>> Japan and Korea have collectivist cultures and made that leap in the past 50 years. > Japan and South Korea are both democratic republics. I think we shoul

>> Japan and Korea have collectivist cultures and made that leap in the past 50 years. > Japan and South Korea are both democratic republics. I think we should be crisp on the difference between government systems and culture. East asian culture tends to be very collectivist regardless of the government system. When you originally said "collectivist culture" I assumed you were referring to this culture (tallest hammer gets nailed down, route memorization learning, respect for seniority over ability, etc). But if you were referring to the political system then that's true now, though this might be putting the cart before the horse. SK, Taiwan, and even Japan all got a lot of economic development done under authoritarian regimes (even if they were democracy in name). Only once economic development came did they transition. Ironically the growth slowed after that so if you think political system is a causal factor of economic growth, it might appear at first glance that democracy is bad for economic growth. > Isn't Singapore more or less a democratic republic now? Haha, well, maybe formally. As others have pointed out Singapore has practically single-party-rule. By some accounts, China owes much of its modern success to copying Singapore's flavor of state capitalism. Deng Xiaoping visited Lee Kwan Yew in 1978 and that set the course for China to pivot away from communism to state capitalism. https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/lee-kuan-yew-lauded-for-critical-role-in-chinas-reform-and-opening-up https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/lee-kuan-yew-lauded-for-cr... > Before Xi, China was slowly moving in the right direction for global dominance. China under Xi is moving backwards. I agree with that statement, though time will tell. ---- To sum up this discussion: 1. if it's ultimately a question of whether democracy is a necessary condition of economic growth or even creativity, I would say no. Plenty of good science was done in Germany in the 40s or the Soviet Union, and economic growth in South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan under military dictatorships. 2. Would more creative work have been done with more freedom? Hard to prove or disprove but I intuitively would lean towards yes, especially for disruptive innovation (the kind that the folks in charge wouldn't like or be able to see). I think we agree here. 3. Is democracy a sufficient to create economic growth? I would say no, looking at some of the other non-western democracies out there, or democracies which failed.