The Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto sponsors annual lectures on weighty subjects (In Defence of God is an example). The latest debates were held in June on the subject of China. Debaters ranged from the current senior economic advisor to the Chinese government to Henry Kissinger and Fareed Zakaria, the Newsweek Journalist and the CNN anchor. The lectures have not yet been released as podcasts (which I would urge you to get) but portions of the debate were rebroadcast on the CBC program Ideas. The other source on China was another CBC broadcast, The Current with Anna Maria Tremonte whose various guests had some input and insight into matters Chinese.
Aside from the usual stuff on China, there were a number of insightful observations. The first is on Chinese innovation. The observation was that, while Chinese students lead in computational skills (e.g. math and engineering) most of the learning is by rote. US education, as woeful as we believe it to be, approaches education from problem solving where failure is as much a part of the process as success. The position taken is that while the computational skills may be lacking in the US, these can be learned. Problem solving takes an social environment that is more closely related to western values. For example, the US to its credit allows for failure if that failure is constructive. That is, if something is learned from the failure. Eastern cultures do not look favourably on failure. Free markets are evolutionary in that strengths are built on constructive failure. Given the feudal nature of the Chinese society (substitute feudal barons for Communist bosses) it is unlikely that society will change any time soon. My mother had a Russian proverb: You can teach a bear to dance--bit it's still a bear.
The other insight came from a participant on the Current. It's one that had not occurred to me and I found it fascinating. One of the hallmarks of Chinese culture is the collective socialist model. The feudal lord "took care" of his serfs or the Chinese bosses that are "taking care" of the population. That social model requires considerable compliance on the part of the population. Change is revolutionary rather than gradual. And here is the fascinating part: the one child policy could seriously undermine the sanguine nature of the general population. Anyone who has been to China has see the effect of the one child policy. Each child is revered. It is catered to. It is invested in. The child is the future. The child is also completely self centred. It is, observed one of the experts, the beginning of the "me" generation. This generation may not be a compliant as the ones that went before it. Those children will want it all and will want it now. Western societies underwent a similar social upheaval in the 1980s. The "me" generation had a significant negative impact on societal values. We are still living with the results of the "me" generation.
I am a great fan of Malcolm Gladwell. He came to prominence with is book The Tipping Point but I would commend to you his book What the Dog Saw. In both books he makes the point that some insignificant fact or occurrence can have a significant bearing on an event or happening. In trying to understand any problem or happening looking at the result may belie some of the insignificant factors that were more important than was realized at the time. For instance, I have been reading an account of the rise of the corporation and commercial institutions. What is credited most for that dramatic rise in the 1700s is the invention of the double entry bookkeeping system. Without a way to measure financial performance there can be no investment. The point of this post is to have a look behind event to determine what may be the driver.
Bernie/
No comments:
Post a Comment