Of course other cultures don't share our values. That's why I define the rule of law in such a limited way: transparent, predictable, equal and protected by some form of accountability. This gives a *lot* of leeway. It protects against the abuse of power, arbitrary taking etc... but not against laws many Americans would find fundamentally distasteful.
Singapore kills drug dealers and aggressively suppresses the freedom of speech. It suppresses homosexual activity. It is still quite lawful. Korea, Taiwan and Japan maintain unique non-Western cultures but are still lawful. Although Taiwan isn't ranked by the WJP (I use their rankings although I prefer something a little more limited), both Korea and Japan rank above the United States. Japan, as an aside, adopted a *Roman* legal structure (not a Common Law one). They share this with Louisiana.
An economically Communist society could be transparent, predictable, equal and protected by accountability. So could a capitalist one. A religious one could as well, either by having genuinely good leadership (willing to deliver transparency, predictability and equality due to divine accountability) or by having mechanisms to displace corrupt religious leadership. It is rare that either economically Communist or theocratic governments achieve this. They tend to stumble on the accountability side, which unravels all the rest.
I am personally religious and believe that walking in the path of G-d is fundamentally rewarding. I see this involving a cycle of creation and rest (six days of work and then a Sabbath). I support laws that encourage work (see my tax proposal) and as well as laws that enable restfulness (see my healthcare and welfare proposals). I even believe it is healthy for a society to have a Sabbath, although I wouldn't legally enforce any particular definition of it.
Mine is a lawful approach, it just focuses on particular values.
Even the UAE, a country with very distinct values and a tribal system, ranks reasonably highly. The WJP puts them at 30th (their great weaknesses are open government, fundamental rights and constraints on government power but they rank well at absence of corruption, order, justice and regulatory enforcement). Next door Iran scores quite poorly (109th) - right alongside more 'western' Turkey (107th).
In my book, the City on the Heights, a form of law is developed that doesn't exist anywhere. It is intended to integrate disparate legal forms in the Arab/Muslim world, the Shia (and to a lesser degree Sunni) legal systems *can* be quite strong by the transparent, predictable and accountable measures. Even equality can be reasonably strong, depending on the school being followed. But the conflict between the Shia and Sunni systems can create a legal vacuum that has led to mass slaughter and war.
As another aside, the Sunni legal systems are a little more challenging because the mechanisms for codification and legal consistency are limited. Every case is more unique than it is in other systems, hampering predictability and transparency.
The rule of law is about creating a playing field - not about determining who scores the goals.
That is why I find it comforting that the cultural competition in the US is overwhelmingly lawful. Americans mostly carry out their cultural competition through elections, courts and regulations. Despite being mostly lawful, American society 70 years ago was quite distinct from the society of today. The obvious and massive exception was the unequal, unpredictable and non-transparent discrimination against Blacks. Even today, Utah is quite distinct from San Francisco although both are reasonably lawful.
So, no, this isn't about ango-saxon law. It is just about the rule of law in a very general sense.
I'm not suggesting US law be international law. I'm suggesting the rule of law (in general) be fostered globally. It might be helpful to note that wealthy countries tend to have the rule of law. The two go hand-in-hand. Not coincidentally, China has both a per-capita GDP and a rule of law score somewhat lower than that of Thailand.
China is not a wealthy country, it just builds concentrations of wealth on the backs of a billion people. Like many totalitarian dictatorships it puts on a good show by eating away at the values of a well-balanced society. Law is, naturally, one of the first casualties.
To support the rule of law is not to be a bully - it is to stand up to those who would be bullies.
Of course the US is a bully in some ways (see the note on assassinations), which is one reason I'm suggesting a shift a policy.
It appear the virus got out because China preferred harsh suppression of what was actually happening to any sort of helpful admission. They shut down transparency, they censured doctors for sharing the reality, they banned Taiwan from sharing their very early findings and they moved mountains to keep it all quiet. With the rule of law, none of this would have been able to happen quite so easily. Given warning and data (both of which were available), the world could have prepared far more effectively. Two more months of notice could have done us all a lot of good.
