BTW, I actually do have a couple ideas on "why":
1) the Vietnamese likely had no people from the U.S. advising them what to do with their stupid free trade and markets will solve everything non-sense. The South Koreans had the good sense to ignore the American advisers. American advisors in Vietnam got on helicopters on got the hell out of that place back in '75. By contrast, Latin America has the misfortune of being crawling with them.
2) Vietnam would never have bought into the bogus "cultural" arguments. That is, often times I here the objection that "South Korea is a Asian country and we Latin Americans can't expect to use the same model, we are different". I've always thought that arguement was silly even for Latin American countries - economic principles and laws are no different in Latin America than they are in Asia or anywhere else. Still many people think that way.
Vietnam of course IS Asian. So they likely wouldn't have seen what South Korea did, or what Tawain did, or what China is doing as something alien. Rather they would think "hey, if these other Asian countries can do it, why can't we?".
Latin American countries need to realize that there is nothing the Asian Tigers have done that they couldn't also do if they really wanted to.
You'll have to wait until Vz , et al raise the education level of the majority population.
You keep comparing regions where leaders took educating the majority populace seriously (reaping now the rewards) vs regions where the leaders did the complete opposite ... for decades.
You cannot continue to miss that very important point.
First, OW, I wouldn't call the Vietnam model 'sustainable' in any sense--they are producing for a very diseased and pathological US-style of comsumersim.
Second, arguments toward 'culture' have some validity. No, it doesn't need to devolve into gringo stereo-types (very hypocritical), but there is something to homogeneity of and long-term evolutionary history.
Again, the South Korean/Vietnam model is stultifying, predicated on very, very cheap labor and horrid working conditions--and, most importantly, it is patholgoical because it lessens our chances of long-term survival as a specie.
Of course, such 'externalities' wouldn't come to the fore in The Economist or WSJ (except tangentially).
First, the rag-tag army didn't kick the US military's butt. We won every battle, slaughtering them at a rate of 10 to 1. US politicians, responding to the demands of the people, gave up the fight and thus condemned the Vietnamese to tyranny ever since. A tyranny, by the way, that would put a critic like you in a cage for a very long time.
But at least the Vietnamese are learning and have adopted a measure of freedom for their economy. But how much better off would they be today if we hadn't abandoned them and they today enjoyed both economic and political freedom. They would be on par with South Korea, another country America scarified 50,000 of its sons to protect. Or Taiwan, developing safely behind America's protective shield.
Venezuela would do well to follow these counties' lead. Both ignorance is a powerful drug. One, by the way, that you seem to subject yourself to on an almost daily basis.
Got milk??
http://rolita816.blogspot.com
I've got milk. Want some?
I bet Vietnam has milk.
Cazador, you were kicked out of Vietnam, kicked out. Your red ass is still sore.
"Only" 50000 US soldiers were killed, many less than the Vietnamese. Still, you were kicked out.
Don't tell me now you also preferred to leave Somalia due to your PR agency.
War mongers are so thick...either side.
This is the kind of things the US did in Vietnam:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
My_...My_Lai_Massacre
Bosque:
I don't think Ow has said anything against education. On the contrary. We have talked about it actually a couple of times. I put some very rough ideas in my blog and I will go deeper into them this weekend, I hope.
This morning my girlfriend complained about dry skin so she filled the yacuzzi with milk and submerged in it for an hour.
I would send pictures but I do not want Moy-boy to slobber over my girlfriend and the milk.
"You'll have to wait until Vz , et al raise the education level of the majority population."
When is that going to happen? In our lifetime?
Kepler, awesome work at your blog. You are to be commended.
OW,
Vietnam is still a socialist country, remember. A market socialist country, today, as opposed to a command economy, but still socialist. The biggest sector of the economy is state owned, the banks and other 'commanding heights' industries are state owned, and land is, I believe, also state-owned and leased to individual farmers. Moreover perhaps most improtantly, inequality is low due to the values of equality, hard work, and self sacrifice that were inculcated during the liberation war and then during the communist regime.
cazador, better their 'tyranny' then your democracy. the people who suffered under the so-called 'tyranny' were largely (though not all) traitors, collaborators and decadent landlords. but then again, i'm sure that's the kind of person you are too, so no wonder you identify with them. in the words of a famous Latin American, let there be two, three, many Vietnams!
