students to have black hair—including dyeing hair for students who don’t have black hair naturally. In America people would consider that a violation of “universal human rights.” Bangladeshis aren’t quite so conformist, but my parents would flip out if I did anything to my appearance that would stand out in public.

Tokyo changed the rules precisely because it was widely criticized as being as inhumane and unjust. It’s not because people thought it was a good idea.

> if freedom is not a purpose to use your wealth for, then I don't see the point of wealth.

Perhaps you are not creative or evil enough for exploring alternatives.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com