.....
Nothing is worse for any society than weak leadership. It leads to chaos the likes of which the Iraqis are experiencing now.
If the PAP were to be ousted, Singapore would end up in the same boat and the country would go downhill very quickly. It is therefore very important that the core 60.1% continue to vote for the PAP despite the fact that the party has its faults. After all, who amongst us is perfect? Nobody is 100% right all the time. We all make mistakes.
I do agree with your reasoning. A good leader is needed to put a country in a chaotic state back to order because all kinds of characters (hidden behind the banner of democracy, freedom, justice ... ) will take advantage of the situation to get a slice of the pie. It is also necessary for such a leader to be ruthless and strict in order to bring things back to order as he is handling people who has no hesitation for violence. Such harsh punishment meted out to these opposing gangs (who are usually gangsters and thugs) will be welcomed by the majority because they are being terrorized by them.
However, it is inevitable that a leader with such fearsome character is also no saint himself. He would continue with his authoritative rule even after peace has been restored. Instead of just acting on hooligans and shady characters, the iron fist will be used to suppress any opposing voices regardless of the nature of the matter. In most cases corruption and cronyism will also set in. Soon, the people notice the injustice and begin to feel cheated.
The people will begin to openly voice their dissatisfaction. Unfortunately, it will be dismissed as "this mortals are ungrateful, unreasonable - asking for handouts and perfection, always angry ...." The situation will deteoriarate to a state where violence erupts and the country returns to a chaotic state and the cycle is repeated.
History has many examples of such cycles. However, if the leader is wise enough to take the initial disquiet seriously, the need to return to chaos can be averted. Although keeping the leadership will slow down the down fall it cannot stop the rot. By remaining silent the leader will be misled to believe that he is continuing to enjoy the trust and support of everyone and his misguided actions will get from bad to worse The ending will still be the same.
A wise leader should take heel of any early warning. It doesn't mean that as long as everybody has enough to eat and a house to stay, they would be contented. We are dealing with social issue where people do compare. If the leader walks to work, leaves in a rental flat and draws a monthly salary of $1000, there will less "anger" and expectation of perfection. If the leader is blind to such nature of the human race, then it is just too bad; we will have to go through the cycle. However, for this liitle dot, the cycle may not repeat but remain stagnant at the state of a "fishing village".
