Assessment
(i) Class Participation 15 %
(ii) Student-led Discussions 25 %
(iii) Evaluative Summary 15 %
(iv) Memo to Self 5 %
(v) Final Project Proposal 5 %
(vi) Final Project 35 %

More details for the specific assignments will be made available on week 1.

Unit 1: Introduction

Week 1

First Class: Introduction

Readings:
• “Making the Centre Hold”, keynote speech by Tharman Shanmugaratnam

Second Class: Economic Inequality and Social Equality
Discussion – survey questions designed to collect data on student’s understanding of social equality as well as their experience of ‘status markers’ and meritocracy in everyday life

Breakout Groups – Discussing Tan You Yenn and Eugene KB Tan’s arguments linking meritocracy, a sense of desert to material wealth, and its alleged link to social and economic inequality in Singapore.

Readings:

• This is What Inequality Looks Like, chapter 1 and 2, Ethos Books, Tan You Yenn, pages 1 – 26.
• “Achieving a fair, equal society is a collective responsibility”, Eugene K B Tan, Today Op-Ed.

Week 2

First Class: The Intrinsic Value of Democracy

Lecture – Covering the following topics:

a) What is intrinsic value?
b) Different justifications of democracy – a closer look
c) Does democracy possess intrinsic value?
d) How to read an academic paper – an illustration using Anderson’s paper

Readings:
• “Democracy: Instrumental vs. Non-instrumental Value”, Elizabeth Anderson, Contemporary Debates in Political Philosophy, pp. 13 – 33
• “How Mode of Governance Must Suit Needs of People”, Lee Kuan Yew, 1984 Parliamentary Speech

Second Class: Democracy as a Way of Life

Lecture – covering the following topics:

a) Democracy as a way of life vs. democracy as an institution
b) Democracy and collective decision-making
c) Democracy and disagreement

Discussion – Survey questions to ascertain current understanding of the distinction between democracy as an institution and democracy as a way of life
Readings:
• “On Democracy”, John Dewey, pages 1 – 6.
• The Public and Its Problems, John Dewey, Blackwell’s, excerpts
• Democracy and Education, John Dewey, Blackwell’s, excerpts

Unit 2: The Value of Social Equality

Week 3

First Class: Lecture on relational equality

Discussion – Survey questions designed to assess students understanding of the varieties of egalitarianism based on the video and the reading
Lecture – covering the following topics:
a) Different reasons why we value equality
b) Egalitarian reasons for equality
c) What does it mean to be social equals?
d) A useful lens for thinking about social equality – levels of analysis
• Micro (individual)
• Meso (neighbourhood)
• Macro (structural – country-wide/global)
Readings:
• Why Does Inequality Matter?, T.M. Scanlon, Oxford University Press, chapters 1 – 3, pages 1 – 39.

Second Class: Relating to One Another as Equals

Breakout groups – discussing Anderson and Schmidtz’s exchange in light of the concepts taught in week 2 and 3

Readings:
• “Elizabeth Anderson and David Schmidtz on Equality”, video

Week 4

First Class – The Relationship between Social Equality and Democracy

Discussion – Survey questions design to test students understanding of the concepts discussed in the readings

Breakout Groups – Discussing Post and Keohane’s essay in light of the discussion in week 3 as well as comparing and contrast Keohane’s view of democracy and leadership with Lee Kuan Yew’s understanding of democracy

Readings:

• “Democracy and Equality”, Robert Post, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, pages 24 – 36.
• “Leadership, Equality, & Democracy”, Nannerl O. Keohane, Daedalus, pages 8 – 18.

Second Class – Democracy and Equal Status

Discussion – The discussion will be focused on Christiano’s understanding of democracy and how it secures the equal standing of each citizen on his view.

Readings:

• “The Authority of Democracy”, Thomas Christiano, Journal of Political Philosophy, pages 20 – 35.
• “A more equal voting system needed in greying Singapore”, Sng Tuan Hwee & Tan Jia Yi, The Straits Times, forum letter
• “Married with Kids? Lee Kuan Yew Says Take Two Votes”, Kenneth L. Whiting, Associated Press.

