1

ExaminewhetherauthoritariancapitalismisaviablealternativetoitsWestern

liberalversion,topromotelongtermeconomicgrowthanddevelopment.

By

TobyE.Evans

TableofContents:

1.0Introduction

2.0TheLiberalDemocraticModel

2.1Liberalism

2.2Casestudy TheUnitedStatesandAustralia

3.0TheAuthoritarianCapitalistModel

3.1CaseStudy China

3.2CaseStudy Singapore

4.0Conclusion:isAuthoritarianCapitalismaViableAlternative?

2

1.0Introduction

Atfirstglance,theterm'authoritariancapitalism'appearstobeoxymoronic.1 Theeconomic

conceptofcapitalismimpliessomemeasureoffreedomofthoughtandactiontoensurethe

efficientallocationofcapitaltoareasofdemand.ToWesternobservers,whosecountriesare

historicallyassociatedwithliberaldemocraticcapitalism,theideathateconomicgrowthand

developmentcan be achievedwithout true freedomordemocracy is quite confronting the

very concept of authoritarianism raises disquiet in the average Westerner. However, it is

undeniablethatauthoritarianregimesare increasinglyturningtothefreemarketasameans

ofensuringtheeconomicprosperityof theircountriesandthe influenceofanefficientand

largelyunquestionedauthoritariangovernmenthasensuredthatsomeachievegreatsuccess.

We need only to lookat the examples ofChina andSingapore to see that huge economic

growth (increasing GDP) and development (industrialisation, increases in the standard of

living andadoption of new technology) ispossible through authoritarian capitalism.Many

indicators,suchastheHumanDevelopmentIndexandtheIndexofEconomicFreedomalso

suggestthattherearegoodsignsthatthisgrowthwillcontinueinthelongterm.

Economic freedom and political freedom are not the same thing. In reality, the present

economic policies of many authoritarian regimes mirror Western liberalist ideology.

SingaporeandChinahavebothintroducedasystemofeconomicneoliberalismthatvalues

entrepreneurshipandlimitedgovernmentinterferencewithbusiness(otherthanstateowned

enterprises).

This essaywill demonstrate that the economic liberalisationof some authoritarian regimes

hasresultedinthecreationofapoliticalsystemwhichpromoteseconomicfreedombutnot

political freedom a system which promises longterm economic growth and development

thatiscomparabletotheirliberaldemocraticcounterparts.

2.0TheLiberalDemocraticModel

Theliberaldemocraticmodelhasbeenapillarofthewesternworldformanyyears.Western

sensibilitieswouldregardisasperhapsthegreatestofallsystemsofgovernment(oratleast

thegreatestcurrentlyinexistence).Asthenamesuggests,liberaldemocracyisacombination

ofliberal anddemocratic idealsandisoftenassociatedwithconstitutionalism,freeandfair

1Ma,Laurence.'Chinasauthoritariancapitalism:growth,elitismandlegitimacy' InternationalPlanningDevelopmentReview,Volume31,Issue1,2009,p.3

3

elections and individualism. Liberaldemocracy is often believed to be superior to other

formsofgovernmentasitbothprovidesacheckonauthority,andprovidesmoresocialand

economicequality,butisthisreallythecase?2

2.1Liberalism

Liberalismisapolitical idearevolvingaroundtheimportanceof individualityandequality.

Muchof themodernliberal theorycomes fromtheessaybyJohnStuartMill, 'OnLiberty'.

Millarguesstrongly ontheimportanceofindividualityandlibertyinsocietysuggestingthat

if individuality is stifled, itwill be to the detriment of society as peoplewill be prevented

fromreachingtheirfullpotentialinlife.3

Mill bases much of his discussion of liberalism around the 'harm principle'. Mills harm

principleisastrongdefenceofindividuality,statingthatpeopleshouldbeallowedtoacton

their opinions without facing legal backlash from the state or social stigma from the

community.Mill arguesthat the liberty toactonopinion is notanabstract right, ratheran

importantvesseltoencourageindividuality,whichisinthepermanentinterestsofmankind.

