Examples of the developmental state are familiar in East Asia: Japan and the four Asian Tigers (Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore), plus post-Mao China. But the East Asians borrowed the developmentalist model from Germany and the United States, which in their successful attempts to catch up with industrial Britain in the 19th century had used their own variants of the tradition, associated with Friedrich List in Germany and Alexander Hamilton and Henry Clay in the U.S. The roots of developmentalist economics can be traced back to mercantilism and cameralism in early modern Europe and even further back to Renaissance Italy. (There was no “fascist model” of economics. Mussolini’s regime might be classified as an authoritarian developmentalist state, but the short-lived Nazi economy was based first on preparation for war and then on plunder and slavery.) Ironically, during the Cold War, when the U.S. supposedly illustrated the virtues of free enterprise, the U.S. had its own successful developmental-state industrial policy, orchestrated by the Defense Department through the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and other agencies. In the 1990s, libertarians and neoliberals claimed that the information technology revolution proved the superiority of the free market to government when it comes to innovation. But the major tools of the computer age, from digitization to the global internet to the computer mouse were developed by government contractors reliant on U.S. taxpayer money. It is no coincidence that U.S. productivity and innovation sputtered in this century, when neoliberal Democrats and libertarian Republicans decided to let the free market develop the next wave of technologies. It turns out that venture capitalists and advertisers are more interested in addictive online sites like Facebook and Twitter than in robots and cures for cancer. Without exception the major advances in basic technology during the post-1980s era of free market utopianism have been largely funded by the federal government.

Michael Lind, “Cold War II” (January 3rd 2023).

BIRTHDAY: PAI Obanya At 85

Pius Augustine Ike Obanya’s Seven (7) Gifts to Africa He is called The Professor of Professors. He has spent decades pointing Africa in the directions to follow into a more industrialized but equitable development. Today May 29 is his 85th Birthday celebration. Our publisher Ngozi Hippolytus Asoya attempts to capture decades of outstanding scholarship and service to UNESCO Africa in a few words.…

View On WordPress

NBA PRESIDENT MOURNS FORMER CHAIRMAN OF ABUJA BRANCH, SENATOR SODANGI DANSO ABUBAKAR

The President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr Yakubu Chonoko Maikyau, OON, SAN, has expressed sadness over Senator Sodangi Danso Abubakar’s recent passing. Abubakar was a former chairman of the Abuja Branch of the NBA and past National Legal Adviser of the NBA. Senator Abubakar was an illustrious and respected member of the bar. The former Chairman of the NBA Abuja Branch was also a…

View On WordPress

FOCUSING ON THE WHO OR WHAT

Some time ago this blog visited the contribution of David Landes[1] in a very influential reader, Culture Matters, edited by two giants in the study of human affairs, Lawrence E. Harrison, and Samuel P. Huntington.  This collection of articles had at the time of its publishing, 2000, a good deal of influence among the academics of that time.  For example, Landes’ article, “Culture Makes Almost All the Difference,”[2] begins by asking a very insightful question.

          It asks:  when a problem pops up, does one inquire into “what went wrong” or “who did this to us”?  The latter question seems to be what one’s emotions push to the fore, while the former is a more reasoned concern.  Eventually, both questions are important in not only fixing what’s wrong but also devising strategies that might prevent a recurrence of whatever the problem is.

          In line with Landes’ writing, today the nation is confronted with a problem that takes up a lot of concern among the nation’s news sources in their reporting.  That is the influx of immigrants through the southern border.  In the realm of blame, a lot of that reporting comments on the politics:  is the President to blame due to a lack of harshness – closing the border to these immigrants – or is it due to the opposition party’s reluctance to meaningfully address the problem in Congress? 

Neither of these options looks at why this immigration is taking place – it is treated simply as a given.  This blogger finally heard, in passing, a commentator on TV suggest that perhaps a program of extensive investment into the economies of the nations of origin – from where these immigrants come – could address the problem and supply a solution.  Of course, this is not a quick or easy fix; it presupposes many factors being lined up and working in productive ways.  To begin with, one can question the viability of moving in this direction.

