…so what exactly are you disagreeing with? None of the above contradicts anything I wrote.
Except when the [del]witches[/del] [del]white devils[/del] American troops are accused of something…
Well I read this
**
As the antipodal/converse/diametric opposite of saying** :
*
I would point out that Japan is the politically “free-est” of the Asian countries and has been since the late 40’s. Free Market Capitalism is easier and more effective in a true Democracy - rather than an Authoritarian rule.
Taiwan, South Korea shed their Authoritarian systems roughly as they came up economically in the World and democratized – wealth and democracy went hand and hand
It is a clear trend….*
Maybe that’s just me – not being snarky – I can see you were using some unorthodox definition of “authoritarian” – but it is hard to see (for me) as this being not contradictory
The Philippines was doing quite well until Ferdinand Marcos came along.
The countries gradually became democratic after their authoritarian (but in hindsight, enlightened) goverment enabled the great advances in economic development. Liberal democracy was the end result, Authoritarian goverment was the initial cause.
Authoritarian control of the economy —>Rapid industrialization and economic development -----> Eventual establishment of liberal democracy. Yeah? 
That is a viable explanation.
Economic activity requires a predictable environment, as people get wealthier they acquire a vested interest in keeping things stable
- and at that point ‘liberal democracy’ becomes both possible and possibly optimal
Authoritarian =/= Kleptocracy
IMO it does not matter much what the rules are, provided they are applied consistently and well understood.
The big gripe in those cases isn’t about getting the local population up in arms and exacting some illegal retribution. It’s about who gets to take them to trial. And the Japanese courts are far more lenient than the US military courts.
Those states were not colonized, however, so much as settled. The indigenous habitants were for the most part exterminated and replaced with immigrants, who built entirely new nations in the images of existing, successful nations.
Don’t forget about W. Edwards Deming’s influence.
Well again, I guess I would again say you are using the word “authoritarian government” in a semi non-standard way. Now essentially using “Authoritarian control of the economy” (which is a little better and certainly different than “authoritarian government” which Japan certainly was NOT from 1952 on) to describe an economically protectionistist and/or nationalist government that subsidies research and development, shields industry from foreign competition, provides troubled companies with easy access to capital and forces Government run companies to buy only nationally made goods…well, that is the Japanese way ideed. Not trying to be a d^ck about it – if that is what you mean by “authoritarian government economically” then I guess I would agree with you… but it isn’t, really, an Authoritarian government – especially not Japan.
Yeah, there is a case to be made that Marcos derailed that Train – I’m buying that. But if I am intellectually honest, to make my point the Philippine economy would have to be doing much better after Marcos. IOW if I want (desperately) to say Liberal Democracy equaled a better economy (as I clearly do) then I am stymied by the post-Marcos Philippines
I looked at Deming’s lists.
Of note–
I see the first 7 problems as universal or near-universal in American business today. 
You might as well ask, “Why Germany?” While cultural and political factors obviously have a lot to do with how things go over time, in my opinion the most important thing about Japan post-War was that the US and other Allied powers spent a lot of money and resources rebulding the economy and infrastructure. Besides, Japan’s performance isn’t without flaws. They’ve been undergoing over a decade of deflation, business failure, higher unemployment, and economic restructuring. Also, domestic investment is piss-poor, to say the least, with so much effort being focused on exports that the Japanese people pay higher prices than overseas markets, and the actual standard of living (which I don’t think is measured very well by statistics) is lower than that of the US or much of Europe.
Take a look at the other countries who “lost” WWII. The Axis powers all did pretty well afterward due to the same kind of investment and recovery efforts that Japan benefitted from. Same with South Korea. They were propped up to be a bulwark against the threat of Communism as we entered the Cold War era. Japan, especially, was used as a forward base for staging in the Korea conflict, and again during Vietnam. Not only did Japan get non-military support, but the US basically has provided much of its defence over the last half-century. That means that the military budget was lighter than many other world leaders, and they could be more choosy about what to spend their money on.
The enormous growth of the Japanese economy was due to the fact that it was, and is, very tightly regulated. The Bubble Economy failure in the early 1990s was a direct result of that regulation, and the recovery has been due to the same rigid planning, but under slightly different rules. It is only nominally a free market and operates in a way that has given American economists severe headaches over the way things are handled. There is no way the US would ever want to adopt Japan’s practices, and they wouldn’t work anyway unless there were the other social and political structures in place to support it.
Despite significant reforms, the financial situation is still more of a shell game than anything; companies borrowing money at preferential rates and repayment terms from banks that are part of their keiretsu (not much different from pre-War zaibatsu) backed by inflated and sometimes non-existent collateral, or nothing more than promises. Contracts between companies are sometimes very different in fact from what is written, with negotiated terms and outside agreements—that are not officially recorded—being more binding than the document.
Mutual support (or what the West would call rampant corruption) between the bureaus and Big Business is the norm. For example, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport provides contracts, the construction companies build roads, dams, bridges, and tunnels, even if they go nowhere of any importance. There are two long tunnels through a couple of medium-sized mountains connecting where I live (the middle of nowhere) with another small town (the armpit of nowhere). There are probably about 3 rivers in all of Japan that are not “improved” somewhere along their courses. The next town over had a stream diverted and the course was concreted, for no particular reason other than to spend money on the construction. It also boasts a million-dollar bridge that connects nothing to nothing. The construction companies provide nominal positions and cushy stipends for retiring ministry officials. Everyone is happy (except the raped environment and the taxpayers). A great deal of domestic spending and employment is provided by these kind of public works projects, which in the US mostly ended at the end of the depression.