Mill suggest that people oftenmake errors of judgement and hold incorrect opinions, and

therefore differing experiments of living are essential to social progress as people will

learnfromandquestioneachother'sopinionsandactions.4

Mill argues fervently in the chapterOfLiberty andDiscussion that any attempt to limit

another persons freedom of opinion and thought is illegitimate. According to Mill, the

generalinterestsofmankindarehurtbythesilencingofindividualopinions.Millarguesthat

no person is exempt from error, and although they may be extremely confident that their

opinion is correct, silencing a contradicting opinionmay mean that they are silencing the

truth and holding mankind back as a result, yet ifthough backed bypublic

judgementhepreventstheopinionbeingheardinitsdefence,heassumesinfallibility.5

Mill'sideasonliberalismhaveimportantimplicationsforeconomicgrowthanddevelopment.

Mill argues that people are most valuable to themselves and others when they develop

individuality. This is because peopleare able to learn from each other, particularly people

who actively resist conforming to social norms. Encouraging individuality allows an

2Sim,SoekFang.'AsianValues,AuthoritarianismandCapitalisminSingapore' ThePublic,Vol.8,Issue2,2001,p.463Mill,JohnStuart. OnLiberty. Suffolk,1974,p.1204 Ibid,p.1205 Ibid,p.84

4

atmosphere oforiginality and freedom.This atmosphere is essential as it allowspeople to

take whichever course they see fit in order to reach their full potential. Furthermore,

individuality allows us to see the positive traits of other people, and therefore our own

weaknesssomethingwhichisnotpossible inasocietyofforcedconformity. Inthisway,a

societywithfreedomofthoughtandactionwilldevelopfasterthanonewithoutthem.

2.2CasestudyTheUnitedStates andAustralia

Manyscholars,suchasFrancisFukuyama inhisarticle "TheEndofHistory", regardedthe

fall of the Soviet Union as a triumph of liberaldemocracy, proving it superior to all

alternatives.6 TheAmericanandAustraliansystemsofgovernmentareshiningexamplesof

Westernliberal democracy in action. The United States Constitution emphasises personal

liberties, limited government and the separation of powers, in linewith the ideas of John

StuartMill an ideology which was been adopted by Australia. The people of the United

States also tend to vehemently protest any increase in governmental power (which can

perhapsbeexemplifiedbytheantisocialistoutcry regardingPresidentObama'shealthcare

reform).7

Therecanbelittledoubtthatbothofthesecountries,particularlytheUnitedStates,reflectthe

considerableeconomicpoweroftheWest.TheeconomyoftheUnitedStatesisthelargestin

theworld,withaGDPofover$14trillionUSD.8 Incomparison,theGDPofChinaisonly

around$4.3trillionUSD.Australia'sGDPisjustover$1trillionUSD,animpressivefigure

for a country of just under 22 million citizens.9 The military of the United States is also

unequalledsincethefalloftheSovietUnionmilitaryspendingintheUnitedStatesmakesup

36%oftheworldstotalmilitaryspending.10

Despite the obvious success of liberaldemocratic capitalism in the economies ofAustralia

and theUnitedStates, it isby nomeansa perfect system.Democracy is often flaunted as

promotingequalityandjusticeinsociety.However,intheUnitedStatesandAustralia,where

theseideasareacceptedwholeheartedly,inequalityandinjusticearerampant.Therearevast

differences in thewealthandpowerofdifferent racial groups, aswell asbetween genders.

6Fukuyama,Francis.TheEndofHistoryandtheLastMan.NewYork,1992citedinSim,SoekFang.'AsianValues,AuthoritarianismandCapitalisminSingapore' ThePublic,Vol.8,Issue2,2001,p.467See: VonDrehle,Davidetal. 'TeaPartyAmerica.'Time,Vol.175,Issue8,20108 'DevelopmentIndicators:TheUnitedStates',WorldBank 2010[accessed12/05/2010]9 'DevelopmentIndicators:Australia',WorldBank

5

RacialinequalityintheUnitedStatesisperhapsbestshownbycontrastingthearrestratesof

youngblackandwhitemales.InConnecticut,approximatelyoneinevery33blackmenwill

be incarcerated in their lifetime,while only onewhiteman in 205will be jailed.11 Similar

racial inequalityexistsinAustralia the lifeexpectancyof IndigenousAustralians isaround

17yearslessthanwhiteAustralians.12 Itseemsthatthesefigureseitherindicate institutional

racismintheUnitedStatesandAustralia,oraresymptomaticofabiaseddemocraticsystem

whereadisproportionately largenumberofopportunitiesarehandedtothewealthiergroup

ofmiddleandupperclasswhitepeople.

