4 ms·

From where do you get the ridiculous claim that human rights and the rule of law are preconditions for economic prosperity? There are many unfree yet rich count

From where do you get the ridiculous claim that human rights and the rule of law are preconditions for economic prosperity? There are many unfree yet rich countries, i.e. Singapore.

tmgcd 11y ago
A person who pretend to be asleep cannot be waken up （你永远唤不醒装睡的人）
- desdiv 11y ago
  In this case, it's more like: "A person being paid 50 cents[0] to pretend to sleep cannot be woken up". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party
PakG1 11y ago
This question was answered years ago by the magna carta. Without rule of law, you get corruption and a dissatisfied population. Then you get economic stagnation and suffering by the masses. Finally, you get the French Revolution, the various Communist revolutions, and so on. Rule of law is necessary for economic prosperity because without rule of law, entrepreneurs cannot confidently engage in economic activity without fearing that their property rights will be trampled and the wealth they generate will be taken away by an arbitrarily deciding government. Why should someone take so much risk and then be punished for their success? Without rule of law, there can be a temporary party for a few decades, but the party stops when the government starts getting out of hand and abuses its power. This is why Xi Jiping is making stamping out corruption one of his top public priorities, more so than any previous Chinese leader in modern history. He is also on record that he wants China to move forward to have proper rule of law. I dislike it when people bring up Singapore as an example. Singapore is so small that it's really easy to manage compared to a large country with a large population. And besides that, Singapore doesn't have poor quality rule of law compared to other countries (yet). edit: I get the impression that you equate rule of law with democracy. But you didn't actually say that, so please confirm for me whether or not that's what you really think. Rule of law is something else entirely: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law
- hga 11y ago
  This is why Xi Jiping is making stamping out corruption one of his top public priorities, more so than any previous Chinese leader in modern history. And/or this campaign is destroying rivals to his power.... He is also on record that he wants China to move forward to have proper rule of law. And if so, we'd better hope he's a 2nd Lee Kuan Yew. Except as you note, the scales don't even vaguely match, trying to effect such a policy change without well neigh unimaginable reforms all the way down to the local level strikes me as equally unimaginable. One of the reasons to equate the rule of law with "democracy" is checking the power of local potentates; hard to see how a huge, all powerful state like the PRC can do that from the top down.
  - PakG1 11y ago
    Yes, definitions and platitudes aside, feasibility is a completely different matter. It would be interesting to see whether the PRC really can implement proper rule of law from the top down, and it is quite possibly not feasible. That doesn't necessarily imply that the desire and effort are false. Xi Bolai was an example of a campaign to destroy rivals to his power using the claim of wanting to clean up corruption. He had goals to achieve not yet achieved. Xi's already at the top. It would be very difficult to remove him from power, given the way the Chinese government operates. It would be tantamount to revolution. If revolution happens, I can't see it being because power rivals plot it.
adventured 11y ago
It's a pre-condition nearly across the board. Name the long list of countries with low freedom and high economic prosperity - the list is in fact extraordinarily short. Singapore isn't a low freedom country, it's a mid freedom country. It has a level of freedom comparable to Mexico or Turkey. Low freedom nations: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Myanmar, North Korea, Sudan etc. Off the top of my head for relatively free + prosperous: Norway, Sweden, Finland, Germany, UK, US, Japan, South Korea, France, Denmark, Netherlands, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Iceland, Belgium. Now match that list with relatively unfree nations that are prosperous. Outside of a select few petro States, you're almost entirely out of luck. That list of prosperous + free states is so far beyond the low freedom list across the board on quality of life and economic metrics, there is no meaningful comparison to be had.

From where do you get the ridiculous claim that human rights and the rule of law are preconditions for economic prosperity? There are many unfree yet rich countries, i.e. Singapore.

tmgcd 11y ago

A person who pretend to be asleep cannot be waken up （你永远唤不醒装睡的人）

desdiv 11y ago
In this case, it's more like: "A person being paid 50 cents[0] to pretend to sleep cannot be woken up". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party

PakG1 11y ago

This question was answered years ago by the magna carta. Without rule of law, you get corruption and a dissatisfied population. Then you get economic stagnation and suffering by the masses. Finally, you get the French Revolution, the various Communist revolutions, and so on. Rule of law is necessary for economic prosperity because without rule of law, entrepreneurs cannot confidently engage in economic activity without fearing that their property rights will be trampled and the wealth they generate will be taken away by an arbitrarily deciding government. Why should someone take so much risk and then be punished for their success? Without rule of law, there can be a temporary party for a few decades, but the party stops when the government starts getting out of hand and abuses its power. This is why Xi Jiping is making stamping out corruption one of his top public priorities, more so than any previous Chinese leader in modern history. He is also on record that he wants China to move forward to have proper rule of law. I dislike it when people bring up Singapore as an example. Singapore is so small that it's really easy to manage compared to a large country with a large population. And besides that, Singapore doesn't have poor quality rule of law compared to other countries (yet). edit: I get the impression that you equate rule of law with democracy. But you didn't actually say that, so please confirm for me whether or not that's what you really think. Rule of law is something else entirely: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law

hga 11y ago
This is why Xi Jiping is making stamping out corruption one of his top public priorities, more so than any previous Chinese leader in modern history. And/or this campaign is destroying rivals to his power.... He is also on record that he wants China to move forward to have proper rule of law. And if so, we'd better hope he's a 2nd Lee Kuan Yew. Except as you note, the scales don't even vaguely match, trying to effect such a policy change without well neigh unimaginable reforms all the way down to the local level strikes me as equally unimaginable. One of the reasons to equate the rule of law with "democracy" is checking the power of local potentates; hard to see how a huge, all powerful state like the PRC can do that from the top down.
- PakG1 11y ago
  Yes, definitions and platitudes aside, feasibility is a completely different matter. It would be interesting to see whether the PRC really can implement proper rule of law from the top down, and it is quite possibly not feasible. That doesn't necessarily imply that the desire and effort are false. Xi Bolai was an example of a campaign to destroy rivals to his power using the claim of wanting to clean up corruption. He had goals to achieve not yet achieved. Xi's already at the top. It would be very difficult to remove him from power, given the way the Chinese government operates. It would be tantamount to revolution. If revolution happens, I can't see it being because power rivals plot it.

adventured 11y ago

It's a pre-condition nearly across the board. Name the long list of countries with low freedom and high economic prosperity - the list is in fact extraordinarily short. Singapore isn't a low freedom country, it's a mid freedom country. It has a level of freedom comparable to Mexico or Turkey. Low freedom nations: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Myanmar, North Korea, Sudan etc. Off the top of my head for relatively free + prosperous: Norway, Sweden, Finland, Germany, UK, US, Japan, South Korea, France, Denmark, Netherlands, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Iceland, Belgium. Now match that list with relatively unfree nations that are prosperous. Outside of a select few petro States, you're almost entirely out of luck. That list of prosperous + free states is so far beyond the low freedom list across the board on quality of life and economic metrics, there is no meaningful comparison to be had.