/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2640344
what is the cope?

>>2618165
>lee kuan yew
>neoliberal
>looks inside
>large state control of industries
>public housing
>economic planning
ehhhhhh

>>2640373
closet stalinist

>>2640148
Almost nobody doesn't wish there were more LKYs
>>2640373
This, Singapore was almost doing Dengism

>>2640377
its weird because op could have used hong kong but instead he used singapore…
Which had economic policies simmilar to the heavily state interventionist east asian tigers (taiwan, china, sk, and japan). I dont get what op is doing by not using hong kong

>>2640380
Hong Kong used to be part of England though so it doesn't really count

>>2640386
true

>>2639836
>it seems that the Soviet industrialization was far faster than even the Asia Tigers.
soviet industrialization was arguably more impressive than the east asian tigers. Soviet didnt rely on us aid. Soviets recieved less foreign investment than japan, korea and taiwan did. Soviets were seen as enemies by most nations in the globe. Soviets were surrounded by capitalists that wanted them gone. Soviets also had to industrialize with way less advanced tech.
And yet in 10 years, the soviets somehow managed to industrialize quickly. This is a miracle

>>2619486
>This is why fascism is fundamentally a reactionary right-wing regime. It doesn't try to change societies, but only to radically safeguard it.
Lol no, fascism goal is also to revolutionary change their society. If this wasnt the case ᴉuᴉlossnW and hitler wouldnt have done their cultural larp shit.

>>2640380
I didn't use Hong Kong because it was a british colony and contradictions caught up, as it is one of the most unequal hellholes, with the most expensive real estate.

>>2640396
Also it has to pull itself up from a backwater hellhole, its major cities and industrial zones got obliterated in ww2

Really it was impressive.

>>2640403
>fascism
>revolutionary
Pick one.

Leftypol is now filled with closeted fascist cunts

>>2640373
>South Korea
>Has the government supported conglomerates
>somehow not neoliberal because government supported

Please read more and KYS after that.

>>2640414
-nationalized financial system.
-certain industries were mostly monopolized by the state (steel)
-economic planning agencies which used the state control of the financial system to "guide" companies
In what way does neoliberalism advocate for the state control of banks and the financial system. And then using them to guide companies? Point to me a neoliberal idea that supports full nationalization of the banking system.

>>2640409
fair but using singapore isnt great either. Its a east asian tiger state. Its an example of mercantile state capitalism with possible "socialist" influence. Its not an example of the success of neoliberalism, at all.
>>2640411
It was very very impressive. It was basically a sieged state for most of its history. Meanwhile the east asian tigers recieved a lot of free shit from the usa.
The soviet union was like a poor kid who had nothing. And had to build himself up to wealth. Meanwhile the east asian tigers were poor kids who got adopted by a rich family. Who then proceeded to shower them with aid and investment.
The soviet union also presented a new model of economic development. Meanwhi;le the east asian tigers in many ways used old mercantile forms of economic development. In this regard the soviet union was trully 100 percent impressive.

>>2640388
>>2640386
Under the colonial governors it was essentially autonomous and had a lot of leeway to adopt its own developmentalist policies independent of the UK, which is why it's often put in the basket of one the East Asian tigers

>>2640423
>>2640411
>>2640396
While I agree the USSR was impressive, and it was the first proper "developmentalist state" of the 20th century with no previous precedent, there's a few things to note. One is that as shit as the Tsarist state was, it had already overseen some industrialization, which was accelerated by WWI. So there was already some level of technical expertise. The scientific and technical expertise didn't just arise de novo, it's just that the Soviet state was able to start from that kernel and exponentially expand the level of cadres. I'd argue the Great Purge in the late 1930s was basically a campaign to destroy the remains of those older bases of expertise which had grown up under Tsarism and were seen as unreliable, and replace them with technical cadres that had been raised during WWI or the 1920s and were the first generation to have grown up under Soviet rule.
>Soviet didnt rely on us aid. Soviets recieved less foreign investment than japan, korea and taiwan did. Soviets were seen as enemies by most nations in the globe.
There is extensive debate on this, but the USSR did import equipment and expertise from the West all throughout the 1920s and 30s, without which industrialization would have been impossible or much delayed. For all the foundations I mentioned above, the need for foreign experts was due to shortages in the early USSR. When the Great Depression hit, moreover, the USSR was actually an attractive investment for US firms because its brisk economic growth during a global slump made it an attractive investment, and the Soviets paid for everything in hard currency and on time on the back of collectivization of the peasantry.
>Soviets also had to industrialize with way less advanced tech.
Keep in mind though, that unlike the Asian tigers, the USSR has vast agricultural and resource wealth. Siberia has fantastic mineral wealth, the Caucasus had oil, the Soviet heartlands of Russia and Ukraine had a lot of good agricultural lands. I am leaving out places like East Ukraine which is a massive industrial region due to its mineral resources etc. The tragedy of the USSR imo is that despite these massive resources it still collapsed on itself and in the long term didn't seem to manage them all that well.