The Gini coefficient, which measures income inequality, also provides insight into the

significant inequality that exists in the United States and Australia despite their liberal

democracy.Thecoefficientdetermines income inequalityona scaleof0 to1(1being the

most unequal). In a studyof 18 developed countries in the early 21st century, theUnited

Statesscored0.318, themostunequalofall thecountriessurveyed.Australia scored0.301,

whichwasabovethemeanscore.13Furthermore,inequalityintheUSisalsoapparentwhen

we examine the proportionate wealth of its richest citizens: the richest 1% ofUS citizens

receives16.5%ofthetotalincome.14

Itseemsthatthepromotionofliberalideascanindeedleadtoeconomicstimulationthrough

individualism and entrepreneurship, but the democratic systems of the West do not

necessarilyensurethatequalityandjusticereignsupreme.TheUnitedStates,andmostother

Western countries, still present extensive economic and social inequality. So, do

economically liberalised authoritarian regimes present an alternative in terms of economic

growthanddevelopment,anddistributionofwealth?

3.0TheAuthoritarianModel

'Authoritariancapitalism'istheintroductionofafreemarketsystemintocountrieswhichare

ruledbyanonelectedandusuallyautocraticgovernment.Policiesareintroducedona'top

down'basisfromatightpoliticaloligarchy.15Thesecountrieshaveproventhatcapitalismis

notnecessarilytheexclusivedomainoftheliberaldemocraticWest.Infact,countriessuchas

11Coppolo,Georgeand McCarthy,Kevin.CrimeRateandConvictionRatesBrokenDownbyRace.2008[accessed19/05/2010]12 'IndigenousLifeExpectancy', AustralianGovernment,InstituteofHealthandWelfare2008[accessed29/05/2010]13Gittins,RossandTiffen,Rodney.HowAustraliaCompares.CambridgeUniversityPress,2009,p.13614 Ibid.p.13815Ma,Laurence.'Chinasauthoritariancapitalism:growth,elitismandlegitimacy' InternationalPlanningDevelopmentReview,Volume31,Issue1,2009,p.2

6

Chinahaveshowncapacityforfurthereconomicgrowthinperiodswheretheeconomiesof

theliberaldemocraticcountrieshavefalteredandrequiredtheinvestmentofhugeamountsof

governmentcapital.Attheheightof theglobalfinancialcrisis in2009,realGDPgrowthin

theUSwas 2.7%,whileChinaswas6.3%.16 In thewordsofLaurenceMa, "somuch for

minimum state policies".17 Two countries which could perhaps be deemed economic

'success stories' through use of the authoritarian capitalismmodel will now be discussed:

ChinaandSingapore.

3.1CaseStudyChina

ForyearstheChinesemodelofauthoritariancapitalismhasbeenproducingsteadyincreases

in growth and economic output. Economic policy is decided by the top echelons of the

ChineseCommunistParty(CCP)andpasseddown.Manyeconomistshavelaudedtheuseof

"Beijing Consensus" as an effective means of introducing economic selfdetermination,

growthandsustainability,andan alternativeforliberaldemocraticcapitalism.18

BeforeMao'sdeath in1976,China suffered fromthe sameeconomicproblemsasmanyof

the other socialist and communist governments of the era. Namely, economic stagnation

brought about by a lack of incentives, outdated machinery and inefficient governance.19

AfterMao'sdeath, the leadersof theCCPdecidedthat significant reformwasnecessary to

boostChina'seconomicstability.Thus,manyneoliberaleconomicpolicieswereintroduced,

whilemaintaining the primacy of the Party.This has lead to the socialist economy and its

inefficiencieslargelybeingsweptasidebythefasttempoofChineseeconomicdevelopment

and the introduction of a capitalist system in the country. The Chinese government has

introduced neoliberalism as a method of obtaining lasting economic growth and

development it is being used as a tool rather than a political ideal.20 Where a liberal

democratic country decides economic policy based on ameasure of consensus and public

opinion, as mentioned above, the Chinese system involves decision making by a small

oligarchyofrulerswhosepoliciesarequickly initiatednationwide.Thus,manycapitalistic

policies have been initiated in China, such as the introduction of the free market and the