As to how authoritarian the government is, that’s complicated. In some ways, it’s extremely authoritarian. The police have broad rights and you have virtually none if you’re arrested. You can be held for up to 23 days (or 5 more past that with a special petition) without even being charged with a crime, and the courts boast of a 98–99% conviction rate. Suspects are routinely deprived of sleep and food during questioning, and despite a specific provision in the constitution against the practice, a signed confession is about all it takes to convict. They still hang people here, and they don’t let anyone know about it ahead of time when they do it. They make sure that the Diet is out of session, so there won’t be any requests for a stay of execution, and the families are notified by seeing an announcement in the newspaper the next day.
At the same time, the central government is so ineffective in many ways that the bureaucracy essentially runs things. Rights that we would associate with a free government are severely curtailed in Japan, and many of them that are supposed to be guaranteed by the constitution were abrogated or ignored soon after the occupation period ended since they were seen as an imposition of Western morals on the “uniquely Japanese” society. The right to assembly, for example, technically exists, but you have to get permission from the local government, the area you want to stage your protest in, local businesses and associations, etc. If you ever watch protests, there will be a few armored vans, a cadre of cops in riot gear escorting the participants, and several police photographers documenting who took part in the march; this is regardless of the size of the assembly. You’ll have 20–3- cops with batons and shields, backup on side streets, and vans with armored windows for a group of 40–60 people. I’ll bet this has a significant quelling effect on political activism.
Free speech is also nominal. You either belong to a kisha kurabu (reporter club), where you are fed news by government officials and ministers, and you don’t piss anyone off, or you don’t get news. Period. There aren’t many rogue reporters because it’s really hard to live when you get shunned by all your sources for publishing something you’re not supposed to report. There was a big stink a few years ago about the Ministry of Education, Blahblah and Blah approving a history book that pretends Japan was always a nation of angels dispensing sweetness and light. (Think Holocaust deniers.) It was recently re-approved for use. When government agencies support active lies and deny access to information, I think it’s safe to say that the right to freedom of speech is just window dressing.
Some background reading I found valuable:
Maybe there is a disconnect here. The most striking transformation of Japan wasn’t post-WW II, it was in Meiji period post-Tokugawa Shogunate. And the Meiji governments were indeed pretty authoritarian ( albeit usually oligarchical, rather than dictatorial ).
- Tamerlane
The reason the Philippine economy didn’t change after Marcos, IMHO, is because of the entrenchment of those with privilege. Heck, they couldn’t even keep his widow from running for and obtaining a seat in the senate although she’s 100% ineligble for it!
Absolutely I was taking the OP to ask about “business, technology, economics” as a post-War Question … If you take it as a broad historical question, well that changes things - Right? But then if you play that game isn’t the answer
“*Why Japan? Well because it was China that so advanced in business, technology, economics for 1,000’s of years and Japoan, really only began to catch up in the last 2 centuries.” * Right?
The OP did have a broad historical question; there’s no mention of the 20th century at all.
I’m not sure when Japan caught up with China, but it was certainly over a millennium ago. The Meiji Reformation is when Japan caught up with Europe. That is the clear answer to when Japan started becoming notably better off than other nations in the region. To answer why requires analysis of the socio-politics of Japan at that time.
That is totally wrong. A reasonable argument could be made the China was the most advanced nation on** earth** in “business, technology, economics” from about 600-1400ish. In any event, there is no serious doubt that it was more advanced than Japan in those areas. Really given the scope of the gaffe, it is a quibble as to when Japan caught up - I’d put it around the end of the 18th Century. Making what I said:
… if you play that game isn’t the answer:
“Why Japan? Well because it was China that so advanced in business, technology, economics for 1,000’s of years and Japoan, really only began to catch up in the last 2 centuries.” Right
Thanks for the cites, but they don’t support your position very well.
No doubt that China was advanced or that it was the political powerhouse of Asia at that time period (rivaled only by the Mongols). But neighboring countries adopted a lot of culture and technology from China. I do have serious doubts that Japan was substantially technologically or economically behind China by the time of Zheng He, if not earlier.
However, I don’t have cites, only my recollection of history classes and books, so I’m happy to be corrected.
Well if you are going to dismiss two cites that say China was the most advanced Society on earth at the time (~1430) as “not supporting my position very well" I am not sure what I cites I can possibly provide.
I guess I would say look at ~1650 when I think Japan was much, much closer to catching China but are not - quite- there yet – they are starting to use Money in internal commerce and are still internationally isolated using trade mainly to buy guns. They have lost a War to China (really, to Korea).
In Maritime technology (where China was roughly the equal of Europe in the 1500s and Japan was not Oceangoing) China has dismantled the fleets but is running a sophisticated semi-meritocracy for its bureaucracy while Japan was truly feudal, and using printing presses while the Japanese used (beautiful) calligraphy and has a bustling internal and international trade
The rest I can see the problem with, but what’s bad about #3? Are you suggesting that, for example, tenure is a better point on which to evaluate?