RESEARCHmembership, condominium, and a car”. 48 She continuesthat “becoming rich and obtaining the 4Cs means workingin some sort of professional or managerial job thatprovides a high salary, and this means getting drawn ontothe side of” their authoritarian leaders, who have bothcreated and continually provided them with opportunitiesto expand their wealth. 49Indeed, it must be reasserted that the middle class inSingapore has not been a major driver of the economicgrowth that has increased their wealth; instead, they havedepended on the “strategic government-owned corporations”especially in the first few decades after independence,when the predominately impoverished populationreceived opportunities to become better educated andthereby increase their wealth. 50 David Brown and DavidMartin Jones maintain that this has created the feeling inthe Singaporean middle class “owes” much to their authoritarianleaders for their success and that the continuationof authoritarianism would mean that political leaderswould provide them with more benefits in return fortheir support. 51 Lam Peng Er argues that their continueddependence on their authoritarian leaders is the primereason that Singapore has not democratized in spite oftheir tremendous wealth. 52 For democratization to occurin such a developed state, a segment of the population,preferably the middle class must be “autonomous” fromtheir authoritarian rulers in order to develop political attitudesthat are in opposition to the regime. 53 However, atruly independent middle class is yet to be developed inSingapore.ConclusionThus, elite choices and differences in public supportfor the existing regime determined levels of democraticsuccess in India and Singapore after independence. InIndia, Nehru made the decision to pursue democraticrule in India in order to undermine the threats fromethnolinguistic and religious communities. Over time,the Indian electorate reinforced democratic rule andsent a message to future leaders that they would notaccept authoritarianism. In contrast, Lee establishedauthoritarianism to combat the serious problems ofcommunalism and communism and limited economicdevelopment. Authoritarianism remains in Singaporebecause the middle class continues to give it support inexchange for material benefits. In the future, it will beinteresting to see the impact of elite choices and publicsupport on democratic success in these two countries.AcknowledgementsI would like to thank Dr. Wendy Pearlman, Dr.Jeffrey Winters, and the Weinberg College of Arts &Sciences for helping me complete this paper.Endnotes1 Fish, M. S., & Brooks, R. S. (2004). Does Diversity Hurt Democracy? Journal ofDemocracy, 15(1).2 Ibid.3 The National Portal of India. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://india.gov.in/Department of Statistics, Singapore. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.singstat.gov.sg/4 Lipset, S. M. (1959). Some Social Requisites of Democracy. American Political Science Review, 69-105.5 Burke, J. (2001, July 14). More of World’s Poor Live in India than in All Sub-SaharanAfrica, Says Study. The Guardian. World Bank. (n.d.). India - New Global PovertyEstimates. Retrieved from http://go.worldbank.org/51QB3OCFU06 United Nations Development Programme. (2010). Human Development Index (HDI) -2010 Rankings. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/Tan, E. S. (2004). Does Class Matter? Social Stratification and Orientations in Singapore (p. 11).7 Weiner, M. (1987). Empirical Democratic Theory. In M. Weiner & E. Özbudun (Eds.),Competitive Elections in Developing Countries (p. 20) [Introduction].8 Diamond, L., Lipset, S., & Linz, J. (1987, Summer). Building and SustainingDemocratic <strong>Government</strong> in Developing Countries: Some Tentative Findings. WorldAffairs, 150(1), 7.9 Rustow, D. A. (1970, April). Transitions to Democracy: Toward a Dynamic Model.Comparative Politics, 2(3), 337-363.10 Nehru, J. (1971). The Appointed Day. In Independence and After: a Collection of Speeches, 1946-1949(p. 11).11 Guha, R. (2008). India after Gandhi: the History of the World’s Largest Democracy. NewYork: Harper Perennial.12 Ibid., 190.13 Sen, A. (2005). The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture, andIdentity (p. 80). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.14 Nehru, J. (1971). Free India is One Year Old. In Independence and After: a Collection ofSpeeches, 1946-1949 (p. 13).15 Ibid.16 Part III: Fundamental Rights [Constitution of India]. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://lawmin.nic.in/olwing/coi/coi-english/Const.Pock%202Pg.Rom8Fsss(6).pdfLijphart, A. (1994). The Puzzle of Indian Democracy: A Reinterpretation. Unpublishedmanuscript. Retrieved from http://www.rgics.org/pdf1/wpo-18.pdf17 Indira Gandhi’s Dictatorship Digs In. (1977, July 14). Time Magazine.18 Ibid.19 Weiner, M. (1977, July). The 1977 Parliamentary Elections in India. Asian Survey, 17(7), 619.20 Ibid.21 Ibid.22 Jnapathy, V. (2005). Indira Gandhi: Woman of India’s Destiny (p. 101).23 Statistical Report on General Elections in India, 1977. (1978). Retrieved from ElectionCommission of India website: http://eci.nic.in/eci_main/StatisticalReports/LS_1977/Vol_I_LS_77.pdf24 Guha, 498-500.25 Weiner, 623.26 Brass, P. R. (1994). The Politics of India Since Independence (p. 44). Cambridge: Cambridge <strong>University</strong>.27 Lee, K. Y. (2000). From Third World to First: The Singapore Story, 1965-2000. New York:HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.28 Bass, J. R. (1970, February). Malaysia: Continuity or Change? Asian Survey, 10(2), 152.29 Lee, 22.30 Ibid., 23.31 Nam, T. Y. (1969-1970, Winter). Singapore’s One-Party System: Its Relationship toDemocracy and Political Stability. Pacific