16 ChinaCountryReview, CountryWatchInc 2010[accessed28/05/2010]p.37917 Ibid.p.418 Ibid.p.119 Ibid.p.420 Ibid.p.2

7

privatisationoftheelementsofproduction,reductionsinsocialwelfareandtheattractionof

foreigninvestment.21

These policies have produced great success for China's economy. According to a 2006

CongressionalbrieffromtheFederationofAmericanScientists,China'saverageannualgross

domesticproduct(GDP)growthrateinthepostreformperiod(19792005)isaround9.7%,

whereastheprereform(19601978)figureisjust5.3%.22Accordingtothebrief,thisgrowth

wasbroughtaboutthroughalargeincreaseinforeigninvestment,coupledwithanincreasein

industrial productivity. Furthermore, there was a reallocation of resources to areas of

strength,includingagriculturalreformswhichallowedruralpeasantstoseekemploymentin

manufacturing and other industries, as well as economic decentralisation and non

interference in new enterprise.23 Thus, we can see that through the introduction of an

authoritariancapitalistmodelattheexpenseofsocialism,Chinahasalmostdoubleditsyearly

growthrate.24

Chineseauthoritariancapitalismisnotwithoutfaulthowever.Therehasbeenseriousconcern

at the level of economic inequality and environmental damage that is now present in the

country.25DengXiaoping,oneof thefirstofChina'seconomicreformersstatedthat itwas

important for a select group of Chinese people to get rich first, before any sort of co

prosperitycouldoccurthuscreatingaprecedentforprotectingtheinterestsof'majorplayers'

intheeconomybeforetheinterestsofthepeople,aprecedentthathasbeenlargelyfollowed

bysubsequentleaders.26

Itissignificanttonoteonthissubject,however,thattheeconomicsuccessofChinainrecent

decades, although disproportionately enjoyed by a select few, has in fact increased the

legitimacyoftheCCPintheeyesofmanyofitscitizens.FormanyChinese,legitimacyhas

depended on the government's ability to provide economic success, somethingwhich was

quite clearly been achieved in recent decades.27 Furthermore, the expanding Chinese

21 Ibid.p.322Morrison,Wayne.'ChinasEconomicConditions'.CongressionalResearchService,TheLibraryofCongress,2006(accessed15/05/2010),p.323 Ibid.p.424 Ibid. p.325Ma,Laurence.'Chinasauthoritariancapitalism:growth,elitismandlegitimacy' InternationalPlanningDevelopmentReview,Volume31,Issue1,2009,p.326 Ibid. p.327 Ibid. p.5

8

economy has significantly achieved its power and prestige in the international system, a

definitepositiveintheeyesofmanyChinese,particularlyeducatedurbanites.28

This expansion of government legitimacy in the eyes of the population can perhaps be

explainedintermsoftheHumanDevelopmentIndex.Thisindex"looksbeyondGDP"also

taking into account the development of a countrys citizens based on life expectancy,

educationandstandardofliving.29Between1995and2005,theHumanDevelopmentIndex

ofChinawasthesixthfastestgrowingintheworld.Thiswouldindicatethatwhilemuchof

thecountry'swealthisinthehandsofaselectfewatthemoment,thestandardoflivinginthe

rest of the country is showing signs of improvement, in line with the liberal idea that

entrepreneurshipwillresultinaflowofwealthfromentrepreneurstoothercitizens.

The Chinese leaders have seemingly acknowledged the fact that increasing economic

prosperity may well lead to the demand for more political participation. Thus, in a 'pre

emptivestrike'theCCPhasallieditselfwithmanydistinguishedintellectuals,scientistsand

capitalists(peoplewhowouldotherwiseleadthemarchforpoliticalparticipation),attempting

to integrate them into the rulingclass.Theclose tiesbetween thepolitical andsocialelites

haveanimpactfurtherthanjuststemmingdissatisfactionhoweverithasleadtoameasureof

'cronycapitalism'where capitalists canusepolitical ties foreconomicbenefit. In thisway,

boththeeconomicandpoliticalelitesareworkingcooperativelytoensurethestabilityofthe

authoritariancapitalistsystem.Furthermore,theChinesecapitalist'class'isnothomogenous,

somerelyongovernmentconnectionwhileothersonlyrelyonthemselvesortheirfamilies

thusnounitedprodemocracyfrontispresentedbythecapitalists.30

Through the introductionofeconomic 'neoliberalism'whilemaintainingpolitical restraints

theChinesegovernment hascreatedaneconomic systemwhichpromotesentrepreneurship

whileensuringthatpolicymakingisstillinthehandsoftheCCP.Thishasleadtosignificant

economic growth, as well as human development, which has outpaced many liberal

democraticcountries.

