South Korean exports jumped from $40 million in 1961 to $15 billion in 1979

[repo]

1960s - clothing, plywood, wigs and other light industrial manufacturing
1970s - textiles, electronics, ship building

The South Korean government implemented an export oriented industrialization by supporting a few companies that later became "Chaebols". These companies were given funding to kickstart manufacturing by taking advantage of an docile, patient and educated labor market. It's a fascinating rise in such a short period.

 

[Velœcity]

it’s crazy where democracy can get a country

 

[repo]

it’s crazy where democracy can get a country

My sweet friend, President Park Chung-hee (1962 to 1979) was a dictator. He increased exports 368 times to 15 billion dollars.

 

[Velœcity]

My sweet friend, Park Chung-hee (1962 to 1979) was a dictator. He increased exports 368 times to 15 billion dollars.

Wtf

let me rephrase myself , its crazy where capitalism can get a country

 

[GemState]

Exports make up 45% of South Korea's GDP, export-oriented industrialization did wonders for them.

I think this model isn't replicable for Africa, however. New developments in tradable services and agro-industries that resemble traditional industrialization is the way forward. The developing world will undergo premature deindustrialization, even places like India/Indonesia may not make it.

 

[Qeelbax]

it’s crazy where democracy can get a country

They had a dictator. Search up Gwangju Uprising.

 

[Ras]

Chaebols was the silver bullet. They learned it from the Japanese.

You need to consolidate your resources and efforts to be world-class in one thing instead of be mediocre in a lot of things.

However your people have to be smart enough to want to maintain the system.

Once the Chaebols leaders were decided, the rest had to get in line and not create chaos in the hope of taking over.

Difficult for most countries but if you lived under a monarchy for centuries it becomes a lot easier.

 

[Juliet]

Democracy simply isn't for developing nations. Uninformed people (ex. MAGA cultists in the U.S. who almost plunged the country into a coup/war) can topple everything in a matter of days, so how can you expect barely literate people to know what's best for public policy?

 

[Odious Delirium]

However your people have to be smart enough to want to maintain the system.
.

Not Necessarily.

Japan when it was going through this had a lot of political assassinations taking place and hijackings or over ruling of the systems which is what lead it to join the global war in the first place. Even the individual branches of its army where moving independently against there actual systems rules.

The actual reason is a large literate population capable of being bureaucrats needs to exist and the ideology of some kind of unity needs to exist. Which in most of these cases back then around the world is nationalism and didn't exist in the mind of the people eg China was a bunch of States ruled by warlords.

Egypt tried to do the same thing but they failed because they didn't have a literate populations and the only other literate guys in the country also are vying for power.

A small minority or a specific class of people eg scholars in the Islamic world isn't enough and this reason specifically is why Japan who had a highly literate population and a nationalist mindset and set national ideologies unlike China and Korea ended up becoming a superpower and developing the fastest out of them. the Koreans and Chinese adopted and learned from them. With China eventually over taking them because of the potential it has with a larger population and a good amount of literacy but no set ideology that united all Chinese at the time.

but once things settled for countries like China and Korea they where able to advance fast.

 

[Velœcity]

Democracy simply isn't for developing nations. Uninformed people (ex. MAGA cultists in the U.S. who almost plunged the country into a coup/war) can topple everything in a matter of days, so how can you expect barely literate people to know what's best for public policy?

id rather have a flawed democracy then an authoritarian gov, regardless because at least then the ppl could pick who they want in office without relying on diasporas in gov to vote using 4.5

society Will progress after the peoples needs are taken care of, which they can demand with there vote. and who knows maybe we would no longer a failed state loool

 

[Kool-Aid]

https://www.somalispot.com/threads/south-koreas-growing-household-debt-suicides-sky-high.126106/

South Koreans put themselves in crazy debt just to show off!