Is rapid growth ever possible without iron-hand rule?

There's something schizophrenic about governing a state. Two totally different processes are involved in it - taking a decision and implementing it. As Dr Adizes contends, these two acts cant be performed with the same level of efficiency within capacity of one and the same regime. The quality of a managerial decision gets markedly improved provided it has been discussed in accordance with democratic principles. This prior discussion - though democratic and free makes implementation of any such decision too delayed an action, however.

Therefore, most efficiently, decisions are being implemented under authoritarian rule (like, say in China or Russia). In the course of time, however, such decisions are going down in quality for the lack of independent and impartial judgment of those who are subject to take the consequences (ethnic unrest in the West of China being a recent proof to that).

Individuals, companies and nations will continuously be seeking for some way to combine the two, thus moving over to some sort of “democratorship” as Dr Adizes calls it.

The rapt attention paid to China nowadays (and is by no means an exception to the rule) is fair and natural. China does catch imagination (and for good deal strikes one all of a heap) when the speed of its economic growth or first-rate infrastructure is in issue. Let’s be honest to ourselves, though, we’re not supposed to replicate China’s miracle here, in the Ukraine, whatever lasting our admiration could be. To work that miracle again would have taken 46 million of “the Chinese” with their Confucian ethics of labor and life (in precisely that order) as well as the ability to stand one-party autocracy when democracy and freedoms are being sacrificed for the sake of rapid economic growth.

Is this the one and only way to secure rapid growth?

Asia is worthy of taking a wider look at, for you to surely see another gigantic and notably both successful and democratic country. India.

For there’s none of that fancy fuss around the latter (the pearls of its economy are hidden away, rather than being on display), India – unlike the Heavenly Empire - doesn’t look that stunning. Neither is there in India anything like Pudong Finance Zone - an eye catcher which is most popular with the flashy photo ads advertising Chinese achievements today. Yet, as Indians fittingly put it, they cannot cause a couple of millions of people to migrate overnight from one place to another, whereas in China it is quite normal as in the case with Pudong, when the party decided to map a new finance zone. Such things are out of the question as far as India is concerned for the private property in land is respected there. In the meantime, India has exhibited 8, 7% growth over the last 5 years, which is only 2% less than that in China. The content of foreign trade (both export and import) in Indian GDP amounts to 51% (as to be compared to 59% in China). Gross domestic savings equal to 38 % (as compared to 20% 20 years ago). There are several massive IT companies in India and Tata Motors renowned for owning Jaguar and Land Rover brands. India is going to hit a wealthy nation status within a single generation, i.e. by 2039 while preserving the name of “the biggest democracy” in the world.

It appears that no sacrificing liberties is required to secure a steep economic growth and in case that the price to pay is 2% of GDP, I am on it.

Source .


Add a comment

RedTram Ukraine