28 Ibid. p.529 'HumanDevelopmentReport2009:Australia' ,UnitedNationsDevelopmentProgram2009[accessed26/05/2010]30Dimitrov,Martin.'CapitalismwithoutDemocracy:ThePrivateSectorinContemporaryChina.'PoliticalScienceQuarterly,Vol.123,Issue4,2009,p.721

9

3.2CaseStudy:Singapore

It is often claimed that economic success will inevitably lead to liberaldemocracy being

adoptedinasociety.31 Agrowingmiddleclasscoupledwithincreasingfinancial inequality

willinevitably,somebelieve,leadtodemocracy andanincreasingdesireforsocialwelfare.32

Singaporeisashiningexampleofwhythisisnotnecessarilythecase.Undertheguidanceof

LeeKuanYew,Singaporehasachievedsignificanteconomicsuccessasacentreofbusiness

and a trading hub and despite this success there seems to be little push towards the

introductionofawesternstyleliberaldemocraticgovernment.

Similar to China, Singapore has adopted economic liberalisation while remaining largely

autocratic.AccordingtotheUnitedStatesCountryReview,Singaporewasgivenapolitical

freedom rank of 5 (with 7 being theworst) incomparison, theUnitedStateswas given a

ranking of 1.33 However, the Index of Economic Freedom shows that in comparison,

Singapores economy is quite free. The index is calculated annually by the Heritage

FoundationandtheWallStreetJournal,whichis"groundedinclassicaleconomictheoriesof

Adam Smith and Friedrich Hayek", thus making it a "time tested formula for sustained

economicgrowth".34 The indexsurveys180countriesandgives thema ratingbasedon10

dimensionsofeconomic freedom.It thendividesthecountries intofivecategories,ranging

from free to repressed. The highest ranking countries are Hong Kong and Singapore,

neitherofwhicharedemocracies:clearlydemonstratingthateconomicfreedomandpolitical

freedomarenotthesamething.35

Singapore's per capita GDP and growth rate is higher than many developed countries,

achievingsteadygrowththroughthepast6years(fig1).Italsomaintainsoneoftheworld's

busiestportsandoneofitsfinestairlines.36ThestandardoflivinginSingaporeisalsovery

high (second only to Japan in Asia), and it also maintains an exceptional rate of English

literacy.37

31Paul,E.C.'ObstaclestoDemocratisationinSingapore'.CentreforSoutheastAsianStudies,WorkingPaperNo.78,1992citedinSim,SoekFang.'AsianValues,AuthoritarianismandCapitalisminSingapore' ThePublic,Vol.8,Issue2,2001,p.132Sim,SoekFang.'AsianValues,AuthoritarianismandCapitalisminSingapore' ThePublic,Vol.8,Issue2,2001,p.133 UnitedStatesCountryReview,CountryWatchInc 2010[accessed28/05/2010]34Gittins,RossandTiffen,Rodney.HowAustraliaCompares.CambridgeUniversityPress,2009,p.23535 Ibid.p.23536Sim,SoekFang.'AsianValues,AuthoritarianismandCapitalisminSingapore' ThePublic,Vol.8,Issue2,2001, p.4537 Ibid.p.45

10

(Fig1)SingaporeGDPGrowth38

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Singapore

GDP

Growth

9.6% 7.3% 8.4% 7.8% 1.1%

Singapore

per capita

GDP

(USD)

$26,319 $28,352 $31,621 $36,384 $37,597

Singaporeisaneffectivecounterexampletotheaforementionedideathateconomicsuccess

willleadtoliberaldemocracy,asnotonlyhasitseconomyachievedsignificantsuccess,the

government shows little signofcollapsingunderpublicpressure forreform.Singaporehas

been described as "clearly authoritarian", yet Singapore's ruling party, the People'sAction