"Vietnam is still a socialist country, remember. A market socialist country, today, as opposed to a command economy, but still socialist. The biggest sector of the economy is state owned, the banks and other 'commanding heights' industries are state owned, and land is, I believe, also state-owned and leased to individual farmers. Moreover perhaps most improtantly, inequality is low due to the values of equality, hard work, and self sacrifice that were inculcated during the liberation war and then during the communist regime. "
That is likely all true, though I don't know all the details.
So why doesn't Venezuela emulate what they are doing. Hell, they could have Vietnamese officials come and act as advisers. I bet the Vietnamese would have them change a bunch of their current policies.
cazador,
did you know that the south won the war between the states. but the north cheated.
Interesting conundrum OW. I also wonder why can't cows bark and dogs produce milk? History OW, history. Yes, context and perspective, two things you seem so easily to forget or simply dismiss.
I would send pictures but I do not want Moy-boy to slobber over my girlfriend and the milk.
grac | 02.01.08 - 9:06 am | #
---------------------------
Don't worry Gracko. I have seen pictures of Bayly before, and believe me, he's not my cup of tea.
Hahahahahahahaha
"History OW, history. Yes, context and perspective, two things you seem so easily to forget or simply dismiss."
Be specific, what is the problem?
If a country that has gone through what Vietnam went through, which is far worse than anything anyone in Latin America has gone through, can still develop why can't Latin American countries develop? And specifically why can't Venezuela?
Venezuela has a lot more going for it than Vietnam does. So if you are going to say there is some fundamental problem Venezuela faces that countries like Vietnam don't you are going to need to be very specific as to what it is.
Viet-Nam has a succesfull history of fighting for its independence and autonomy. They resisted for thousands of years Chinese imperial interference and colonialism, they defeated the Japanese imperialists, they defeated the French colonialists, and afterwards expelled the US too. In other words, Viet-Nam is a nation forged and sustained by centuries of patriotism and love for the people and land by its different leaders at diffrent historical stages. We, on the other hand, are the direct and exclusive result of Spanish colonialist expansion after 1492. We have had some spurts of nationalism and patriotism, which have later been swamped by decades of "entreguismo", parasitism and dependency. Why? Because our elites, are both racially and ideologically more inclined to identify themselves with foreign Western colonialist and imperialist powers, than with their own popular subjects. In other words, what was an exception in Vietnamese long history (the entreguismo of certain elites), in Latin America is the rule -while defiant patriotism is the exception. I mean, OW, just look at the shameful behavior of our Venezuelan traditional economic and political elites. They detest Chavez because of his racial appearance, his pride in his popular roots, his irreverent nationalism, and they wish to eliminate him somehow so they can continue with their grotesque plundering of Venezuela's natural and human resources. Did the South Korean State in the past, or the Vietnamese State today, have to deal with such an internal foe, a domestic enemy with so much power, money and influence, willing to do just about anything in order to continue with an impossible model of under-development? No. Now, if you don't have nationalist and dedicated economic elites willing to promote a self-centered model of development, who do you have in exchange? Well, you may have a State sufficiently progressive, modern, autonomous, patriotic and determined that may do what was otherwise done by bourgeois elites in most of Western developed countries. But do we have such state in Latin America? No we don't. We have state apparatuses that were historically conceived as instruments of domestic bureaucratic oppression and as instruments of pro-imperialist and pro-colonialts surrender. So what can we do?: revolutions aimed at destroying both, the old oligarchy and the parasitic state apparatuses, which we have inherited. That is the only path left for us. And that is what we are trying to do in Venezuela, and it isn't easy, as you very well know.
Got Homicides.......Got Plenty
http://www.csis.org/media/csis/
e...riceno_Leon.pdf
ok, Moy, now you are making some thoughtfull and important points. Thought provoking and I think you are at least partially right (though I still think partially missing things).
I'll comment more on this when I have time later.
Moy,
We do not detest Chavez because of his racial appearance. In fact, the bloke is not less "European" than most of us.
