Firstly, You are conflating two wholly different issues. You asserted that of certain Asian countries only thrived economically when they adopted western democratic liberal values and then you said that only happened because of "western military protection". South Korea is really not a "much poorer" country. Have you ever been there? It has amongst other things, the highest rate of broadband penetration in the world. Granted there is pretty tiny living space in Seoul but their apartments, at least those i went to, are really hi tech. You have actually engaged in a logical fallacy here. All WESTERN liberal democracies are rich(relatively speaking). However, not all liberal democracies are RICH. In fact, this is the shocker, only western liberal democracies (as defined by you, let's exclude east Asia for now) are wealthy! Democracies which have been around for the last fifty years after the end of the second world war, such as India, Jamaica, Botswana, Bangladesh, the Phillipines, Mauritius have had very low growth rates and endemic poverty. Take a look at India and the Phillipines, the rate of growth for almost 4 decades was only about 3% as compared to over the same period by authoritarian or semi authoritarian states like Singapore and South Korea, where they virtually eliminated poverty and reached stratospheric growth rates. Most non-western liberal democracies if not all, after the second world war simply have not done well. Yes I know India,etc ahve their own problems(corruption,etc) and might not fit the ideal of a liberal democracy but why have non-western democracies universally SUCKED? Therefore we have to conclude there are other factors at work. Yes things like property rights and a competent and just judiciary are all important but what made Europe so rich is not some fancy notions of individual freedom. That's hogwash and you know it. Europe's prosperity was garnered by centuries of mercantilism and colonialism. The resources that these colonial empires amassed afforded them such material and intellectual progress that even a wholesale destruction of infrastructure during the 2nd world war did not abrogate this. The knowledge and technological gap that western countries possessed remained even after the Germans ran havoc all over Europe. Do you have any idea how much wealth went over to Europe during this period? Entire civilizations in South America were destroyed and stripped of their wealth, 30 million Indians died in the three great famines as the British governor generals hoarded grain for their own subjects in India. The British planted tons of poppies in India, sold a useless drug to China(Opium) in exchange for very tangible goods. Even a teeny weeny country like Belgium could enslave the Congo and wiped it clean of its minerals. Look at the Netherlands, It is widely acknowledged by historians that the industrialization of Holland came from the colonial exploitation of the Dutch East Indies. My god, a tiny country like it controlled up to half of the spice trade in the WORLD at that time by just taking it from the Indonesians. Do you know how much frigging sugar, coffee, pepper and cocoa that is for a tiny nation? LOL. This was the LARGEST wealth transfer in human history, probably never to be equalled again and that, my friend, is the main cause of Europe's prosperity not some idealistic airy headed notion of human rights and freedom. What it seems to me is that you are some kind of cultural taliban, the white European who goes off to a faraway land to spread his "civilizing" values to the unenlightened natives and who takes secret satisfaction that somehow your values triumphs over everybody else. Me, I take no such view. I recognize there are two ends of the spectrum, one which is an authoritarian, repressive shithole as epitomized by Kim Jung Il and his fruitcakes. The other end is the crazed European liberal who believes that individual freedoms triumphs over all and that is ideologically speaking, the endpoint of history. And of course look what has happened in certain European countries, where the rights of criminals now surpass that of victims. In my opinion they are both extremist ideologies, no different in intensity from Osama and his ilk. What I do think is that there is a happy medium , a middle path, where individual rights can be safeguarded with certain exclusions and when necessary, a state can choose to exercise a semi-authoritarian guiding hand again with certain modifying characteristics and sometimes, the interests of the community can triumph over that of the individual. Congratulations to the East Asian countries, I think they have reached such a medium. It is far better for South Asia and Africa to follow this tried and proven model than jump headlong into western liberal democracy. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BTW, do you know that BHUTAN which ranks at the top or near the top of happiest countries rankings is a clerical fascist state?
the references were for your benefit. the discussion is about a brain drain. your reply is smoke and mirrors because it doesn't address the issue of brain drain.
+1 And I know quite a few hong kongers who had gotten a foreign passport when 1997 came around but who have since returned, found tons of opportunities and are thriving.
UN human development reports, Legatum prosperity, Heritage foundation index of economic freedom. Cmon, this isn't rocket science, have you heard of google? http://www.heritage.org/index/ http://www.prosperity.com/ http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/ That's a pretty diverse set of surveys, sponsored by political bodies across the political spectrum. All take a generally facts-based statistical approach, and all show clear correlations between greater freedom and greater prosperity. If you disagree, please point us to FACTS, not debating trick bullshit, to put your case. For example, democracy is correlated with freedom, but it is hardly the sole factor. And countries that have only recently become democracies, after decades of dictatorship and 3rd world shithole status, are hardly going to become prosperity stories overnight. Still, if you take Africa, one case you pathetically try to distort to suit your incoherent non-agenda, prosperity there has improved massively in the last 1-2 decades, as more became democratic, more ushered in freedoms. Botswana for example is a great example of how government based on the precepts listed gives good results, even from a very unpromising starting point (3rd world dump, small population, arid desert climate, massive HIV rates, illiteracy and poverty etc). Or do you even have a case? Seems like you are just sniping from the peanut gallery like any common garden internet troll - in fact, you haven't even put forward an alternative thesis at all. At least Grandluxe gave a competing hypothesis, even if it was something as weak as the long-discredited 90s EM bubble-driven 'Asian Values' fad. You on the other hand just sling mud without even sticking your head over the parapet - cowardly scum. If you are too lazy to google some basics and inform yourself about the subject, don't expect further replies - it is embarrassingly easy to destroy your weak output, I knock off fools like you quicker than I break wind.