Party (PAP), is distinct from other authoritarian regimes as it prefers hegemony to

dictatorship. This means that PAP leads through the consent of the led.39 Policies are

implemented"notsimplythroughcoercion,butonconsensus".40 Forthisreason,Singapore

wasrankednumbertwointheworldforgovernmentefficiencyina2010surveybytheIMD

WorldCompetitivenessYearbook.41

PAP bases its rule on 'Asian values' which create a distinct version of authoritarian

capitalism.WhilemanyWesterncountrieshavebeen forced to 'waterdown' their capitalist

ideologiesinordertoprovidesocialwelfareandequality,Singaporehasclungtowhatcanbe

described as "old liberalism": a strongly liberal economic systemwhere social inequalities

canbejustifiedasnecessaryandwelfareisrunprivatelythroughnongovernmentinstitutions

such as churches or community groups.42 Socalled 'Asian values' legitimise this lack of

38 'DevelopmentIndicators:Singapore'WorldBank 2010[accessed3/05/2010]39Lim,Lisa."HegemonyandPoliticalDominanceinSingapore"PaperpresentedattheannualmeetingoftheAmericanSociologicalAssociation,MarriottHotel,LoewsPhiladelphiaHotel,Philadelphia,PA,Aug12,2005.,p.140Sim,SoekFang.'AsianValues,AuthoritarianismandCapitalisminSingapore' ThePublic,Vol.8,Issue2,2001,p.4741 'IMDWorldCompetitivenessYearbook19952010',InternationalInstituteforManagementDevelopment2010[accessed19/05/2010]42Sim,SoekFang.'AsianValues,AuthoritarianismandCapitalisminSingapore' ThePublic,Vol.8,Issue2,2001,p.49

11

governmentwelfare, saying that communities and individuals should be as self reliant as

possible, and not make demands on the state (perhaps displayed by Singapore's laws

requiringpeopletofinanciallyprovidefortheirelderlyparents).43

Singapore also maintains a surprisingly free level of media exposure for an authoritarian

regime.LeeKuanYewbasedPAP'spolicyonthemedialargelyaroundthatoftheVatican:

"TheVaticanmaintainsCatholicunityaroundtheworldbyclearlycommunicatingitsofficial

or doctrinal position Catholics may read other views but they make a distinction

betweentheofficialviewandtheotherviews.Whetherornottheyaccepttheofficialviewisa

differentandseparatematter.In the sameway,Asiangovernmentswill require theofficial

viewtobecarriedinthemedia,alongwithotherviewsoverwhichtheyhavenocontrol"44

Inthisway,thePAPgivestheofficialviewofaparticulareventorissue,providinga'moral

compass' amidst the varying different opinions. Thus, censoring dissent is largely

unnecessary.

Similar toChina, themain issuewiththeSingaporeanversionofauthoritariancapitalism is

that is stifles individual liberties. The highly competitive, meritocratic and government

influencedSingaporeansocietythathasbeencreatedunderthepracticeof'oldliberalism'has

meant that a highly rigid path has been set for young people there is little room for self

expressionandveryfewsecondchancesfortheunsuccessful.45

4.0Conclusion:isauthoritariancapitalismaviablealternative?

Through examination of the economic growth rates of both authoritarian and liberal

democratic countries it is clear that while authoritarian countries lack the fundamental

freedomsthatweintheWestvaluesohighly,authoritariancapitalismcanindeedpresenta

viablealternative.

Itmust be noted that economic liberty and political liberty are not the same thing.When

examiningeconomic liberty alone, the twosystemsdonotappear tobe radicallydifferent.

Countries such as China and Singapore have initiated a system than can be described as

'economicneoliberalism'.Thisinvolvespoliciessuchastheintroductionoffreemarketsand

governmentnoninterventioninprivateenterprisewhilemaintainingrestrictionsonfreedom

43 Ibid.p.4944 Ibid.p.5145 Ibid.p.60

12

ofspeechandpoliticalparticipation.Inthisway,authoritarian governmentshavebeenableto

produce significant economic success adopting someofMill's ideas on achieving success

through individual entrepreneurship while shedding others that may challenge the state's

primacy.Thisresultsinefficienteconomiclawmakingandadministration.

