I really like Singapore, but it’s almost a single party police state. It’s somewhat unique in a couple of respects. Mostly that it does actually provide the safety and stability that you are theoretically promised as a trade of for the compromised civil liberties, and that the government is kinda, mostly benevolent… But I don’t think it’s directly comparable to a country that embraces civil liberties. It’s probably pretty safe to walk around Pyongyang too.

Economically speaking they also embrace a basically libertarian style of free market capitalism (in respect to everything except land use), which is another reason they’re not a great comparison.

> I really like Singapore, but it’s almost a single party police state.

SF is a single party city defunding the police. While they parallel Singapore in the single party system they are close to the opposite in nearly all other aspects and it shows. Both places are awash in money but one of them only seems to get worse the more money pours in. If I had to choose between the political system of San Francisco and that of Singapore I would choose the latter.

It is a good thing I do not have to choose though since I don't like either of those systems, it is just that watching the slow-motion train wreck of San Francisco (among others) being run into the ground by self-proclaimed saviours of humanity is so disheartening, especially seen in the light of the claims made by those who push these policies. They must know that they are destroying the place, they can not be so blindsided by ideology. This only leaves the possibility that they are so hell-bent on staying in power that they will do anything it takes, no matter the consequences. How they can rhyme this with their self-proclaimed virtuous goals is beyond me.