Asian values not so Asian over time

ARTICLE: "Why Private Colleges Are Surging in India," by Paul Gladner and Peter Wonacott, Wall Street Journal, 29 March 2007, p. B1.

ARTICLE: "Mergers and Acquisitions No Longer Shock Japanese," by Martin Fackler, New York Times, 29 March 2007, p. C1.

I often think back to all the writings about how capitalism in Asia was going to be so different from that in the West. They are more communal, more statist and less given to hyper-competitiveness and the edge-seeking behavior of Westerners.

And yet watch socialist India accept a boom in private education and the Japanese allowing for M&A--even hostile takeovers! Their "distinct" forms of capitalism are looking more familiar by the day.

Yes, differences will always remain, but years from now it's not like we're going to look back and recognize only common ancestors, as so many breathless analyses of yesterday made it out to be. Instead of converging toward something not quite us or them, their evolution seems to mirror ours plenty, with each rationalizing stage seeing their further acceptance of behaviors and policies that--only years earlier--would have been unthinkably "cruel" (the loss of past custom) and "heartless" (watch especially the similar "breakdown" in social relations).

There's Hindu and Shinto and Confucian, and then there's the reality of modern life.

Comments

[Bill C.]

The sharpening of the edge of capitalism in Asia is being caused by fear of China. Another example of this phenomenon: the increased level of market activity being allowed in Vietnam. These modifications of behavior have nothing to do with a philosophical agreement with this type of capitalism -- but everything to do with concern for survival.

[Mark in Texas]

As there are a lot of similarities among Core countries, even ones with very different starting places, there are also a lot of things in common among Gap or near Gap nations.

Here's a short post by University of Tennessee Law School professor Glen Reynolds, more widely known as the Instapundit.

"SLUMS RULED BY MILITIAS: It's a quagmire! Pull out!

Oh, wait, it's in Rio de Janeiro. As someone with family in Nigeria, it's been clear to me that some -- not all -- of Iraq's problems are unfortunately typical of third world countries with weak social contracts, and will likely persist regardless of how the war goes. That's not to say that Baghdad is no worse than, say, Lagos -- but in Lagos, armed criminal gangs, kidnappings, murder, etc. are shockingly common and uncontrolled. And in Nigeria's Delta region there's basically guerrilla war over oil already. Sadly, Iraq probably already has a better government and military than Nigeria, so that if the insurgency ended tomorrow Baghdad would probably be better than Lagos. Heck, it might be as good as Rio. But it wouldn't be as good as even a badly-governed, gang-infested, crime-ridden American city like, say, Washington, DC."