Yes, he was a dictator who made Korea what it is today. If Korea had adopted multi-party politics right after the Korean war, Korea will be unstable and poor today. China is just following that formula, so did Taiwan and Hong Kong. Singapore liked this system so much they stuck with it. Malaysia, despie its problems, is eons away from multi-party states like the Phillipines. Just admit that fact.Whatever criticisms you have about the PAP, they are supported by the majority of the Singaporean people. The LDP, how are they different from UMNO? Malaysia also allows opposition parties. The LDP rig the rules of the game that in effect even if they are out of power, they willstill rule, with all the patronization and cronyism. Despite Japan's decade long recession, they were still in power. At least the PAP delivered the goods, for crying out loud.
I am not saying an authoritatrian system can guarantee stability (benign and competent authoritarianism, I mean), but I am trying to point out the futility of imposing democracy on societies that are not ready for it. Obviously, for a country in a less advance stage of economic development, democracy has been a hindrance. Like democracies, bad authoritarian leaders like Mugabe can also screw up the country, just like bad democaratic leaders like Arroyo. Incidentally, Mugabe was brought to power by the democratic process, which was easy as he represented the majority Shona people. In fact, a democratic Iraq will also yield a Shiite leader for the same reasons. Just see how the US admin is harping about the current Iraqi leader's secterian bend.
Just note this sobering statistic, in the 20th century, only 4 regions emerge into the first world from the 3rd world (discounting oil economies) and none had democracy and all were made with decades of authoritarianism. These regions are HKG, Singapore, Taiwan and SK. The architects namely McLehose, Lee Kuan Yew, Park Chung Hee and the Chiang family. No third world democracies have achieved first world status in the 20th century.
