李光耀早年反共是事实，但德孤进一步说“李光耀实际上可以说是个民主斗士”就既不合逻辑，也不合事实了。许多伊斯兰教盛行的国家，如印尼等，也是强烈反共甚至大量屠杀共产党人的，但即使时至今日，距离民主国家的要求依然很遥远。事实上李光耀在国际上广泛地被认为是个benevolent dictatorship（好的独裁者）。下面这段这段话摘自华盛顿邮报，看看李光耀是如何看待民主，权力的。
“With few exceptions, democracy has not brought good government to new developing countries,” Mr. Lee said in a 1992 speech in Tokyo. “What Asians value may not necessarily be what Americans or Europeans value.” He ignited a furor in Manila the same year when, ignoring two decades of previous authoritarian rule, he told Philippine businessmen that their country needed “discipline more than democracy” to develop. “The exuberance of democracy leads to undisciplined and disorderly conditions which are inimical to development,” he said.
His outlook was perhaps best summed up in his 1997 biography. “Between being loved and being feared, I have always believed Machiavelli was right,” he told his biographer. “If nobody is afraid of me, I’m meaningless.”
参考http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/lee-kuan-yew-who-led-singapore-into-prosperity-over-30-year-rule-dies-at-91/2015/03/22/00f7ccbe-d0d4-11e4-a62f-ee745911a4ff_story.html
新加坡，也绝不是像阿妞忽悠的那样：“李光耀的新加坡从一开始，就是属于民主法治资本主义国家”。有人认为新加坡是Illiberal democracy（缺乏自由的民主国家），与香港这种liberal autocracy（有自由的专制政体）正好相映成趣。但也有学者（来自哈佛及多伦多大学）不同意这种提法，认为它将民主与专制的分野给模糊了，他们认为新加坡是个competitive authoritarian regime（有竞争力的极权国家），布丁领导下的俄罗斯也是这样的国家。（参见http://iis-db.stanford.edu/evnts/4396/Levitsky-Way-Stanford.pdf）。
在典型的民主国家（如美、英、加等），和典型的专制国家（如中国，朝鲜等）之间有一些灰色地带，我们不妨称之为准民主国家，新加坡眼下就处于这个地带，当然，位于这个区域的国家还有一些。
李光耀因为是学法律出身，所以在打击政敌、批评者时惯用的策略就是起诉对方，告对方诽谤。因为新加坡的司法系统是总是偏袒长期执政的人民行动党，所以李及他的党能屡屡得手。另外新加坡的Internal Security Act，使得李可以不经审判就随意逮捕、拘押反对派。李光耀唯一的一次失手是在加拿大安省起诉流亡在汉密尔顿的新加坡前总统Devan Nair，多亏加拿大不在李光耀的统治下。详情如下。
Devan Nair
In 1999, the former Singaporean President Devan Nair, who was living in exile in Canada, remarked in an interview with the Toronto The Globe and Mail that Lee's technique of suing his opponents into bankruptcy or oblivion was an abrogation of political rights. He also remarked that Lee is "an increasingly self-righteous know-all", surrounded by "department store dummies". In response to these remarks, Lee sued Nair in a Canadian court and Nair countersued. Lee then brought a motion to have Nair's counterclaim thrown out of court. Lee argued that Nair's counterclaim disclosed no reasonable cause of action and constituted an inflammatory attack on the integrity of the Singapore government. However, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice refused to throw out Nair's counterclaim, holding that Lee had abused the litigating process and therefore Nair had a reasonable cause of action.
参考http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Kuan_Yew
中国在九十年代开始学习新加坡，在苏州搞了个新加坡工业园，并派出了大量官员去新加坡的大学进行进修培训。当时万众景仰、具有超凡魅力的朱镕基还东施效颦，提出了高薪养廉，削减公务员人数，结果大家都看到了，公务员人数未减，公务员，国企高管的工资翻了好几倍，可是非但“廉”未养成，腐败倒是遍地开花。这就是清廉的朱留下的政治遗产。如果说邓小平是改革开放的总设计师，那李光耀就当仁不让就是中国改革开放的教父，但中国学习新加坡也有了二十多年，到底有何成就，实在说不上来，除了在严格控制舆论，随便抓人上胜出一筹外。可见长袖善舞，八面玲珑的李师傅也未能教出好徒弟。
依我看，新加坡的成功，有很强的特异性，中国是无法复制的。中共领导人的教育及政治智慧，也无法同李相提并论。老老实实走一条对更多国家普遍适用的民主、现代化之路才是正途，尽管不是捷径。如果真有什么捷径，我想也不会留待中国去发现，其它国家可能早就发现了。所以还是不要过度自信为妙。中共领导人如果有自知之明，应自觉抵制新加坡的诱惑。韩国，台湾的成功可能更有参考价值。
|