>>2640433
I will respond later. I need to do something. Im not ignoring you just busy

Singapore is a fascist entity that uses slave labor. It's a literal police state in the full sense of the word. They execute people for possessing small amounts of marijuana. A real "social miracle". lmao

>>2640439
If the Qatari emir said "US bad" 80% of leftypol would become wahabists.

>>2640438
yep, take your time

>>2640456
Don't tell them about the saudi king that cut off oil to the entirety of the west

>>2640376
>>2640414
>everything I dont like is neoliberalism
absolute dumbfucks, plz read a book once in your lives

>>2640439
>muh marijuana
>muh immigrant slave labor
They are immigrants, they have two choices either die like a pest in their own country or in a foreign country.
>police state
GDR had stasi, what is your point?

>>2620283
So why are we pretending that it is amazing Singaporean government systems that have made it rich and not its extremely good location?

>>2640515
because similar gov systems have produced simmilar results. Which suggests its a combination of location and political systems.

>>2640516
>because similar gov systems have produced simmilar results

like where?

>>2640517
korea, taiwan, japan, china? Theres differences but theres simmilarities to the point they get grouped up together

Singapore is successful because it's majority Chinese.
Taiwan (Republic of China) is successful because it's majority Chinese.
China is successful because it's majority Chinese.

>>2640521
bro Japan is a massive failure of a country. Korea is not much better, the public is massively unhappy and doesn't want kids. Taiwan I don't know much about but they are also propped up by the west to use against China. And as for China itself, yes they embraced global trade kind of but they never became 'neoliberal', they are highly-regulated state managed capitalism. These countries get grouped together because westerners are ignorant and racist lol.

>>2640521
China never became neoliberal, Jesus it feels like at this point you are just throwing words around.

>>2640533
Bro, im talking about overall economic development. Japan korea, and taiwan despite being unhappy shitholes still did develop economically. And china while never become neoliberal, still has a highly regulated state capitalism that has some parallel elements with singapore.

Im saying that all these economic models show that you can use a singapore style system to develop industry, urbanization and etc. Its just in the long term it doesnt guarantee happy results and could just end up producing a dystopia like south korea and japan was.

> These countries get grouped together because westerners are ignorant and racist lol.

Its also because they do share elements with each other. Inductive planning, state control of finance, export oriented industrialization, powerful economic bureacracies, etc etc. And some cultural similarities.

>>2640539
I never said china became neoliberal. Im saying that chinas current model of highly regulated state capitalism has some parallels with singapore. Or at least the political economic system which singapore used during its development.

>>2640525
People ask: What about when the Chinese suffered like in the Opium wars or under Japanese occupiers? And I tell them those anecdotes don't count because back in the day the people of China were French, you see.

>>2640515
I am the anon who wrote that post originally. My percentage was wrong. It is more like 25-30 percent of world trade. But that is still by far the largest percentage of trade of any global choke point: the others being the Panama Canal, Suez Canal, Straits of Hormuz, Gibraltar, Bab el Mandab straits, and the Turkish traits. Of those, you have Oman and UAE abutting the Straits of Hormuz, and they are "rich" societies. Panama is also essentially a city-state consisting of Panama City and its hinterlands and, while somewhat dysfunctional, is very wealthy by Latin American standards. The Turkish straits has Istanbul and its environs, which is by far the richest most developed part of Turkey. Suez Canal and Bab el Mandab have not yielded wealthy city-states, and this case it probably is a case of poor state policies and development. Still, the Suez is a big money maker for Egypt and one can imagine some imaginary city-state detached from Egypt itself would be very wealthy if it weren't attached to a highly dysfunctional state. Gibraltar is fairly wealthy but noting like Singapore.

>>2640533
>bro Japan is a massive failure of a country. Korea is not much better, the public is massively unhappy and doesn't want kids. Taiwan I don't know much about but they are also propped up by the west to use against China.
All of these societies have acute problems, but they are absolutely successful examples of state capitalist development and, if you were to visit, you'd encounter highly organized, technologically advanced societies that outclass many Western countries.

>Taiwan I don't know much about but they are also propped up by the west to use against China.
Korea and Japan were propped up after WWII as well. But Taiwan, like those countries, went on to stand on their own two feet as successful export economies. The US heavily subsidized Japan's recovery and Korea's rise with favorable policies that allowed them to import to the US, as well as putting in massive orders to their industries during the Korean and Vietnam wars. Taiwan faces similar problems to Korea and Japan such as problems with birth rate, exploitative work cultures, etc. but it is also quite nice by developmental standards.

>These countries get grouped together because westerners are ignorant and racist lol.
They get grouped together because they followed very similar models of economic development which were influenced by each other and which all received US backing on various fronts. Mostly, Korea and Taiwan wholesale borrowed Japanese economic developmental policies and some ideas from the USSR concerning the implementation of 5 year plans. Korea's Chaebol system was essentially a copy-paste of Japan's prewar Zaibatsu formations (which were succeeded by Keiretsu after WWII) of massive sprawling family enterprises. Taiwan also had a similar use of crony capitalism where state and corrupt private enterprises power worked hand in glove to implement industrialization.