We dislike him because he is a very bad president.
How come we are more dependent on the US now than we were in the eighties?
As far as "patriotism" is concerned,
as Simon Rodriguez said: "no hay cosa mas patriota que un tonto".
Those who claim to love a patria are usually the same people who are sending money away from Venezuela and who are buying the Gucci ties and the red-red Hummers.
Nobody has plundered Venezuela as much as the rogues who have been in power since 1999.
John, excellent link.
After reading opposition sites, I have to agree with Moy.
That's the number one problem ... not being satisfied with who you really are. The sad pretense of people in Latin America is why it has not yet come into its own. You are Venezuelan, not European.
Koreans, Vietnamese, etc. DO NOT have split loyalties.
What is loyalty for you, Bosque?
I'll make it easier by mentioning disloyalty:
Disloyalty is not caring about a failing infrastructure, extreme poverty, and a majority uneducated citizenry while you give away your country's resources to foreigners.
Disloyalty is not building a future for your countrymen by diversifying and failing to build manufacturing or agricultural zones along with other industry.
Disloyalty is mass murdering your own people at the request of foreigners.
Disloyalty is allowing decades upon decades of third world shit hole status for your own country and just not giving a fuck.
Disloyal leadership and disloyal elites. Did you hear any of those disloyal people complaining as long as their various home countries were kept third world shit holes?
High levels of prior DISLOYALTY is why Chavez, Correa, Lula, Ortega, Morales, etc are now Presidents.
Who are "those people"?
I won't be able to get back today. I will answer back tomorrow.
The US won the military battles, at a price greater than it could sustain. General Giap's military strategy was tied to political strategy. It is revisionist to say US left on its own. When the embassy was taken, everything was over. The US could have won, with 500,000 troops and destroying the country like Nazis. Anyone who thinks only in a military tactician manner, is bound to lose.
The US accomplished peacefully, what it couldn't do militarily.
Bosque, I will get back tomorrow on how Hugo is very similar to the rubbish we had before
Chavismo thrives on branding anyone who disagrees with Chavez as part of the Ancien Regime
The past leaders and the elites.
Those who care more about someone else's country or themselves than they do about their own country and its people. They have shown it with their actions.
You and I both know you would not see such in Europe among real Europeans.
I am watching TV where they are showing people fighting their way into a supermarket to get milk. It is chaotic, looting is around the corner. This country is fucked up. Thanks Chavez for your socialism.
Anybody has milk???
And, as always (save for one post about the pollution connected with global maritime pollution) OW ignore the central thrust of my positions--always dreaming about export-lead, unsustainable economic models.
Ideas such as the oligarch plow are the red-headed step-child of discussions here. Better to masterbate graphs and such.
FYI, Vietnam is getting lots of economic advice from the U.S. as part of a long-running USAID program, they get lots of help from IMF and World Bank.
Vietnam's doing well because they're turning around horrendously bad economic policies and putting in place some good ones. Growth rates are high, but they're starting from such a low base thanks to the earlier stupidities that they still have a very long way to go to catch up to the likes of South Korea. They'll make it, but if they'd been smart thirty or forty years ago they wouldn't have to be playing catch up.
Venezuela will go through the same thing. Once the economy collapses and someone else comes into power, the growth rates will be fantastic as they pull themselves out of the hole, but it doesn't mean they shouldn't have avoided getting into the hole to begin with.
sorrry for the interruption my name is amy dutton i am the mother of george dutton. he told me he was a regular at this board. he is terminally ill and asked me to write to you to show his appreciation for all the good times he had with you. he will soon will depart so i ask all of you to keep him in your thoughts. he is a great son and a great person. he dies now without having seen fulfilled his dream of a socialist world but hopes that mr chavez will soon prevail. thanks a, again, sorry for the interruption.
Amy, tell George that Slave Revolt has his eternal respect and admiration
George has an engaging intelligence, and he is in solidarity with humans suffering the worst ignomynies and various social oppressions. Just as they carry on, I have every confidence that George (because he is OF the people) will do likewise.
Carry on George. I embrace and saulte you as a comrad.
