>They had policies which allowed capital to flow in AND OUT!!>
True. And one of the policy was being in a favorable trade relationship with the economic guerilla, USA.
You are in the camp with the Strong - you get success faster. You move against the winner, you slow down economically. With the winner - Saudi Arabia, Iran before 1975, Chile, South Korea, Japan, Germany, Ireland (after peace negotiations), China (after Nixon's deal).
Not with the Strong - Castro's Cuba. Iraq of Saddam's later years. India during the soviet phase (1965 to 1990), Iran after Islamic rule.
Democracy and free markets or freedom and progress don't seem to matter as the economically winner countries don't seem to have that in common. The favorable relationship with the Strong seems to be a bigger factor.
That capitalism was stronger than communism as an economic system seems to uncontested. At one time, countries were betting one way or the other. The countries that linked with the wrong Strong man lost out.
As a corollary, when the power shifts to China, a different set of nations may benefit.
-Arun |
