So, like if we're talking about being backward in different countries, the vibes are that the way things develop is gonna be different too, especially the fifth one. OMG, like, I'm not even gonna front, there are def some similarities, ya know? For real, the strong national and diversified manufacturing has been slaying the development game in Britain, Germany, the United States, and Japan. Periodt. OMG, like spotting similarities in the end result doesn't even give you the full tea on what went into making it. Like, for real, Gerschenkron was all about how the timing of industrialization determined the resources that needed to be mobilized for development. It's all about the institutions, the tech, and the money, you know?
OMG, like, List totally thinks that people can be hella influenced by the places they're in and it can totally change how they see and value their surroundings.
List like totally peeped the historicity of institutions as they stackin' up in front of us and gonna survive (maybe tweaked) any of us and straight up emphasized the social vibe of a nation's productive power. OMG, List was so woke about how the institutions totally shape what goes down in the markets and how people act. It's like this complex web of institutions is everything, you know? Like, state officials, just like any other peeps, aren't immune to the vibes of social needs and the mindset that's poppin' in their era and place. Like, state officials, just like any other peeps, aren't immune to the vibes of social needs and the mindset that's poppin' in their era and place. To secure their clout and keep the vibes chill, state rulers can't just front like they care about the people, but really only think about themselves when making decisions on public stuff. Furthermore, like, the vibe of institutions is just as crucial in the public sphere as it is in the market, you know? As like, I already said, any public policy proposition, even neoliberal, is like, proclaimed in the name of public interest, ya know? OMG, like Karl Polanyi (1944) says, the public interest is obvi evident in public goods, like education and infra-structure, but it's also there in the private sphere, ya know? He also flexed that rulers of the first industrialising countries were hella forced by mad objective circumstances to adopt measures that were not related to narrow group interests. Ofc, no one can just assume that public officials will always be on fleek for the public's best interest. But like, to assume that they'll always be vibin' in their self-interest with catastrophic consequences for the public interest is to deny the possibility of political change – which is, like, a major part of economic development.Historical Specificities and the State as a Lit AF Agent in the Development Process.
Starting from recognizing the vibes of institutions sets the stage for giving mad attention to the vibes of the context where market exchanges and government intervention go down their self-interest with catastrophic consequences for the public interest is to deny the possibility of political change – which is, like, a major part of economic development. Historical Specificities and the State as a Lit AF Agent in the Development Process. Starting from recognizing the vibes of institutions sets the stage for giving mad attention to the vibes of the context where market exchanges and government intervention go down. Here the contrast with the neoliberal doctrine is like, totally two-faced. The first is like, all about the vibes instead of being all about balance, ya know? The other is like, the vibe that development is gonna come from all sorts of different setups instead of the basic neoliberal saying "there's no other option." One is like, way less worried about listing all the preconditions and stuff that "must exist" for development to happen than just describing how development is, like, this totally dependent process of choosing the right institutions for development, you know? The tech reqs and plant size of big biz, and the military power of advanced countries, got Gerschenkron thinking that in the 20th century, the gov of backward countries gotta be all up in the dev strategy, whether it's for military security or entrepreneurial profit. The vibe of Gerschenkron's argument was like, if a country wants to get rid of its backwardness, the government should step in and make some sick institutions to make up for the lack of money, skilled peeps, entrepreneurship, and tech skills in those countries that wanna modernize.op. cit, p.113, fam. The explanation of how specific dynamics of development come about seems to have been the vibe of many historically and institutionally grounded theorists of development, ya know?
This section is all about the lit, game-changing, and on-point works of Alexander Gerschenkron (1962), Gunnar Myrdal (1957), and Albert Hirschman (1958) and a few others to flex on the role of government in the development process. Alexander Gerschenkron (1962) suggested that developed countries represent a major incentive for underdeveloped countries to adopt development policies, as developed countries themselves are indicative of the fruits of progress. The more obvi the progress of developed countries, the more the backward countries will peep the benefits of being developed and the costs of being backward. However, like, while the progress of developed countries is lowkey tempting backward countries to adopt developing policies, the experience of developed countries would, like, hardly be repeatable. According to Gerschenkron (1962, p.16), the paths to development are like totally different, you know? Like, 1) there are some countries that are like so behind in industrial development that you can't even find any similar features, and 2) there are countries where the basic elements of being behind are like so extreme that they have to use totally different ways to industrialize, you feel me? Gerschenkron was like, "Yo, countries gotta follow a certain path of development, ya know?" lol the level of backwardness in that country was like, sooo varied. He totally flexed on those late industrialising countries with these six propositions:
Comments
Post a Comment