As a fellow human in the state of becoming, you give me hope and confidence to engage the fight that I must engage.
Thank you.
(Please tell George that Slave is with him now. You are so fortune to have such a decent son in your life journey Mrs. Dutton. 
)
My thoughts and prayers will also be with George. Please pass that on to him.
FYI, Vietnam is getting lots of economic advice from the U.S. as part of a long-running USAID program, they get lots of help from IMF and World Bank.
... then they will soon be in debt, IMO. There is no such thing as "help" from the IMF or World Bank. Those are lending institutions not charity.
Here's an idea to consider...
..........
Vietnam and China were/are totalitarian states.
They have populations that are submissive and intimidated. And whoever doesn't follow state edict spends time in some Asian prison-labour-camp.
They have armies and officials ready to ban/crush organized labour.
............
Venezuela, on the other hand, is a truly democratic state.
It has a lively population that doesn't fear any entity. There is little worship of the government or the landed elite.
It has unions, collective bargaining, protests, free elections, and a spirit of entitlement.
.............
I am a rich American, looking to dump my high-priced union-loving manufacturing workers...
WHY COME TO VENEZUELA?
Chaves will respond to public demand for social spending, thereby taxing me. Chavez won't stop union-organization in my factory. And if push comes to shove, Chavez isn't ready to spill disobedient blood on my behalf.
Why wouldn't I take the better deal in China? Stability, an army at my service, and workers who remain insignificant members of their society.
Why wouldn't I wait?
Until Chavez does what the Asians did, and crush populist elements of the population. Thereby creating a friendly environment for foreign investment,
So why doesn't Venezuela emulate what tat they are doing. Hell, they could have Vietnamese officials come and act as advisers. I bet the Vietnamese would have them change a bunch of their current policies.
ow | Homepage | 02.01.08 - 11:19 am | #
Vietnam has a hard core Commnunist party that would never tolerate the type of sabotage from media and any foriegn maniplated "democratic" politicos. Also their version of contras were blessedly decisively beat during that lengthy war. Nothing like globobullshit there.
Vietnam and China were/are totalitarian states.
They have populations that are submissive and intimidated. And whoever doesn't follow state edict spends time in some Asian prison-labour-camp.
They have armies and officials ready to ban/crush organized labour.
............
Venezuela, on the other hand, is a truly democratic state.
It has a lively population that doesn't fear any entity. There is little worship of the government or the landed elite.
It has unions, collective bargaining, protests, free elections, and a spirit of entitlement.
Yes, that is true, up to a point. It is certainly true of Venezuela today.
But....
There have been many dictatorial regimes and authoratarian regimes in L.A. history and none of them seem to have done done much economically either. Pinochets Chile, Catro's Cuba and Mexico under the PRI come to mind, but there are plenty of other examples. Hell, even in Colombia trade unions are pretty repressed.
Also, while Venezuela has all those things it also does have a lot of resources so that it could meet satisfy some of those entitlements and still have the resources with which to develop.
So I think this is a valid point, and true, but it isn't the full explanation.
"Vietnam has a hard core Commnunist party that would never tolerate the type of sabotage from media and any foriegn maniplated "democratic" politicos. Also their version of contras were blessedly decisively beat during that lengthy war. Nothing like globobullshit there."
Again, this is true but a lot of the economic problems aren't caused by Globovision - they don't have much control over the economy.
The overvalued currency, the favoring consumption over investment, etc. are government problems.
The opposition doesn't make things easy. But different from 2002/2003 the opposition isn't now the main problem.
I Vietnam they can make plans and carry them out without guarimbas, food and medicine shortages and opposition from a vocal foriegn protected traitor lobby. The west has to deal with them as they are, not as they want them to be.
I should have said "traitor orchestrated food and medicine shortages. "
ow,
I agree that Venezuela ought to try to model itself after Vietnam, or perhaps after Yugoslavia, which was the most prosperous and market-oriented of the Eastern European countries. However, one should bear in mind that the Vietnamese culture is different. Vietnamese have lived for many centuries in a densely populated country, full of mountains and swamps, with few natural resources, in which it was absolutely necessary to work sixteen hour days in order to survive. The national culture of discipline and sacrifice was honed through many decades of fighting the Chinese, the Japanese, the French, the Americans, th South Vietnamese and the Cambodians.
