Sorry I'm late to this discussion - one I'm very interested in. My home country is Indonesia - another example a populous, large, heterogenous, geographical area, an archipelago (non-contiguous geography!). Achieving independence only in 1945 (yet the ex-colonist, The Netherlands, only acknowledged it in 1949). So barely 80 years of state creation. I (and my parents and grandparents) was a witness (and participant) in the effort. And yes, it does require some complex and nuanced trade-offs. And the progress is not always linear.
Plenty - one I recently found is this open access book https://brill.com/display/title/55310 focusing on the early (post independence) economic history. And if you search for Soekarno (or Sukarno - alternate spelling) that will turn up a whole bunch of pre-independence (1920s onward) history.
As German physicist Max Planck somewhat cynically declared, science advances one funeral at a time. Planck noted “a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
It seems that country development may be much the same. Indeed all human progress that is not technical, and even some technical issues may only advance one funeral at a time. It seems that the more advanced the plutocracy of the country, or institution the more this is true.
This is something that we do not seem to take into account in our evaluation of other countries, and ignore in our own.
I do not agree with that quote, do you? There are so many advancements that happen within our lifetimes that we adapt to. Everyone doesn't just stay stuck in their ways forever and then die?
Slow change over generations is certainly part of the picture, but it certainly can't be the whole picture.
I think it's interesting that I know many people who I would say have chosen to stay stuck, not change, not grow and not contribute to society moving forward in a more beautiful way. But I sincerely doubt there are too many people that would say that about themselves. I think people's tolerance for change varies dramatically, and when one feels threatened by change, they will typically dig their heels in and hold fast, resisting what is new. "Triumph" happens when a shift occurs in a portion of the crowd that tips the scales of society beginning to agree with a new position. I think it can look like it occurs with a change in generation, sometimes look like its even overnight, but typically there is a long strand leading up to those moments.
Sorry I'm late to this discussion - one I'm very interested in. My home country is Indonesia - another example a populous, large, heterogenous, geographical area, an archipelago (non-contiguous geography!). Achieving independence only in 1945 (yet the ex-colonist, The Netherlands, only acknowledged it in 1949). So barely 80 years of state creation. I (and my parents and grandparents) was a witness (and participant) in the effort. And yes, it does require some complex and nuanced trade-offs. And the progress is not always linear.
That's very fascinating. Has anything been written on the creation of your state? I'd love to learn more about it!
Plenty - one I recently found is this open access book https://brill.com/display/title/55310 focusing on the early (post independence) economic history. And if you search for Soekarno (or Sukarno - alternate spelling) that will turn up a whole bunch of pre-independence (1920s onward) history.
Ooooooh thank you so much!
As German physicist Max Planck somewhat cynically declared, science advances one funeral at a time. Planck noted “a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
It seems that country development may be much the same. Indeed all human progress that is not technical, and even some technical issues may only advance one funeral at a time. It seems that the more advanced the plutocracy of the country, or institution the more this is true.
This is something that we do not seem to take into account in our evaluation of other countries, and ignore in our own.
I do not agree with that quote, do you? There are so many advancements that happen within our lifetimes that we adapt to. Everyone doesn't just stay stuck in their ways forever and then die?
Slow change over generations is certainly part of the picture, but it certainly can't be the whole picture.
I think it's interesting that I know many people who I would say have chosen to stay stuck, not change, not grow and not contribute to society moving forward in a more beautiful way. But I sincerely doubt there are too many people that would say that about themselves. I think people's tolerance for change varies dramatically, and when one feels threatened by change, they will typically dig their heels in and hold fast, resisting what is new. "Triumph" happens when a shift occurs in a portion of the crowd that tips the scales of society beginning to agree with a new position. I think it can look like it occurs with a change in generation, sometimes look like its even overnight, but typically there is a long strand leading up to those moments.
Yes, that makes sense. There is a generational shift, but also a personal shift. I feel like I'm constantly changing my mind!