But the first step is asking why this immigration is going on with the intent of addressing the causes in a way that is true and accurate.  This posting does not make an argument for this investment plan – it doesn’t argue against it either – but addresses what all is involved with such an approach.  And with that concern, Landes provides a historical case in which a traditional society did cross the line from being a traditional and agriculturally based economy to one in which it became a leading industrial and post-industrial nation, that being Japan.

To make a comparison between south of the border nations, from Central and South America, and Japan of the 1800s, one needs to go through several different stages.  The first stage is to compare the global landscape Japan faced with the one that exists today.  Very profound differences exist between that world of nearly two centuries ago and contemporary times.  At the earlier time, there were the beginnings of what today one calls dependency relationships and what some consider to be the post dependency era.

Simplified, dependency relationships divided lesser developed countries (LDCs) among the developed countries in which a given developed country controlled the export/import markets for a set of LDCs.  An LDC would be limited to which countries it could export its mostly agricultural/natural resources products and from whom it could import industrial products.  This would be to the benefit of both the upper classes of each type of nation.  The rich of the poor countries were/are equally rich as those of the developed countries.

Some argue today that due to advanced countries not limiting themselves to “their” LDCs, the whole system has been compromised.  Others think this is overstated.  Here is what a Global South article determined to be the case on this question:

In today’s realm, dependency thoughts are still useful in analyzing the widening inequalities between the poor and rich countries, or in analysing the divisions within a developed or a developing country context. Our societies are vastly divided, and dependent relations exist within our own social facbric [sic].[3]

Whatever the situation is today, one can suppose that there are vested interests that benefit from what is and they enjoy significant political power or influential status.  So, the first challenge would be to address this imbalance of power and financial resources.

          And here, this blogger believes Karl Marx had a point, not in terms of justice – although one can see injustice being an element of this arrangement – but from a practical point of view.  Treat people with disregard, especially if there is any experience of better times, and they will seek reciprocity.  They will believe they have the right to seek revenge.  Can one see this in operation?

          This blogger believes one can.  And one does see it in the politics of today here in the US.  The Global South article comments on this practical reality:

In other words, the financial crisis of 2008 showed the inefficiency of the global capitalist system and questioned the strengths of the new liberal economic philosophy in contributing to economic equality. Aaccording to [James] Petras & [Henry] Veltmeyer … capitalism in the form of new liberal globalisation provides very poor model for changing society in the direction of social equality, participatory democratic decision making and human welfare.[4]

And it is this aspect that motivates this posting.  Before one looks at any historical example to address contemporary conditions, one needs to consider how social/economic/political landscapes of the compared nations are one to the other.

          Another factor is how comparing nations addresses basic, relevant social elements or resources.  If the aim is to transform a nation from an agriculturally based economy to an industrial one, certain infrastructure assets need to be in place or developed before any such effort begins.  And in this, Landes describes how advantaged Japan was before they began the transition.

          Landes reports:

            The Japanese went about modernization with characteristic intensity and system.  They were ready for it – by virtue of a tradition (recollection) of effective government, by their high levels of literacy, by their tight family structure, by their work ethic and self-discipline, by their sense of national identity and inherent superiority.

            That was the heart of it:  The Japanese knew they were superior, and because they knew it, they were able to recognize the superiorities of others.[5]

And that overview sets up this blog to address the steps Japan took to make Japan the modern, developed nation one observes and admires today.  It wasn’t a smooth development – World War II didn’t help – but one can safely determine that nation has made the transition.  The next posting will trace a number of the broad strategies Japan employed in that process.

[1] Robert Gutierrez, “Is It Better to Ask Who or What?,” Gravitas:  A Voice for Civics, September 30, 2019, URL:  https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2019_09_15_archive.html.

[2] David Landes, “Culture Makes Almost All the Difference,” in Culture Matters:  How Values Shape Human Progress, eds. Lawrence E. Harrison and Samuel P. Huntington (New York, NY:  Basic Books), 2-13.

