3 ms·

> Those poor countries are improving faster than Sweden ever did... so in just one more lifetime they'll be where the world leaders are today. This is a very s

> Those poor countries are improving faster than Sweden ever did... so in just one more lifetime they'll be where the world leaders are today. This is a very simplistic extrapolation. There are significant factors, primarily social/cultural ones, that will halt the relative development of those countries, sooner or later.

pas 8y ago
Why? What are those? Could you please explain this argument?
grecy 8y ago
> primarily social/cultural ones, that will halt the relative development of those countries, sooner or later. Hans addresses this in the book, actually. What you said has no basis in fact, and makes no sense. Do you think people said exactly the same thing about Sweden a generation ago? Why / why not? We in the West have this completely-made-up assumption that "they" can't develop like "we" did, with absolutely no grounding in fact.
- megous 8y ago
  > We in the West have this completely-made-up assumption that "they" can't develop like "we" did, with absolutely no grounding in fact. They can. But "we" developed in a very turbulent and deadly ways. Just handful of decades ago, during WWI and WWII, "we" were killing millions of people, helping spread massive disease outbreaks that killed other millions in just a few years, created economy destroying monetary and isolationist policies, impoverished millions, destroyed advanced industrialized countries in the middle of Europe with communism, were colonizing, destabilizing and exploiting natural resources of other countries, etc. We're still humans, and all this is still possible to repeat. And developing "like we did", is not necessarily something great or positive. It can mean pretty much anything, unless you cherry-pick baselessly.
  - kiliantics 8y ago
    This is absolutely right. The wealth in the West was largely gained through colonialist/imperialist means. Developing countries don't have this option.
- igravious 8y ago
  You know what it is? I think that people flat out don't want to believe that the world can become measurably better in whole or in part. They've been told all their lives and they've believed that "things" are getting worse. When someone turns around and writes a whole book saying, "the data shows that country X is where Sweden was Y years ago; at the current rate country X will be where Sweden is now Z years from now." Their gut instinct is to not believe.
  - whatshisface 8y ago
    If you live in country X, you will believe that things are getting better. If you live in Sweden, you might think things are getting worse. If you live in the rust belt in the US, you would think that things were better in the past, and you'd be right.
- mistermann 8y ago
  > We in the West have this completely-made-up assumption that "they" can't develop like "we" did, with absolutely no grounding in fact. Some people do, that's true. It also seems to be true that some people have an assumption, not at all completely grounded in fact, that "all" people can and will develop "like we did". Two problems I see with this belief are that it is inherently speculative (a prediction of the future), and it assumes that other cultures Necessarily* _want_ to develop like we have. Personally, I believe there are significant imperfections in Western culture, the way we've developed and the way we operate today, I'd be extremely surprised if all cultures view our way as the best way to organize societies. You can see evidence of this all over the place, but Westerners have a habit of classifying dissenting opinions as "just wrong" and dismissing/ignoring them.
  - throwaway47861 8y ago
    > ...but Westerners have a habit of classifying dissenting opinions as "just wrong" and dismissing/ignoring them. Fully agreed. This is also extremely prevalent in any economic discussions here in HN where most of the first-world dwellers are cozying up their minds with the generic statement "it is all getting better on average" which I think is utter BS. As a guy who has been to pretty poor parts of the world and lives in a country that touts any small bill that will benefit zero common folk -- but is always advertised as such for 30 years now -- I have to say, most first-world population is tragically misinformed on how are the average people around the world living.
IfOnlyYouKnew 8y ago
There was a recent report on a long-term study of people’s attitudes regarding certain civilisational values, such as equality and acceptance of homosexuality. The takeaway was that the Middle East today is about where the west was in the 60s. That would seem to go quite well with OPs point that they are about “one lifetime” behind the west, specifically on the social/cultural values you mention.

pas 8y ago

Why? What are those? Could you please explain this argument?

grecy 8y ago

> primarily social/cultural ones, that will halt the relative development of those countries, sooner or later. Hans addresses this in the book, actually. What you said has no basis in fact, and makes no sense. Do you think people said exactly the same thing about Sweden a generation ago? Why / why not? We in the West have this completely-made-up assumption that "they" can't develop like "we" did, with absolutely no grounding in fact.

megous 8y ago
> We in the West have this completely-made-up assumption that "they" can't develop like "we" did, with absolutely no grounding in fact. They can. But "we" developed in a very turbulent and deadly ways. Just handful of decades ago, during WWI and WWII, "we" were killing millions of people, helping spread massive disease outbreaks that killed other millions in just a few years, created economy destroying monetary and isolationist policies, impoverished millions, destroyed advanced industrialized countries in the middle of Europe with communism, were colonizing, destabilizing and exploiting natural resources of other countries, etc. We're still humans, and all this is still possible to repeat. And developing "like we did", is not necessarily something great or positive. It can mean pretty much anything, unless you cherry-pick baselessly.
- kiliantics 8y ago
  This is absolutely right. The wealth in the West was largely gained through colonialist/imperialist means. Developing countries don't have this option.
igravious 8y ago
You know what it is? I think that people flat out don't want to believe that the world can become measurably better in whole or in part. They've been told all their lives and they've believed that "things" are getting worse. When someone turns around and writes a whole book saying, "the data shows that country X is where Sweden was Y years ago; at the current rate country X will be where Sweden is now Z years from now." Their gut instinct is to not believe.
- whatshisface 8y ago
  If you live in country X, you will believe that things are getting better. If you live in Sweden, you might think things are getting worse. If you live in the rust belt in the US, you would think that things were better in the past, and you'd be right.
mistermann 8y ago
> We in the West have this completely-made-up assumption that "they" can't develop like "we" did, with absolutely no grounding in fact. Some people do, that's true. It also seems to be true that some people have an assumption, not at all completely grounded in fact, that "all" people can and will develop "like we did". Two problems I see with this belief are that it is inherently speculative (a prediction of the future), and it assumes that other cultures Necessarily* _want_ to develop like we have. Personally, I believe there are significant imperfections in Western culture, the way we've developed and the way we operate today, I'd be extremely surprised if all cultures view our way as the best way to organize societies. You can see evidence of this all over the place, but Westerners have a habit of classifying dissenting opinions as "just wrong" and dismissing/ignoring them.
- throwaway47861 8y ago
  > ...but Westerners have a habit of classifying dissenting opinions as "just wrong" and dismissing/ignoring them. Fully agreed. This is also extremely prevalent in any economic discussions here in HN where most of the first-world dwellers are cozying up their minds with the generic statement "it is all getting better on average" which I think is utter BS. As a guy who has been to pretty poor parts of the world and lives in a country that touts any small bill that will benefit zero common folk -- but is always advertised as such for 30 years now -- I have to say, most first-world population is tragically misinformed on how are the average people around the world living.

IfOnlyYouKnew 8y ago

There was a recent report on a long-term study of people’s attitudes regarding certain civilisational values, such as equality and acceptance of homosexuality. The takeaway was that the Middle East today is about where the west was in the 60s. That would seem to go quite well with OPs point that they are about “one lifetime” behind the west, specifically on the social/cultural values you mention.