近年新加坡在全球化的浪潮下，憑藉著監視社會的運作使其威權政治與知識經濟得以相容並存，監視社會控制不僅成為其面對高風險社會的有效因應之道，且進而形塑出結合威權政治、知識經濟與監視社會三位一體的獨特發展模式。這一「後現代式」的監視權力觀點其實並未否定既存的現代式威權操作對其市民社會之控制，而是增補新加坡在進入網絡數位時代後，政府如何藉由對市民社會的監視控制以維繫其威權統治。目前監視社會的探討仍多偏重於監視科技對社會現況的衝擊和影響，這樣的研究方向雖得以論證全球監視社會的「匯聚說」，但卻欠缺對特定監視社會發展的歷史生成進行探討，如此將難以解釋不同國家監視社會發展的主、客差異及其在監視進程上的發展意義與影響為何。本文認為目前監視社會研究所面臨的限制可透過歷史脈絡檢視的研究路徑來改善，亦即從監視社會理論的探討起步後，將新加坡監視社會控制與既有建制的連結置於其歷史脈絡中去察考，便能建立起監視社會與既有建制間的歷史動態分析，增進研究者對新加坡監視社會發展之瞭解。

Singapore has developed a new surveillance society strategy to keep authoritarian politics compatible with knowledge economy in the globalization era. The surveillance society control is not only workable in the highly risk society, it also shapes a special development mode that can integrate the authoritarian politics, knowledge economy and surveillance society into an incorporated whole. Indeed, the post-modern surveillance power explanation does not deny those accounts of modem authoritarian political operations in the civil society. The more recent explanation is to increase our understanding of how Singapore government maintains authoritarian politics through surveillance control in the digital network. The surveillance society study may overemphasize the impacts of surveillance technologies upon the present society. Although this emphasis could provide evidence for the convergence argument of global surveillance society, however; it requires a more profound research of the specific historical formation of Singapore's surveillance society. The author argues that the restrictions of surveillance society research can be improved by using the historical-context analysis. That is, with the framing of surveillance society theories, the researcher can further link the surveillance society control with Singapore's existing establishments under a historical-dynamics examination. It will enhance our understanding of surveillance society development in Singapore.