Week 5

First Class – Does Equal Status Require Equal Wealth?

Breakout Groups – Discussions will be focused on examining the relationship between equal status and economic equality, guided by survey questions.

Readings:

• “Equality and Hierarchy”, Jonathan Wolff, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, pages 1 – 25.
• “Class, Moral Worth, and Recognition”, Andrew Sayer, Sociology, pages 947 – 960.

Second Class: Consultations for Student-led discussions

Unit 3: Contemporary Threats to Social Equality – Global and Singaporean Perspectives

Week 6

First Class: Student-led Discussions

Student-led discussions

In groups of 3 – 4, students will teach the class about the specific reading they have chosen and how it relates to the larger theme of social equality we have discussed in Units 1 and 2. Students will choose the readings in consultation with the instructor.

Possible readings to assign:

• Why Does Inequality Matter?, T.M. Scanlon, Oxford University Press, chapter 5, pp. 53 – 73
• This is What Inequality Looks Like, Tan You Yenn, Ethos Books, chapter 4

Second Class: Affluence and Responsiveness

Discussion – Survey questions designed to elicit students understanding of democratic responsiveness

Breakout Groups – Discussions will focus on five areas:

a) Gilens and Bartel’s research and their findings
b) Why their research might be normatively significant
c) Gilens’s conception of democracy
d) How we might think about recent political events in Singapore with respect to responsiveness

Readings:

• “Inequality and Democratic Responsiveness”, Martin Gilens, Public Opinion Quarterly, pages 778 – 796.
• “Economic Inequality and Democratic Political Engagement”, Frederick Solt, American Journal of Political Science, pages 48 – 60.
• “WP says it has brought a more responsive government”, The Business Times
• “PAP vs WP: What these four years have shown”, The Straits Times

Additional background reading:

• “Singapore: Authoritarian but Newly Competitive”, Stephan Ortmann, Journal of Democracy, pages 153 – 164

Week 7

First Class: Does Responsiveness Matter?

Breakout Groups – Discussions will focus on three areas:

a. The role of political representatives in Scanlon’s account
b. Why responsiveness is important to ensuring equality
c. Potential trade-offs between responsiveness and other democratic values

Readings:

• Why Does Inequality Matter?, T.M. Scanlon, Princeton University Press, chapter 6, pages 74 – 85
• “Government Responsiveness: A Democratic Value with Negative Externalities?”, Marcia Grimes and Peter Esaiasson, Political Research Quarterly, pages 758 – 768.

Second Class: Social Equality and Education

Breakout Groups – Discussions will focus on two areas:

a) The distinction between equality of opportunity and democratic equality
b) Whether opportunity markets exist in Singapore

Readings:

• “Rethinking Equality of Opportunity”, Elizabeth Anderson, Theory and Research in Education, pages 101 – 109.
• “The Rise of Opportunity Markets: How Did it Happen and What Can We Do?”, David B. Grusky, Peter A. Hall, and Hazel Rose Markus, Daedalus, pages 19 – 45.

Week 8

First Class – The Prospects of Singaporean Meritocracy

Breakout Groups – Discussions will focus on three areas:
a) How the two paradoxes of the Singaporean system potentially creates opportunity markets and potential areas of reform
b) The link between broader social policy and education as a vehicle of equality/inequality
c) How the notion of lifelong learning can both exacerbate inequality but potentially mitigate it

Readings:

• “Dealing with two paradoxes of Singapore’s education system”, Ong Ye Kung, July 2018 Parliament speech
• “Let’s talk about meeting needs, not just equality of opportunity”, Tan You Yenn, The Straits Times
• “Lifelong learning and income inequality in Singapore: A Critical Approach”, Lee and Morris, International Journal of Lifelong Education, pages 1 – 32

