5 ms·

> Most nations today would be richer if they had long ago just submitted wholesale to a rich nation, allowing that rich nation to change their laws, customs, et

by yk 11y ago

> Most nations today would be richer if they had long ago just submitted wholesale to a rich nation, allowing that rich nation to change their laws, customs, etc., and just do everything their way. But this idea greatly offends national and cultural pride. So nations stay poor. The examples of China, Japan and the USA suggest the exact opposite. (Actually I do not know an example that would support the authors claim.) > When firms and managers from rich places try to transplant rich practices to poor places, giving poor place workers exactly the same equipment, materials, procedures, etc., one of the main things that goes wrong is that poor place workers just refuse to do what they are told. [Citation needed] and so on, and so on... In conclusion, I think were the essay falls apart is, that it does not examine different kinds of submit. 'submit' is a very different word if the pupil submits to a teacher out of a deep desire to learn a new skill or if someone submits to a warlord. (And both are very different from submitting to a boss at a workplace.) Plus it would be nice to see a rejection of the standard story, that school mainly teaches useful skills.

ktRolster 11y ago
The examples of China, Japan and the USA suggest the exact opposite. (Actually I do not know an example that would support the authors claim.) Indeed, the article would be better with less speculation (presented in the form of assertions) and more data collecting.
chroma 11y ago
> The examples of China, Japan and the USA suggest the exact opposite. (Actually I do not know an example that would support the authors claim.) What? Japan adopted representative democracy, human rights, capitalism, fractional reserve banking, the metric system, and even western attire. China is more authoritarian, but has made many of the same changes. Their economic prosperity is highly correlated with these changes. And I'm flabbergasted that you think the USA doesn't prove his point. The original American culture was from the native Americans. Once it was replaced with British culture, the economy of north america flourished. In places where native culture was replaced with others (Spanish/native culture in Mexico, Portuguese/native culture in Brazil, etc), the people haven't had the same level of success. Similarly, Spain and Portugal haven't had the same prosperity as the UK. When it comes to per capita GDP, the effect of culture is vastly underestimated. > [Citation needed] and so on, and so on... He links to a citation in the sentence after your quote.[1] The paper is a study of the differences in cotton mill productivity in various countries. The author accounts for varying levels of technology, training, and other factors. He finds that the biggest factor affecting productivity is culture. Honestly, I think you're reading this far too uncharitably. It's a blog post, not an academic paper. If the author took the time to address the objections in this thread, it would have been 10x as much work. 1. http://faculty.georgetown.edu/mh5/class/econ489/Clark-Why-Isn't-the%20-Whole-World-Developed.pdf http://faculty.georgetown.edu/mh5/class/econ489/Clark-Why-Is...
- yk 11y ago
  On the US and Japan, Japan did industrialize first, prior to WWII, and adopted some aspects of western culture afterwards. Similar the US did become independent first and then largely developed what is nowadays called western culture. Both actually used force instead of submitting. My understanding of China is more limited, but it seems they will become a developed nation first before adopting things like representative democracy, human rights etc. > He links to a citation in the sentence after your quote.[1] Indeed I overlooked that link, so I should have chosen a different claim that needs a good argument. ( The claim that education became more rigid as a general trend in history seems dubious for example.) However, looking very quickly through the paper, it does not seem to claim that culture as most important factor is well understood, instead he seems to build an argument that local factors are very important and suggests that culture may be the most important local factor.
  - mdw 11y ago
    > Similar the US did become independent first and then largely developed what is nowadays called western culture. I stopped reading here. The US developed its own culture, it did not largely develop 'western' culture, though it is very influential.
    - yk 11y ago
      Well, I did expand the claim several times when writing the comment. The thing is, if you look at the world of the 1780ies, then there is only one democracy ( for comparison, France is still an absolute monarchy, Britain has some democratic elements but is mostly a monarchy). So it is probably some hyperbole and certainly glosses over all details, especially that cultures are interconnected, I think it is not a too strong statement.
  - chroma 11y ago
    > Japan did industrialize first, prior to WWII, and adopted some aspects of western culture afterwards. Except for voting and human rights, Japan adopted all the things I listed before WWII. The Meiji era was full of westernization. I don't think people realize just how insanely dysfunctional other cultures can be. Plenty of poor countries lack concepts we consider basic. Take Haiti, for example. I'll quote a couple paragraphs from a doctor who volunteered there after the earthquake[1]: > It has proven hard for me to appreciate exactly how confused the Haitians are about some things. Gail, our program director, explained that she has a lot of trouble with her Haitian office staff because they don't understand the concept of sorting numerically. Not just "they don't want to do it" or "it never occurred to them", but after months and months of attempted explanation they don't understand that sorting alphabetically or numerically is even a thing. Not only has this messed up her office work, but it makes dealing with the Haitian bureaucracy - harrowing at the best of times - positively unbearable. > Gail told the story of the time she asked a city office for some paperwork regarding Doctors Without Borders. The local official took out a drawer full of paperwork and looked through every single paper individually to see if it was the one she wanted. Then he started looking for the next drawer. After five hours, the official finally said that the paper wasn't in his office. I hope that gives an idea of the culture gains Robin Hanson is talking about. Such concepts only seem obvious to us because we were raised in a culture that already had them. 1. http://squid314.livejournal.com/297579.html http://squid314.livejournal.com/297579.html
elcapitan 11y ago
> The examples of China, Japan and the USA suggest the exact opposite. I think the comeback of Japan after WW2 speaks against this. Also the US are probably a good example of copying the existing British institutions (with the exception of the crown, although you might argue that the US president is king-like). More broadly speaking, it's probably not so much about "submitting to a rich nation", which is a pretty crazy simplification that doesn't apply to many former colonies. But I think you can find a strong correlation between former parts of the British Empire and now Commonwealth or Ex-Commonwealth and the successful implementation of institutions that give them wealth and freedom. Read "Why Nations Fail" [1] to get some examples of that, one that I remember was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botswana https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botswana. [1] http://www.amazon.com/Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity/dp/0307719227 http://www.amazon.com/Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity/dp...
- yk 11y ago
  I thought about Japan before WWII, the causality is backwards for the claim in the post. Why Nations Fail is actually somewhere on my to read stack, hopefully I find some time to actually read it.
  - elcapitan 11y ago
    It's a good book, although I'm not so sure if they fact-checked the historical details, at least for some chapters. Some of the stuff concerning Germany looked a bit questionable, but it doesn't harm the overall quality of the argument.
gh-lfneu28 11y ago
[Citation needed] - watch Empire of Dust ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0C4_88ub_M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0C4_88ub_M )
philwelch 11y ago
> The examples of China, Japan and the USA suggest the exact opposite Seriously? In 1945, Japan literally submitted wholesale to a rich nation (the US), allowing it to change their laws, customs, etc. It was called "unconditional surrender". General MacArthur ran the country for a few years. Japan is probably the best example of how that approach can be successful.