Itisalsooftensuggestedthateconomicgrowthwillresultinagitationforincreasedpolitical

participation, inferring that liberaldemocracy is the 'next step' for economically successful

authoritarian regimes. However, China and Singapore have shown us that this in not

necessarily the case. The Chinese government's involvement of intellectual and economic

elites, which would otherwise be leading the charge for democracy, has ensured that the

system remains highly stable regardless of economic growth. While the Singaporean

government'semphasisonhegemonyhasmeantthat littleactivedissentoccurs.Inasimilar

vein,theideathatliberaldemocracypromotesequalityandjusticeisalsonotnecessarilythe

casewiththedistributionofwealthinmostWesterncountriesshowingthesameinequality

thatisapparentinChinaorSingapore.

The main issue with authoritarian capitalism seems to be the ease in which it could

degenerate,giventhecorruptingnatureofabsolutepower.Therightpeoplemustbeinpower

inorderfortheauthoritarianregimetoavoidbeingreducedtoaquagmireofcorruptionand

powerabuse.ItseemsthatChinahadsuchaleaderinDengXiaopingandSingaporeinLee

KuanYew(unfortunatelycountlessotherdictatorshipshavenotbeenquitesolucky).Given

thereissuchstrongevidencetothecontrary,itwouldbehighlywesterncentrictoassertthat

authoritariancapitalismdoesnotpresentaviablealternative,whenadministeredbytheright

people.Neithershouldweassumethatdemocracyandcapitalismmustgohandinhandjust

because Western capitalists are typically prodemocracy China and Singapore have both

introduced capitalist systems which are arguably more economically neoliberal than the

UnitedStatesorAustralia,andshowlittlesignofacceptingdemocracy.

13

Bibliography

1. Berteaux,John.'WhatAretheLimitsofLiberalDemocraticIdealsinRelationtoOvercomingGlobalInequalityandInjustice?'.HumanRightsReview,Vol.6,Issue4,2005

2. ChinaCountryReview,CountryWatchInc 2010[accessed28/05/2010]

3. Coppolo, GeorgeandMcCarthy,Kevin.CrimeRateandConvictionRatesBrokenDownbyRace. 2008[accessed19/05/2010]

4. DevelopmentIndicators:TheUnitedStates',WorldBank2010[accessed12/05/2010]

5. 'DevelopmentIndicators:Singapore'World Bank2010[accessed3/05/2010]

6. Dimitrov,Martin.'CapitalismwithoutDemocracy:ThePrivateSectorinContemporaryChina.'PoliticalScienceQuarterly,Vol.123,Issue4,2009

7. 'DevelopmentIndicators:Australia',WorldBank,

14

13. Lim,Lisa."HegemonyandPoliticalDominanceinSingapore" PaperpresentedattheannualmeetingoftheAmericanSociologicalAssociation,MarriottHotel,LoewsPhiladelphiaHotel,Philadelphia,PA,Aug12,2005.

14. Ma,Laurence.'Chinasauthoritariancapitalism:growth,elitismandlegitimacy'InternationalPlanningDevelopmentReview,Volume31,Issue1,2009

15. Mill,JohnStuart. OnLiberty.Suffolk,1974

16. Morrison,Wayne.'ChinasEconomicConditions'.CongressionalResearchService,TheLibraryofCongress,2006(accessed15/05/2010)

17. Paul,E.C.'ObstaclestoDemocratisationinSingapore'.CentreforSoutheastAsianStudies,WorkingPaperNo.78,1992citedinSim,SoekFang.'AsianValues,AuthoritarianismandCapitalisminSingapore' ThePublic,Vol.8,Issue2,2001

18. Sim,SoekFang.'AsianValues,AuthoritarianismandCapitalisminSingapore' ThePublic,Vol.8,Issue2,2001

19. Stolze,Ted.'CapitalistLimitstoLiberalDemocracy:AResponsetoJohnA.Berteaux'.HumanRightsReview,Vol.6,Issue4,2005

20. UnitedStatesCountryReview,CountryWatchInc 2010[accessed28/05/2010]

21. VonDrehle,Davidetal.'TeaPartyAmerica.'Time,Vol.175,Issue8,2010

22. Winckler,Edwin.'ModernAuthoritarianism:AComparativeInstitutionalAnalysisbyAmosPerlmutter' ContemporarySociology,Vol.11,Issue6,1982