Hey chump, before spreading +1s faster than a ghetto hooker passes out $10 blow jobs, how about responding to my point? It's a very simple question - if you examine the facts about national prosperity, is greater freedom correlated with greater prosperity, or not? Put up, or kindly STFU.
FACTS versus bullshit: HDI index, 1-42, in order Norway Australia New Zealand United States Ireland Liechtenstein Netherlands Canada Sweden Germany Japan Korea (Republic of) Switzerland France Israel Finland Iceland Belgium Denmark Spain Hong Kong, China (SAR) Greece Italy Luxembourg Austria United Kingdom Singapore Czech Republic Slovenia Andorra Slovakia United Arab Emirates Malta Estonia Cyprus Hungary Brunei Darussalam Qatar Bahrain Portugal Poland Barbados
Using empirical evidence to simply destroy fools: http://www.prosperity.com/rankings.aspx 1 Norway 2 Denmark 3 Australia 4 New Zealand 5 Sweden 6 Canada 7 Finland 8 Switzerland 9 Netherlands 10 United States 11 Ireland 12 Iceland 13 United Kingdom 14 Austria 15 Germany 16 Singapore 17 Belgium 18 France 19 Hong Kong 20 Taiwan 21 Japan 22 Slovenia 23 Spain 24 South Korea 25 Portugal 26 Czech Republic 27 United Arab Emirates 28 Poland 29 Uruguay 30 Italy 31 Chile 32 Slovakia 33 Estonia 34 Costa Rica 35 Kuwait 36 Hungary 37 Panama 38 Israel 39 Argentina 40 Greece
Correlation does not equate causation. If you are unclear how to distinguish between the two, go google it. I'd actually argue the HDI surveys show something else: wealth developed nations prefer to be democracies. If you don't know how to statistically test/distinguish between these two hypothesis, go google it.
Anyone noticing a pattern yet? http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking world rankcountryfreedom scorechange from previous world rankcountryfreedom scorechange from previous 1Hong Kong89.70.0 93Morocco59.6+0.4 2Singapore87.2+1.1 94Mongolia59.5-0.5 3Australia82.5-0.1 95Ghana59.4-0.8 4New Zealand82.3+0.2 96Egypt59.1+0.1 5Switzerland81.9+0.8 97Swaziland59.1+1.7 6Canada80.8+0.4 98Nicaragua 58.8+0.5 7Ireland78.7-2.6 99Honduras 58.6+0.3 8Denmark78.6+0.7 100Tunisia58.5-0.4 9United States77.8-0.2 101Serbia 58.0+1.1 10Bahrain77.7+1.4 102Cambodia57.9+1.3 11Chile77.4+0.2 103Bhutan57.6+0.6 12Mauritius76.2-0.1 104Bosnia and Herzegovina57.5+1.3 13Luxembourg76.2+0.8 105The Gambia57.4+2.3 14Estonia75.2+0.5 106Kenya57.4-0.1 15The Netherlands74.7-0.3 107Sri Lanka57.1+2.5 16United Kingdom74.5-2.0 108Tanzania57.0-1.3 17Finland74.0+0.2 109Mozambique 56.8+0.8 18Cyprus73.3+2.4 110Gabon56.7+1.3 19Macau73.1+0.6 111Nigeria56.7-0.1 20Japan72.8-0.1 112Vanuatu56.7+0.3 21Austria71.9+0.3 113Brazil56.3+0.7 22Sweden71.9-0.5 114Mali56.3+0.7 23Germany71.8+0.7 115The Philippines56.2-0.1 24Lithuania71.3+1.0 116Indonesia56.0+0.5 25Taiwan70.8+0.4 117Benin56.0+0.6 26Saint Lucia70.8+0.3 118Tonga55.8+2.4 27Qatar70.5+1.5 119Malawi55.8+1.7 28Czech Republic70.4+0.6 120Moldova55.7+2.0 29Georgia70.40.0 121Senegal55.7+1.1 30Norway70.3+0.9 122Côte d'Ivoire 55.4+1.3 31Spain70.2+0.6 123Pakistan 55.1-0.1 32Belgium70.2+0.1 124India54.6+0.8 33Uruguay 70.0+0.2 125Djibouti54.5+3.5 34Oman69.8+2.1 126Niger54.3+1.4 35South Korea69.8-0.1 127Yemen54.2-0.2 36Armenia69.7+0.5 128Tajikistan53.5+0.5 37Slovakia69.5-0.2 129Suriname53.1+0.6 38Jordan68.9+2.8 130Bangladesh 53.0+1.9 39El Salvador 68.8-1.1 40Botswana68.8-1.5 Note how places like HK and Singapore have *more* economic freedom than the west, yet less political freedoms. And they are well-off - but not at the levels of the top countries like USA, Switzerland, Norway etc. Could that be because economic freedom helps mightily, but is not the *whole* picture?
For those who don't trust statistics, how about we rely on the people who PUT THEIR MONEY WHERE THEIR MOUTH IS (unlike heech and Grandluxe), by actually upping sticks and moving country? That should give a good indication of which places are more desirable to live in. Net world migration map: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Net_migration_rate_world.PNG Is this pattern still eluding our 'intellectual' friends? Get with the program - freedom is right, freedom works, freedom is desirable. Take your backward repressive ignorance and shove it up your ignorant, authoritarian, hypocritical asses!