Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Wednesday, August 13. 2008

I think David Brooks has it all wrong about China

David Brooks says that the economic rise of China demonstrates that collectivist societies can prosper.

I think he is wrong. Seems to me that the unleashing of individual enterprise and free markets (combined with free markets for labor, lower business taxes than the US, and globalization) are what have unleashed China's belated industrial revolution. In other words, individualism. But I am no expert on the subject (and neither is Brooks).

There is still one Path to Prosperity.

Furthermore, I wonder whether this whole subject of Asian collectivism is a myth. Police state-enforced collectivist "harmony" can give the appearance of a collectivist ethos - but only the appearance.

Posted by The Barrister in Our Essays, Politics at 10:10 | Comments (7) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Prosper? In the short run possibly. I suppose it all depends how one defines 'prosperity'. Top-down economic structures are notorious for short term, skewed thinking confused by the interests of those holding power versus the general interest. Price/market distortions are the rule and in the long term there will be hell to pay without authentic liberalization. Brooks should at least mention the level of corruption always present is such arrangements.
#1 Tom C on 2008-08-13 10:44 (Reply)
Thanks for the link to the Path to Prosperity piece. Right on target.
#2 texan99 on 2008-08-13 11:19 (Reply)
Having spent only 6 days in southern China two years ago, my sense was that of a thriving, hungry population, eager to participate in their own individual ways. I didn't see any police or state propaganda, and I didn't hear anyone talking about the common good. Just people going to work, learning new things, trying to get more. It was entirely capitalistic.
#3 Phil on 2008-08-13 11:44 (Reply)
The Asian collectivism harmony is a myth. The more Asians who toss off their inner Uriah Heep and embrace capitalism, the harder it's going to be for the governments to stop a democratic process. Marx just didn't get the whole human nature thing, and what a price it has cost humanity. Having a democratic, capitalistic Iraq sitting in the midst of its surrounding nations is going to prove that. Let's hope it spreads.
#4 Meta on 2008-08-13 13:40 (Reply)
"Marx just didn't get the human nature thing."

That's exactly it.
#4.1 Bird Dog on 2008-08-14 07:00 (Reply)
It pays to note that the "collectivist" nations, when they succeed, do so by ruthlessness to other nations. Even the Swedes are hard competitors on the international market. They only share at home.
#5 Assistant Village Idiot (Link) on 2008-08-13 22:30 (Reply)
individualism?...what an ignorant bit of writing.......ya need to get out and see how its going in this here world...you don't have a clue...but good luck with your dreams....cheers
#6 james twig on 2008-08-25 22:42 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.