[3] “Is Dependency Theory Still Relevant Today?  A Perspective from the Global South,”  Global South:  Development Magazine, November 18, 2020, accessed December 23, 2023, URL:  https://www.gsdmagazine.org/is-dependency-theory-still-relevant-today-a-perspective-from-the-global-south/#:~:text=In%20today's%20realm%2C%20dependency%20thoughts,within%20our%20own%20social%20facbric.  British spelling.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Landes, “Culture Makes Almost All the Difference,” in Culture Matters, 8.

India's Astrological Forecast: Navigating the Mars Mahadasha (2025-2032)

As India approaches the Mars Mahadasha from September 6, 2025, to September 6, 2032, an intriguing astrological phase unfolds, promising a period marked by transformation and challenges. This forecast delves into the implications of Mars’ transit through various houses in India’s Vedic Astrology charts – the Ascendant, Navamsha, and Dashamsha – specifically focusing on public sectors, economic…

View On WordPress

Elite role, purpose and national development, By Olu Akanmu

Elite role, purpose and national development, By Olu Akanmu

Aerial view of Ibadan, showing the iconic Mapo Hall. The elites of old of this ancient city bequeathed unto this generation of elites ‘the promise of Ibadan”. We have an historic duty to ensure that the ‘promise’ does not die with our generation. Let history count us that we kept the promise of Ibadan aglow and passed on the torch brighter onto the next generation to also fulfill their God-given…

View On WordPress

I'd like to take a moment to point out to detractors of ships involving Laios who feel that "Laios wouldn't take any interest in people!" that he'd hyperfixated on Shuro so badly it was ruining the man's life lmao

This is not puppy love 🐶🩵💙

This was in my head and I had to make it.

@taylorswift @taylornation

In an 1815 letter to Thomas Jefferson, long after both men had served as president, John Adams wrote: “As to the history of the Revolution, my Ideas may be peculiar, perhaps Singular. What do We mean by the Revolution? The War? That was no part of the Revolution. It was only an Effect and Consequence of it. The Revolution was in the Minds of the People, and this was effected, from 1760 to 1775, in the course of fifteen Years before a drop of blood was drawn at Lexington.” Adams was saying that America was conceived and, as an embryonic nation, grew within the hearts of the peoples of the 13 colonies, two to three decades before the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. In short, our country came to be before our republic came to be, and long before what we today call “our democracy” came to be. A country is different from, and more than, the political system that it adopts.

Pat Buchanan, “Is ‘Our Democracy’ Failing Our Country?” (September 30th 2022).

The ulterior motive to keep Haiti in turmoil

Absolutely thrilled that David has finally gone to see Michael in Nye tonight, but potentially controversial opinion: I'm almost hoping we don't get a recreation of the Macbeth photo.

For one thing, I think the NT is too big for it and doesn't have the same atmosphere as the Donmar, so I'm not even sure the photo would be possible from a logistical standpoint. But I'd also rather David just be left alone and get to enjoy the play and Michael. I know we're all hyped up for a potential photo at the end of the night, but I'd rather it be from them and something they've chosen to share more than anything else. Just my opinion, at least...

prompts from Ready, Set, Novel! A Writer's Workbook by Chris Baty, Lindsey Grant, and Tavia Stewart Streit from the National Novel Writing Month

Have each character retell their first memory.

Write your opening scene from the point of view of a supporting character.

Write a scene of dialogue between your main character and a younger version of themself.

Describe the worst thing that ever happened to your villain.

Flash forward twenty years into the future and write a scene that involves at least three of your characters.

Have your characters share tales of their first kisses.

Write about the last five things your main character bought and why they bought them.

Write a scene in which your protagonist and villain get drunk together.

Lock a few of your characters in a broken elevator.

People rarely get sick in novels. Have your protagonist come down with something.

Write a thank-you card from your protagonist to their sidekick.

Relate the dream your villain had last night.