Venezuela has never faced the kind of desperation that the Vietnamese have faced, that's probably why they have not developed the same culture of sacrifice and discipline.
By the way, while I'm a Chavez supporter I have no particular opinion about how to solve the food shortages, but I will say this. There are alternatives to milk, some very good ones. In fact development agencies in much of Africa (don't know about Latin America) are trying to encourage rural villagers to use alternative sources of calcium and other nutrients which are generally less expensive and more locally available than milk. Most green vegetables (particular the edible Moringa Oleifera, which grows all over central America and possibly in South America too) have high calcium contents. Moringa leaf powder is generally considered an even better (as well as cheaper and more suited to the tropics) alternative to milk. Perhaps the Venezuelan government should be encouraging Venezuelans to plant moringa trees.
by the way, I'm not ragging on the Venezuelans in particular. Few other countries are as hardowrking as the Vietnamese. Certainly not the US-Americans.
Hector, please get us up to speed and give us your recipe for Arroz con Leche,
http://daniel-venezuela.blogspot...ce+sugar%
2Cmilk
OW,
Interesting article and interesting question right at the end. You've done enough research, so you should know the answer: Culture.
I've lived in several countries in SE Asia, including Vietnam and had a Vietnamese wife, and then lived many years in LA and had two Latina wives down here. There's literally a world of difference between the two regions and their cultural ethos.
A plethora of books address this issue, citing the same problems, differences, and riddle that you point out: Why is LA, with all of its rich natural and human resources, so behind the curve?
There are a variety of books that with the impact of Spanish (and to some degree, indigenous) culture on economic, social, and political development in LA. A few examples of these books are Harrison's "Underdevelopment Is a State of Mind", "Who Prospers?", Landes' "Wealth and Poverty of Nations", Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel", Wiarda's "Soul of Latin America", Rangel's "The Latin Americans", and Harrison and Huntington's compendium of papers on culture, "Culture Matters".
These books and many others underscore the legacy of the Spanish invasion and culture in the region and the developmental constraints that that culture has imposed on LA. As you point out, we're still operating under these constraints almost 500 years after Cortez, Pizarro and the gang hit the beaches in LA. Things are getting better, but it would be nice to see the Vietnamese phenomenon break out here too...
In Vietnam the workers have no control of the means of production. Why would anyone want that for Venezeula? Who cares about growth when it only goes to the red monarchy.
Perhaps the Venezuelan government should be encouraging Venezuelans to plant moringa trees.
Hector | 02.02.08 - 4:09 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Exactly Hector, they should create PDVINGA. Good idea.
Ms. Amy Dutton, please tell your son that grac sends him his best regards and that he misses his links. I hope he pulls through this one and rejoins our blog soon.
Tumbopaxi:
I used to think that, but not anymore. There is just too much evidence that contradicts it.
For example, cultural norms change as countries develop as I mentioned reviewing Changs book:
http://oilwars.blogspot.com/
2007...samaritans.html
The Koreans, Japanese and Germans were all once notariously "lazy", "shiftless", or "theiving". Yet now somehow they are different.
An even more obvious resean to discount that hypothesis for me is just look at Hispanics in the U.S. - they are famously hard workers. They show up on time, they work hard, they work long hours, they do difficult jobs, etc. Yet of course they are still hispanics. So how did everything so suddenly change when they crossed the border? Easy, once they cross the border they are in an industrialized country where those things matter and are rewarded. By contrast in an underdeveloped country where people have informal jobs or no job at all those things are of little importance.
Looking at it that way, those things don't seem to be cultural traits as much as rational reactions to the economic conditions around them.
BTW, I read two of those books. Diamond argues it was geography that was the main determinate and not culture. And Landes does say in the beginning that it was culture but then changes that when he points out that it was government policies that led countries like Germany to develop.
Actually, OW, the examples you point out validate the importance of culture and how it works. Cultures are capable of change as are individuals within those cultures.