by yk 11y ago

ktRolster 11y ago

The examples of China, Japan and the USA suggest the exact opposite. (Actually I do not know an example that would support the authors claim.) Indeed, the article would be better with less speculation (presented in the form of assertions) and more data collecting.

chroma 11y ago

> The examples of China, Japan and the USA suggest the exact opposite. (Actually I do not know an example that would support the authors claim.) What? Japan adopted representative democracy, human rights, capitalism, fractional reserve banking, the metric system, and even western attire. China is more authoritarian, but has made many of the same changes. Their economic prosperity is highly correlated with these changes. And I'm flabbergasted that you think the USA doesn't prove his point. The original American culture was from the native Americans. Once it was replaced with British culture, the economy of north america flourished. In places where native culture was replaced with others (Spanish/native culture in Mexico, Portuguese/native culture in Brazil, etc), the people haven't had the same level of success. Similarly, Spain and Portugal haven't had the same prosperity as the UK. When it comes to per capita GDP, the effect of culture is vastly underestimated. > [Citation needed] and so on, and so on... He links to a citation in the sentence after your quote.[1] The paper is a study of the differences in cotton mill productivity in various countries. The author accounts for varying levels of technology, training, and other factors. He finds that the biggest factor affecting productivity is culture. Honestly, I think you're reading this far too uncharitably. It's a blog post, not an academic paper. If the author took the time to address the objections in this thread, it would have been 10x as much work. 1. http://faculty.georgetown.edu/mh5/class/econ489/Clark-Why-Isn't-the%20-Whole-World-Developed.pdf http://faculty.georgetown.edu/mh5/class/econ489/Clark-Why-Is...