Your protagonist's mother is interviewed for the local newspaper about her child's achievements. Write that article.

Add a scene in which your character loses something very valuable.

Write a week's worth of Facebook posts from a supporting character. Take it a step further and add comments made by their friends... and enemies.

Have your villain bust out their high school yearbook. Write some of the notes they find in it.

Have your character recount a (hilarious) childhood trauma.

Write a scene describing how your main character's parents met.

Does your main character collect anything? Maybe they should. Describe their collection and why they started it.

Write a really cheesy love song that your main character will sing to their love interest.

Describe the worst thing your main character ever did.

Write a scene in which your main character and the villain have to work together, and explain why.

Send your protagonist to a psychic. What do they find out?

Write a description of your setting in the style of a travel brochure.

Deprive a character of sleep for three days and write about how it affects them.

Read "Today's Featured Article" on Wikipedia and integrate something you learn into your novel.

Your main character finds a genie in a bottle. What three wishes do they make?

Place a few characters in a karaoke bar. Describe the scene and what songs they choose to sing.

Have a character win a huge prize out of the blue. How do they react when they get the news?

Your villain houses a dinner party. What's on the menu? Who is invited?

Write a 200-word newspaper obituary for your villain.

Weird question here: do I need to describe my character's clothes? Obviously I need to if it's important to the story or setting (if they're wearing a beautiful ruby gown at a ball, or maybe dirty and torn to indicate a fight) but just on a normal day? Do readers need to know what characters are wearing?

The issue of whether or not to describe a character’s clothes is a common dilemma faced by many creative writers. The answer to this question, however, is not a simple one. It ultimately depends on the specific context and requirements of your story. Let’s dive into how to strike the right balance in descriptions of clothing, and when it helps or hurts your narrative pacing.

When should you describe a character’s clothes?

Setting the tone and atmosphere

In scenes where the character’s clothes significantly contribute to the setting or atmosphere of the story, a detailed description is good to include. A vivid description can immerse a reader fully in the scene. Examples could include a fancy gown at a ball or an inappropriate costume at a house party.

Defining characters

Clothes have the potential to be a powerful tool in defining your character, as they can reflect their social status, personality traits, and even their current mood or mindset. Whether it’s a sleek suit that exudes sophistication or a colourful ensemble that showcases their vibrant personality, the clothes your character wears can provide valuable insights into who they are when they are first introduced.

Moving the plot forward

The type of clothing a character wears can help to move your plot forward. A character in a magician’s robe, for instance, can spark reader curiosity but also heighten anticipation for the future role they may have in the story. It becomes a visual cue, subtly hinting at the possibility of magic and the potential impact the character might have on the story’s unfolding events.

When should you not describe a character’s clothing?

When it doesn’t add anything to the story

It is important to consider whether a description of a character’s clothing adds crucial information to the story or character development. If it doesn’t serve a purpose in enhancing the plot or providing insights into the character’s traits, it is usually best left out. Instead, focus on elements that truly matter and contribute to the narrative.

When it slows down the story

Detailing every piece of clothing in every scene can result in a slow progression of the story. While it is important to create a vivid and immersive world for your readers, focusing too much on clothing descriptions can detract from the overall pace and flow of your narrative. Instead, prioritize the elements that truly matter to the plot and character development. Choose key moments or scenes where the character’s clothing holds significance, such as pivotal events or instances where what they wear contributes to the atmosphere.

When it distracts from plot development

Detailed descriptions of clothing can sometimes divert readers’ attention away from the main plot and essential details of the story. When the focus on clothing becomes excessive, it can interrupt the flow of the narrative and hinder the development of more crucial elements.

Strike the right balance

It’s all about striking the right balance. Descriptions are necessary when they have a purpose and impact on the story or characters. Consider the following tips to accurately depict your character’s clothing:

Do not overload your description in a single paragraph. Distribute it throughout the story.

Maintain variety. Describe different aspects of clothing in different scenes.

Keep it relevant and contextual.