5 ms·

> That being said, the greatest improvement in the greatest number of people at the fastest rate is almost certainly a title held by the totalitarian government

> That being said, the greatest improvement in the greatest number of people at the fastest rate is almost certainly a title held by the totalitarian government in China. If you're talking about the recent two decades, then specifically it's a totalitarian government adopting market reforms (i.e. freedoms) which imitate successful liberal democracies on their borders. I'd also note that prior to the "Chinese miracle" was the "South Korean miracle" and before that the "Japanese miracle". China was the slowest and last, just the biggest population.

eloisius 6y ago
Also worth noting that Taiwan has a far higher GDP per capita. Admittedly, not a perfect comparison with China since they received decades of Japanese infra development.
- brobdingnagians 6y ago
  Did the Japanese infra development come from a more free market Japan? I would think there is a chain involved somewhere along there.
  - eloisius 6y ago
    The Japanese infra came from imperial Japan prior to the conclusion of WWII so I’m not sure how “free” market I would consider that since it was more of a totalitarian command economy.
roenxi 6y ago
I'm pretty extreme; I see all forms of government 'help' as the precursors for disaster. So I totally accept the argument that they are doing the correct thing by backing away from totalitarianism. But unfortunately, the twin arguments that 'they aren't pure in their beliefs' and 'they are copying good ideas from elsewhere' and both devastatingly weak arguments if someone challenges them. I would call on Western governments to copy what China has done that worked, except I don't trust them to identify it. I think they'd just import the surveillance state and ignore the "what about letting the capitalists capitalise?" idea.
- m463 6y ago
  I think it might be more like "fragile efficiency". It is more efficient to take the best potato strain, grow it everywhere and feed everyone more efficiently. But then the whole population becomes very very dependent on one healthy potato.
  - machiaweliczny 6y ago
    Yeah, it's difference between efficient vs robust. Totalitarism might be more efficient short term but long term it will be set back much more. It just places too much responsibility/power on too few. You might get lucky or might not. Problem with democracy is that it's susceptible to neocolonialism(bribery, power and economic diff, dissinformation, non-competive local market), that's why I guess all Asian economic miracles happened with good faith authoritarian government and with good geopolitical location that allowed them to close market without wars. This would suggest that having big country nearby powerful neighbours is not a good place to be, which brings India to my mind. Wonder how it will turn out. On the other hand Canada and Mexico are doing quite fine. I expect big changes on governance when most of the world catches up od when we get fusion.
- unishark 6y ago
  The point was more about narrowly describing the conditions under which they have succeeded, limiting how much you can conclude about the reasons. Playing catch-up is always easier and faster. Growth requires risk-taking. but if you already know what "risks" to take by looking over the border at what the other country built, it's more just formulaic, which works great for a top-down approach. But once they stat getting into uncharted territory the top-down approach can switch from being the best to the worst as they inefficiently dump resources into the wrong directions.
scottlocklin 6y ago
South Korea's industrialization is under-appreciated. 8% a year for 20 years is pretty bonkers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_South_Korea#Rapid_growth_from_1960s_to_1980s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_South_Korea#Rapid_g... Like China, authoritarian and protectionist. Though Park eventually drove the country in a democratic direction. He's seen like a combination of George Washington and Paul Bunyan in South Korea; wish there was a good bio of him in English.

eloisius 6y ago

Also worth noting that Taiwan has a far higher GDP per capita. Admittedly, not a perfect comparison with China since they received decades of Japanese infra development.

brobdingnagians 6y ago
Did the Japanese infra development come from a more free market Japan? I would think there is a chain involved somewhere along there.
- eloisius 6y ago
  The Japanese infra came from imperial Japan prior to the conclusion of WWII so I’m not sure how “free” market I would consider that since it was more of a totalitarian command economy.

roenxi 6y ago

I'm pretty extreme; I see all forms of government 'help' as the precursors for disaster. So I totally accept the argument that they are doing the correct thing by backing away from totalitarianism. But unfortunately, the twin arguments that 'they aren't pure in their beliefs' and 'they are copying good ideas from elsewhere' and both devastatingly weak arguments if someone challenges them. I would call on Western governments to copy what China has done that worked, except I don't trust them to identify it. I think they'd just import the surveillance state and ignore the "what about letting the capitalists capitalise?" idea.

m463 6y ago
I think it might be more like "fragile efficiency". It is more efficient to take the best potato strain, grow it everywhere and feed everyone more efficiently. But then the whole population becomes very very dependent on one healthy potato.
- machiaweliczny 6y ago
  Yeah, it's difference between efficient vs robust. Totalitarism might be more efficient short term but long term it will be set back much more. It just places too much responsibility/power on too few. You might get lucky or might not. Problem with democracy is that it's susceptible to neocolonialism(bribery, power and economic diff, dissinformation, non-competive local market), that's why I guess all Asian economic miracles happened with good faith authoritarian government and with good geopolitical location that allowed them to close market without wars. This would suggest that having big country nearby powerful neighbours is not a good place to be, which brings India to my mind. Wonder how it will turn out. On the other hand Canada and Mexico are doing quite fine. I expect big changes on governance when most of the world catches up od when we get fusion.
unishark 6y ago
The point was more about narrowly describing the conditions under which they have succeeded, limiting how much you can conclude about the reasons. Playing catch-up is always easier and faster. Growth requires risk-taking. but if you already know what "risks" to take by looking over the border at what the other country built, it's more just formulaic, which works great for a top-down approach. But once they stat getting into uncharted territory the top-down approach can switch from being the best to the worst as they inefficiently dump resources into the wrong directions.

scottlocklin 6y ago

South Korea's industrialization is under-appreciated. 8% a year for 20 years is pretty bonkers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_South_Korea#Rapid_growth_from_1960s_to_1980s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_South_Korea#Rapid_g... Like China, authoritarian and protectionist. Though Park eventually drove the country in a democratic direction. He's seen like a combination of George Washington and Paul Bunyan in South Korea; wish there was a good bio of him in English.