Second Class – Consultation for Student-led Discussions

Week 9

First Class – Student-led discussions

In groups of 4, students will teach the class about the relationship between social equality and a public policy area for 15 minutes, followed by a Q&A session of 10 minutes. Students will be allowed to assign a reading/video to the class. The reading must be no more than 15 pages. If you wish to exceed this limit, a supermajority (2/3s) of the class must agree. Students will decide upon the readings in consultation with the instructor.
Possible questions/topics to explore include:
• Do health inequalities contribute to relational inequalities?
• Drawing upon a theory of relational egalitarianism we have discussed, suggest potential implications for reform of Singaporean educational policy.
• Relational egalitarians are primarily concerned with ensuring that citizens can relate to each other as equals. Drawing upon a theory of relational egalitarianism we have discussed, do you think the family in the Singaporean context reproduces or mitigates social inequality?
• Drawing upon class discussions and readings, in your mind is our current university setup promoting or hindering social equality?
• Intergenerational justice and social equality
• Migrant labor and social equality
• Race-relations in Singapore and social equality
• Activism in Singapore and changing perceptions about equality

Unit 4: Creating a More Egalitarian Future?

Second Class: Unconditional Universal Basic Income (UBI) – The Basics

Breakout groups – The discussion will focus on three areas:
a) Why UBI is needed
b) How UBI is supposed to provide a remedy for social inequality
c) The appeal of UBI

Reading:
• “Democratizing Citizenship: Some Advantages of a Basic Income”, Carole Pateman, Politics and Society, pages 89 – 105

Week 10

First Class – The Political Feasibility of UBI

Mini-lecture – The lecture will cover the following topics:

a) How should we think about political feasibility
b) Evaluating policy across dimensions
c) Unintended consequences
d) Final project requirements

Readings:

• Basic Income: A Radical Proposal for a Free Society and Sane Economy, Philippe van Parijs and Yannick Vanderborght, Harvard University Press, excerpts
• “Universal Basic Income in the US and Advanced Countries”, Hilary W. Hoynes and Jesse Rothstein, NBER Working Paper

Second Class – UBI and Social Equality

Breakout groups – focusing on the following areas of discussion:

a) The potential crowding-out effect of the UBI
b) Will UBI improve social cohesion?
c) How will UBI change social and political relations?

Readings:

• “Universal Basic Income and the Welfare State”, Richard McGahey, Working Paper, pages 1 – 18.
• “Who Really Stands to Win from Universal Basic Income?”, Nathan Heller, New Yorker
• “Optional Freedoms”, Elizabeth Anderson, Basic Income, pages 75 – 79.
• “Basic Income and Social Power”, Koen Raes, Basic Income, pages 246 – 255.

Week 11

First Class – UBI in the Singaporean Context

Breakout Groups – Discussions will focus on the following areas:
a) How might UBI address existing concerns about social mobility in Singapore?
b) Public perceptions and UBI
c) How will UBI influence and/or impact existing policy arrangements?

Readings:

• “Let's talk about a living wage: Singapore should consider a society-wide approach to raising low wages”, Tan You Yenn, The Straits Times.
• “Why the debate on unconditional basic income is relevant for Singapore”, Chua Mui Hoong, The Straits Times.

Second Class – Consulations for Student-led discussions

Week 12

First Class – Student-led Discussions

Student-led discussions

Based on the discussion about UBI, students will engage in their own research to examine isues related to UBI.

Possible questions and topics to explore include:

• In response to criticisms of UBI, some political scientists and economists have argued for an alternative—a basic Participatory Income. In your view, does the Participatory Income fare better than UBI?
• UBI and automation
• In your view, is Richard McGahey right that UBI will restructure power relations between employees and employers?

Another Option: Debate

Two groups might decide to have a debate on the following topic: “Singapore should adopt replace its social welfare system with an unconditional universal basic income system”.

Second Class – Overview – What Have We Learnt?

Lecture – Summary of the major themes of the class, focusing on the following areas:
a) Why we value social equality
b) The importance of social equality in current events
c) Thinking about social equality on three broad scales and policies we have discussed at each level
• Micro (individual)
• Meso (neighborhood)
• Macro (country-wide/global)

Week 13

First and Second Class – No class, consultations for final project