straight_talk isn't comparing Singapore to North Korea; they're arguing that Tloewald's definition of evil is too strict because it wouldn't include North Korea.

I'm not providing a definition of evil, i'm pointing out that Singapore's achievements on the Evil Checklist don't measure up to the United States'. I don't think the US is evil either, it sets a high bar for other contenders though.

Take a look at the Roman Empire which, despite everything, made the lot of ordinary people better.

North Korea probably meets my definition of evil, but I really don't know enough. Nazi Germany, Stalin and his apparatus. Pol Pot.

Edit: among millions worldwide, I marched in protest against the massacre at Tien an men square. My mother, who has far better cred in this area than I do (having been imprisoned and tortured as a political prisoner) argued in favor of the Chinese government — she said China wasn't ready for democracy and far more people would suffer in a chaotic transition than if the government were allowed to reform at its own pace. It's imponderabe — we can only try to do what we think is right.

Except it does include North Korea. As I stated in my previous post.

Plus Tloewald's post was satire, pointing out that many countries that are not considered evil (namely USA - in his example) have committed far worse atrocities under their government than Singapore ever has has. Thus it's a bit of a stretch to call Singapore's government evil over this news item. Tloewald's point wasn't meant to be taken as a literal checklist for what constitutes as an "evil government".