Will progress triumph over conflicts of interest?

“Integrity in government is the bedrock upon which the people’s trust is built. Without that trust, no nation can prosper for long.” – Lee Kuan Yew

We are invited to reflect on one of the most formidable national struggles: the fight against corruption and the obstacles that cloud the path to progress. History teaches us, with undeniable force, that a society cannot remain standing for very long if its supporting foundation has rotted away. Such was the thinking of Lee Kuan Yew, the visionary architect of modern Singapore, who regarded corruption as a deadly poison, capable of subjugating the dreams of an entire population. Each bribe received, in his words, was an assault on the sacred principle of equal opportunity, tarnishing reputations and breaking the economic backbone of a nation.

His crusade against this insidious evil was unwavering. Yew bolstered the state apparatus with strict legislation and armed the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau with broad powers to act relentlessly, even when pursuing the highest ranks of government. He also established a meritocratic system and instituted competitive public-sector wages, minimizing incentives for fraud and bribery. In doing so, he not only dismantled the old structure of privilege but demonstrated to all nations that properly executed progress can overshadow any conflict of interest.

In the daring endeavor to create a completely new governance operating system, it is common to hear skeptical voices claiming that “they will not allow it.” By “they,” we may understand the corrupt and those groups whose profound interest lies in perpetuating privileges at odds with the common good. In this brief guide, we aim to examine some ideas for circumventing these challenges, exploring methods such as Autonomous Governance Experimental Zones (AGE-Zones), the Parallel Governance Model, the Traditional Evolutionary Model, and the Virtual Society Model.

The so-called Special Economic Zones—or SEZs—are examples of bold economic enclaves established to attract investments and accelerate development through regulatory and tax incentives. Acronyms such as ZEED in Honduras and Charter Cities follow this same path, creating islands of prosperity safeguarded by their own laws and incentives, capable of shaking the ancient foundations of a corrupt system.

Here, we employ the term AGE-Zones in a specific sense; however, for the purposes of this article, we can treat it as synonymous with Special Zones.

Let us consider a scenario in which the central government is either inefficient or broadly corrupt: by establishing autonomous areas, it becomes far simpler to attract human capital and foreign investment, which in turn ignite development in a new region. This economic growth strengthens local authorities through more substantial tax revenues, and although there are criticisms regarding inequality—since some perceive themselves as “privileged” at the expense of others—the fact is that no system is perfect. And, as we well know, if we allow ourselves to be paralyzed by the pursuit of impossible perfections, we will never build anything at all.

In various parts of the world, particularly in former British, French, and Portuguese colonies—Nigeria, Kenya, Senegal, Angola, Mozambique, among others—it has been possible to witness the juxtaposition of European-influenced laws and courts alongside traditional customary tribunals that preserve local practices in matters such as marriage, inheritance, and land disputes. In majority-Muslim nations like Malaysia and Egypt, secular courts based on modern legislation coexist with religious (Sharia) courts charged with family law and inheritance.

This overlapping of structures, far from ideal, can appease powerful groups by maintaining their well-funded domains, while simultaneously creating parallel mechanisms to enhance processes where political power proves weaker. We observe similar phenomena in the emergence of cryptocurrencies (which, for now, coexist relatively peacefully with the traditional financial system) or in the tensions between Uber and traditional taxis, Airbnb and hotel chains. At a certain point, room for new advances opens up as society’s preferences evolve and the political class, out of both interest and acumen, adjusts its tune to the new melody.

The most common method, and perhaps the most arduous, is the Traditional Evolutionary Model: reforming the system from within. This is how countless societies have achieved equal rights for women and minorities, and made progress in constitutional, civil, criminal, and tax matters. Still, after fifteen years of studying governance, I am convinced that while it is essential to have individuals of goodwill and intelligence in leadership—above all, to steer the first two models—we must not ignore that powerful interests almost always rise up against innovation.

The carriage industry trembled at the advent of the automobile; lamp and gas distributors fiercely resisted electrification; and trucking lobbies frequently oppose railway expansion. These collisions of specific interests tend to undermine initiatives aimed at collective benefit, resulting in outcomes so compromised that they lose all credibility. Savvy politicians, aware of this risk, often extend debates to exhaustion, sapping the momentum of bold proposals and leaving them on the brink of defeat.

The fourth model, one might say, dwells at the threshold between reality and science fiction: a virtual world akin to games such as Fortnite or Roblox. Citizens fulfill their local obligations but find, in this digital space, the opportunity to build a “second life,” freed from certain geographic or political constraints. As eccentric as it may sound, the fact is that the world is heading toward ever deeper interconnection, in which goals and affinities transcend territorial boundaries. Should this virtual jurisdiction gain legal legitimacy, we can envision a platform for joint purchasing, collaborative negotiations, and shared development—among other features of this virtual society—even potentially creating a second citizenship recognized internationally. According to Henley & Partners, there are currently 560 million crypto-asset users worldwide, a figure exceeding the population of most countries. This group could be recognized as an active virtual society with its own rules and leaders.

At PRIME Society, we envision providing the tools so that each city, state, or nation—be it physical or virtual, private or public—can reach new heights of development. Yet there can be no true progress without bold leadership, willing to confront the ravenous sharks of political waters. We need statesmen like Lee Kuan Yew, who raise the flag against bribery and conflicts of interest, ensuring the flame of progress burns ever brighter.