yk 11y ago
On the US and Japan, Japan did industrialize first, prior to WWII, and adopted some aspects of western culture afterwards. Similar the US did become independent first and then largely developed what is nowadays called western culture. Both actually used force instead of submitting. My understanding of China is more limited, but it seems they will become a developed nation first before adopting things like representative democracy, human rights etc. > He links to a citation in the sentence after your quote.[1] Indeed I overlooked that link, so I should have chosen a different claim that needs a good argument. ( The claim that education became more rigid as a general trend in history seems dubious for example.) However, looking very quickly through the paper, it does not seem to claim that culture as most important factor is well understood, instead he seems to build an argument that local factors are very important and suggests that culture may be the most important local factor.
- mdw 11y ago
  > Similar the US did become independent first and then largely developed what is nowadays called western culture. I stopped reading here. The US developed its own culture, it did not largely develop 'western' culture, though it is very influential.
  - yk 11y ago
    Well, I did expand the claim several times when writing the comment. The thing is, if you look at the world of the 1780ies, then there is only one democracy ( for comparison, France is still an absolute monarchy, Britain has some democratic elements but is mostly a monarchy). So it is probably some hyperbole and certainly glosses over all details, especially that cultures are interconnected, I think it is not a too strong statement.
- chroma 11y ago
  > Japan did industrialize first, prior to WWII, and adopted some aspects of western culture afterwards. Except for voting and human rights, Japan adopted all the things I listed before WWII. The Meiji era was full of westernization. I don't think people realize just how insanely dysfunctional other cultures can be. Plenty of poor countries lack concepts we consider basic. Take Haiti, for example. I'll quote a couple paragraphs from a doctor who volunteered there after the earthquake[1]: > It has proven hard for me to appreciate exactly how confused the Haitians are about some things. Gail, our program director, explained that she has a lot of trouble with her Haitian office staff because they don't understand the concept of sorting numerically. Not just "they don't want to do it" or "it never occurred to them", but after months and months of attempted explanation they don't understand that sorting alphabetically or numerically is even a thing. Not only has this messed up her office work, but it makes dealing with the Haitian bureaucracy - harrowing at the best of times - positively unbearable. > Gail told the story of the time she asked a city office for some paperwork regarding Doctors Without Borders. The local official took out a drawer full of paperwork and looked through every single paper individually to see if it was the one she wanted. Then he started looking for the next drawer. After five hours, the official finally said that the paper wasn't in his office. I hope that gives an idea of the culture gains Robin Hanson is talking about. Such concepts only seem obvious to us because we were raised in a culture that already had them. 1. http://squid314.livejournal.com/297579.html http://squid314.livejournal.com/297579.html

elcapitan 11y ago

> The examples of China, Japan and the USA suggest the exact opposite. I think the comeback of Japan after WW2 speaks against this. Also the US are probably a good example of copying the existing British institutions (with the exception of the crown, although you might argue that the US president is king-like). More broadly speaking, it's probably not so much about "submitting to a rich nation", which is a pretty crazy simplification that doesn't apply to many former colonies. But I think you can find a strong correlation between former parts of the British Empire and now Commonwealth or Ex-Commonwealth and the successful implementation of institutions that give them wealth and freedom. Read "Why Nations Fail" [1] to get some examples of that, one that I remember was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botswana https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botswana. [1] http://www.amazon.com/Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity/dp/0307719227 http://www.amazon.com/Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity/dp...

yk 11y ago
I thought about Japan before WWII, the causality is backwards for the claim in the post. Why Nations Fail is actually somewhere on my to read stack, hopefully I find some time to actually read it.
- elcapitan 11y ago
  It's a good book, although I'm not so sure if they fact-checked the historical details, at least for some chapters. Some of the stuff concerning Germany looked a bit questionable, but it doesn't harm the overall quality of the argument.

gh-lfneu28 11y ago

[Citation needed] - watch Empire of Dust ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0C4_88ub_M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0C4_88ub_M )

philwelch 11y ago

> The examples of China, Japan and the USA suggest the exact opposite Seriously? In 1945, Japan literally submitted wholesale to a rich nation (the US), allowing it to change their laws, customs, etc. It was called "unconditional surrender". General MacArthur ran the country for a few years. Japan is probably the best example of how that approach can be successful.