I'm sure you've met any number of Latinos who've immigrated to the States; I sure have, including relatives of my (various) spouses. Interestingly, they come predisposed to work and flourish in the U.S. because they've already got the work ethic and ethics (as in honesty, the expectation that systems will work, etc.).
These Latino did not, repeat, did not change as individuals. Rather, they came from one culture which evinces the very cultural attitudes you cite toward the end of your post ("... spouting excuses vs. busting your butt...") to one where things work.
Re: Chang's book, and your posting on it, I didn't bother commenting there, because the subject would take, well, it'd take a book, and I don't think comments (I come as a guest here) should be as long as your post.
I'll just say that Chang is amazingly wrong in his take on culture and peoples' attitudes towards them. Actually, I say that wasn't so much wrong as very superficial in his examination of the subject. In saying that Chinese, Koreans, etc., were once lazy, etc., Chang focuses more on racist attitudes extant in the west in those, "were all once" times and then uses these points to attack the, "do as we say, not as we do" line. I haven't read Chang's book, but based on your review, I'd say he does not, not address seriously, for example the very question you pose in this posting: Why is LA behind the curve in terms of econ, social and political development?
I've lived in eight different countries down here in LA over the last 31 years, OW, and I live here now. In each of these countiries (almost every one of them rich in natural and human resources and often with lots of cash as well) we still have endemic poverty on large scale, attitudes and problems of the sort you cite, and each country I ask the same question, What's wrong with this picture?
Why don't (not can't, au contraire, they can, or could) they realize their potential for developing systems that lift their economies and societies into the same stratum as that of Korea, Vietnam, etc.? The books I cited earlier all address this and similar, related questions mostly in the LA context.
Re: your comments on Diamond's and Landes books, 1) geography is contributing factor in development of cultures, just look at the Extremadura of western Spain and the conquistadores it produced; and 2) (simplistically speaking) government policies and their implementation, btw, are functions of culture. Both of these points come out in the books you mention, and acutally form the basis for points on culture made in those same books and others noted.
Finally, on a positive note, as I say, cultures are capable of changing, and in this day of instant communication, examples for improvement (o
(?? comments section hiccupped), I was saying examples for improvement, such as your Vietnamese example, abound, and they're picked up down here. As a result, in my experience, I've seen slooow improvements in terms of work ethics, punctuality, ethics in general, etc. It's not been a constant, unbroken trend upward, but overall things are getting better. It's not an overnight affair, mind you, but in the long term, I'm optimistic, LA will eventually realize its potential to be a truly developed set of economies and societies on par with those of the northern hemisphere....
Sorry for the length my comment, but it's extremely interesting subject you've raised, and thanks for the opportunity to say something...
OW,
Please don't confuse me with Tambopaxi. There is no Tumbopaxi.
The question of why some national economies grow and others don't is very interesting and difficult.
You've done a good job of pop some simple answers. I think you're wrong about Germans or Japanese having been lazy at one time. But that's not a big deal.
I agree with you that the fault is not foreign hostility or a history of colonization. Those can and are overcome by many nations. But what does that leave for an explanation?
Do you agree that the poorest nations (and the richest) are clustered geographically and culturally? That is Latin America and Africa lag economically while Europe, North America, and much of Asia grows rapidly?
I'm inclined to think that the difference between successful and unsuccessful nations has a lot to do with the willingness of the population to accept new ideas, change practices, and be free of institutions that block innovation. But even to me, that sounds pretty vague and subjective.
If yes, what do those regions have in common?
hector, why would Venezuelans be better with Moringa trees than with milk??????very funny,
and as for that little side remark about US Americans...very funny..I am laughing...the Chinese and the Americans work enough so that the rest of the world can hang out......
maybe take a month long vacation and 10 long weekends a year....ja ja
that was one of the funniest posts I have seen yet
Dear Ms. Amy Dutton, please send my best regards to your courageous son George. We sure miss him a lot and wish him well and hope he will rejoin us to continue this fight to the very end.
firepig,
go look up what the united nations says about moringa. a better source of calcium than milk, ask any biochemist. i don't have time to argue with you, go look it up.
Just drink soy milk .... its better for you and you don't have to worry about mad cow disease.
Commenting by HaloScan