>>2640525
>China is successful because it's majority Chinese.
Well, China became successful for many reasons. But an understated factor is that when China opened up in the late 1970s, Chinese diasporas in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan had already developed to a good degree and many of their experts, managers, entrepreneurs flooded into China to offer the government their services in the economic development of the country. Not for selfless reasons, but because they stood to make massive profits by building up Chinese industry (which they did).

>>2640670
Good observations anon

>>2620299
>>2618169
>>2618171
There are hundreds of islands in that trade route. We know it's a good place because people want to move there, no-one wants to move Venezuela, Cuba, China, North Korea, or ever wanted to move to the USSR or East Germany. If you need to coerce people stay in your country, then the system sucks, if you can't keep people out when you coerce them to stay the fuck out, then it's good.

>>2640423
>The soviet union was like a poor kid who had nothing. And had to build himself up to wealth. Meanwhile the east asian tigers were poor kids who got adopted by a rich family. Who then proceeded to shower them with aid and investment.
It's worth noting both that if there's no Four Asian Tigers miracle the only options are the Soviet Union and China, but that the city states of Hong Kong, and Singapore developed without aid. Something like 70% of global inequality reduction this century is due to the development of East Asia. The half the remaining 30% is South Asia, and another quarter South East Asia (now dubbed, perhaps too soon, the Tiger Cub Economies - following an inspired economic model). Apparently the remainder is split between recovery of the former USSR from privatization and the development of Africa.

>>2640710
The point is that they control access through a bottleneck and can charge fees on everything that goes through

>>2640710
>There are hundreds of islands in that trade route.
And only one of those islands (Singapore), was already deliberately cultivated as a major entrepot and naval base under the British Empire, which is why it attract so much Chinese immigration in the late 19th century in the first place. It was already positioned to exploit that trade artery unlike any other major port in the region. The country's being chucked out of Malaysia made that all but inevitable.

>>2640791
>no-one wants to move Venezuela, Cuba, China, North Korea, or ever wanted to move to the USSR or East Germany.
Until the 1980s, North Korea was the larger economy than South Korea and garnered much sympathy from the massive Korean diaspora in Japan that was trapped there after WWII. Of course, South Korea overtook it with its ruthless export-oriented developmental policies, which North Korea very much lacked due to it's isolation from major trading partners like the USSR and China. East Germany did attract a lot of migration from Eastern Bloc countries like Hungary and Czechoslovakia because it had the more developed economy. It also had a large immigrant community from Vietnam, which is still felt in Berlin today. The USSR also had a lot of internal migrants going to the Russian SSR from Central Asia, Ukraine, and the Caucasus. It's definitely true that professionals would have preferred to leave to the West, but that is because the West garnered massive wage increases on account of their economies being already highly developed. The same shit happens today and we call it "Brain Drain" which has been a massive problem that has hindered the development of the so-called Third World countries. If those educated populations had to stay in place instead of migrating to the West, those economies would be more stable and would develop faster. This is just universal problem of individual self-interest competing with national self-interest, and no solution has been develoepd to this day. You will see neoliberal economists praise remissions, but the reliance of developing countries on said remission leads to severe problems and distortions in economic development.

>>2640808
keywords
>was
>had

>>2640808
>severe problems and distortions in economic development.
See, the Philippines and Nepal as archetypal examples of economies heavily reliant on remissions from their diasporas in the developed West, Japan and Gulf States.

>>2640812
The point is, that there is a general rule whereby educated professionals move from less developed to more developed countries. This exists within the European Union today, where Southern and Eastern Europeans move to German or Scandinavia. Within the US, professionals will move from less developed areas (the "flyover states") to more developed regions, leading to internal brain drain and unbalanced development. This isn't a problem of socialism per se.

>>2640818
Basically, you get a doom loop where the less developed areas become stagnant which leads to more brain drain which leads to further stagnation and underdevelopment, so it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Again, not a problem that was confined to the Socialist countries when they existed.

>>2640710
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TtZtTA6cTU
Interestingly, there is the example of the Seychelles, a semi-successful quasi socialist entity at one point which has a high standard of living for Africa. But it's a tiny population and not nearly as successful as Singapore. Funny vid

>>2640424
But it also had the special status of being able to trade with mainland China while not being cut off from trade with the outside world, essentially serving as China's "window to the world" and a massive trade hub which made it rich(and then made it go into decline after the rest of China opened up and its monopoly was lost).

>>2640844
yep, don't disagree

>>2640791
Also, to add to this comment, consider that Singapore was surrounded mostly by the Dutch East Indies, all of whose ports had high taxes. The British undercut the Dutch ports by making their port a "free port" with no duties. Secondly, nearby British ports like Penang further up the Malay peninsula had a shallow water port. Singapore already had natural deep water harbors and had better situated geography allowing it to dominate trade for Indochina, the Dutch East indies and trade between India/China/Europe.