Affairs, 42(4), 467.32 Christie, C. J. (2001). The Cold War and the Ideological Foundations of Non-Alignment. In Ideology and Revolution in Southeast Asia, 1900-1980: Political Ideas ofthe Anti-Colonial Era (p. 187).33 Sundby, K. (2010, August 6). Lee Kuan Yew News - New York Times.34 Richardson, M. (1992, July 2). Singapore Asks: Why Do We Need An Opposition? New York Times.35 U.S. Department of State. (2011, December 2). Background Note: Singapore.36 Barr, M. D. (2000). Lee Kuan Yew: The Beliefs Behind the Man (p. 31).37 Ibid., 32.38 Kluver, R., & Webber, I. (2003, October). Journal of Communication Inquiry. Patriotismand the Limits of Globalization: Renegotiating Citizenship in Singapore, 27(4), 371-388.Riegel, 83.39 Means, G. P. (1996). Soft Authoritarianism in Malaysia and Singapore. Journal of Democracy, 7(4).40 Lee, 129.41 Means.42 Lee., 158-159.43 Ibid.44 Lee, E. (2008). Singapore: The Unexpected Nation (p. 271). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.45 Krause, L. B., Tee, K. A., & Yuan, L. (1987). The Singapore Economy Reconsidered (p. 62).46 Lim, C. (1994, September 3). The PAP and the People – A Great Affective Divide.Strait Times. Retrieved from http://catherinelim.sg/1994/09/03/the-pap-and-the-peoplea-great-affective-divide47 Tamura, K. T. (2003, June). The Emergence and Political Consciousness of the MiddleClass in Singapore. The Developing Economies, 41(2), 195.48 Ibid.49 Ibid.50 U.S. Department of State.Brown, D., & Jones, D. M. (1996). Democratization and the Myth of the LiberalizingMiddle Classes. In D. A. Bell, D. Brown, K. Jayasuriya, & D. M. Jones (Eds.), TowardsIlliberal Democracy in Pacific Asia. Macmillan.51 Ibid.52 Lam, P. E. (1999). Singapore: Rich State, Illiberal Regime. In J. W. Morley (Ed.), Drivenby Growth: Political Change in the Asia Pacific Region. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.53 Ibid.12 NORTHWESTERN UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL
RESEARCHHealing More than aDISEASE:Catholic FBOs in Africa’s Era of HIV/AIDSABRIDGED VERSIONSub-Saharan Africa contains 68 percent of all AIDS cases but only 10 percent ofthe world’s total population. Over the years, fund raising and awareness of HIV/AIDS has increased drastically, but epidemiologists have failed to produce consistentsuccess in lowing HIV/AIDS prevalence rates in developing countries. My<strong>research</strong> examines Catholic faith-based organizations (FBOs) providing HIV/AIDs care because of their heavy involvement in Africa and their view regardingcontraceptives. Opponents of FBOs fear that the religious will impose their ideasregarding sexual purity on the marginalized and create more obstacles in HIV/AIDS prevention by propagating stigmas and presenting an unrealistic strategicplan. However, my <strong>research</strong> shows that Catholics can be an effective governmentalpartner and in some cases have an advantage in fighting HIV/AIDS. Personalaccounts of fieldwork in Africa indicate that practices on the ground concentrateon issues other than sexuality, and an analysis of ethics show that historic viewson contraceptives may be waning. Furthermore, global health studies indicatethat the disease has social, economic, and cultural components that are stronglyinfluenced by the surrounding environment and that these factors must be addressedfor successful prevention and treatment. Catholics have established tiesin African communities and have a commitment to infrastructure developmentwhich has given them strength in addressing all aspects of the disease. My <strong>research</strong>concludes that all future HIV/AIDS strategies need to consider the diseasebeyond biomedical parameters.Anna MartinDEPARTMENT OF RELIGIOUS STUDIESLaurie ZolothFACULTY ADVISORDEPARTMENT OF RELIGIOUS STUDIESIntroductionToday over 33.3 million people are infected withHIV/AIDS and another 25 million have already diedfrom HIV/AIDS. 1 In the past two decades, remarkableprogress has been made. The developed world aptlyreduced HIV/AIDS prevalence rates among its owncitizens, but similar campaigns in Africa have failed toproduce consistent success.In 2003, President Bush created the President’s EmergencyPlan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) which dramaticallyincreased US governmental HIV/AIDS spending andprimarily supported twelve different countries in Africa. 2Controversy surrounded his decision to award aid to faithbased organizations (FBO), since HIV/AIDS preventiondepends on responsible sexual behavior. 3 Under theObama administration starting in 2008, FBOs have continuedto receive a large share of PEPFAR funding withCatholic Relief Services, the third largest recipient, receiving$103,000,000. 4VOLUME 7, 2011-2012Despite their heavy involvement, Catholics havethe most incompatible beliefs with secular HIV/AIDSprevention strategies because they view contraceptivesas intrinsically evil. Official Catholic policy considersthe use of condoms between sero-discordant marriagepartners in which case one partner is HIV-positive andthe other HIV-negative as illegitimate. Protestants alsopromote abstinence before marriage policies but do notobject to birth control within a marriage between serodiscordantcouples.While I do not want to dismiss the need for or importanceof condoms in the battle against HIV/AIDS, Iintend to show that developed countries’ obsession withsexual freedom and the power of medicine distorts theappropriate response. The culture-war on sexuality primarilyresides in developed countries and obscures thebenefits that FBOs contribute on the ground in developingcountries. This disease has sociological, cultural,and economic components that need an appropriateNORTHWESTERN UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH JOURNAL13