European Tribune

Display:
Exactly how are you going to get political progress without first getting economic progress and an educated middle class?  And in a place like Bangladesh, of all places?

Look at South Korea, Taiwan, and Europe for that matter. And then contrast it with all the countries that never got anywhere, and look at the ones that are now at last moving forward, and ask yourself what they have done to get moving.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid (arvid.hallen at gmail.com) on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 at 10:37:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'd bet France in 1880 or the US in 1780 were less developed than Bangladesh is now...

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 at 10:49:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't know the specifics of the former two, but Europe raped the rest of the world to get rich. Oh, and we had laws regulating the flow of goods and capital to such an extent that it's doubtful that any modern trans-nat could have survived - much less prospered - in the regulatory environment of 19th cent. Europe. The closest we got to a genuine trans-nat was the British East Empire Company. And a fat load of good it did for East India...

- Jake

Ceterum censeo Chicago esse delendam

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 at 11:09:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Beg to differ to some minor extent: we did have transnats, certainly in the railway sector, but they went away with the wave of nationalisations. (For example, there were large French companies owning privately built and run railways across Europe, and some locomotive builders expanding or buying rivals.)

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.
by DoDo on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 at 12:50:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
"what they have done to get moving" : that shipbreaking industry is an example?

You're really now in danger of endorsing that exploitation as some kind of necessary step on the road to all-industrial progess.

When locusts move on, they leave nothing behind

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 at 11:47:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
<provocative quip>

Would make a nice pair of argumentations with redstar's.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 at 12:51:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Fat chance. Big difference, ideologically, between those running the show in the one place versus those running the show in the other. You can actually manage this transition and cushion some of the excesses (though not all).

But there is some truth in what you two are complaining about: we will not all be equal until economically we are equal, and we won't get there without letting the developing world develop. We keep talking about gini coefficients and applying them haphazardly (to countries, for instance, rather than regions or, ultimately, the world itself). We will not achieve peace, imho, until we are thinking about gini in terms of global equality, and not intra-national equality. And we don't get there by blinking our eyes, and tapping our feet, and wishing liberal christian democracy and euro-centric values on the developing world.

The question then becomes which development models are the most humane and effective and here, there is room for a lot of argument.

by redstar on Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 at 09:50:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Debates
Campaigns
Occasional Series