Local authorities afraid of extra-legal punishment and central authorities unable to accept accountability led directly to the virus being what it is.
World population is 7.6 billion. 1% is 76 million. 5/1000s of that is 380,000. WorldOMeter reports 355,000 deaths. I think it's pretty clear there will be at least another 30,000.
I do think it is highly dangerous, but I also think the extent of our shutdown is also highly dangerous. I support social distancing and masks, but not the shutdown of businesses around the world.
We have an incentive system that rewards better health outcomes. We just need to adjust the structure so it also rewards better cost outcomes. It is like setting up a system of subsidized cars that only allows the very nicest cars on the road - paid for by third-party car providers with actual drivers having no incentive to shop around individually. They'll be nice cars, but they will cost a lot more than they should.
Latest Comments
The Road To A Post-Corona Boom (Foreign Policy) - Part 3
That was the goal of the piece :)
You might enjoy the related book (City on the Heights) - although it only focuses on the seed...
The Road To A Post-Corona Boom (Foreign Policy) - Part 3
Of course other cultures don't share our values. That's why I define the rule of law in such a limited way: transparent, predictable, equal and protected by some form of accountability. This gives a *lot* of leeway. It protects against the abuse of power, arbitrary taking etc... but not against laws many Americans would find fundamentally distasteful.
Singapore kills drug dealers and aggressively suppresses the freedom of speech. It suppresses homosexual activity. It is still quite lawful. Korea, Taiwan and Japan maintain unique non-Western cultures but are still lawful. Although Taiwan isn't ranked by the WJP (I use their rankings although I prefer something a little more limited), both Korea and Japan rank above the United States. Japan, as an aside, adopted a *Roman* legal structure (not a Common Law one). They share this with Louisiana.
An economically Communist society could be transparent, predictable, equal and protected by accountability. So could a capitalist one. A religious one could as well, either by having genuinely good leadership (willing to deliver transparency, predictability and equality due to divine accountability) or by having mechanisms to displace corrupt religious leadership. It is rare that either economically Communist or theocratic governments achieve this. They tend to stumble on the accountability side, which unravels all the rest.
I am personally religious and believe that walking in the path of G-d is fundamentally rewarding. I see this involving a cycle of creation and rest (six days of work and then a Sabbath). I support laws that encourage work (see my tax proposal) and as well as laws that enable restfulness (see my healthcare and welfare proposals). I even believe it is healthy for a society to have a Sabbath, although I wouldn't legally enforce any particular definition of it.
Mine is a lawful approach, it just focuses on particular values.
Even the UAE, a country with very distinct values and a tribal system, ranks reasonably highly. The WJP puts them at 30th (their great weaknesses are open government, fundamental rights and constraints on government power but they rank well at absence of corruption, order, justice and regulatory enforcement). Next door Iran scores quite poorly (109th) - right alongside more 'western' Turkey (107th).
In my book, the City on the Heights, a form of law is developed that doesn't exist anywhere. It is intended to integrate disparate legal forms in the Arab/Muslim world, the Shia (and to a lesser degree Sunni) legal systems *can* be quite strong by the transparent, predictable and accountable measures. Even equality can be reasonably strong, depending on the school being followed. But the conflict between the Shia and Sunni systems can create a legal vacuum that has led to mass slaughter and war.
As another aside, the Sunni legal systems are a little more challenging because the mechanisms for codification and legal consistency are limited. Every case is more unique than it is in other systems, hampering predictability and transparency.
The rule of law is about creating a playing field - not about determining who scores the goals.
That is why I find it comforting that the cultural competition in the US is overwhelmingly lawful. Americans mostly carry out their cultural competition through elections, courts and regulations. Despite being mostly lawful, American society 70 years ago was quite distinct from the society of today. The obvious and massive exception was the unequal, unpredictable and non-transparent discrimination against Blacks. Even today, Utah is quite distinct from San Francisco although both are reasonably lawful.
So, no, this isn't about ango-saxon law. It is just about the rule of law in a very general sense.
The Road To A Post-Corona Boom (Foreign Policy) - Part 3
I'm not suggesting US law be international law. I'm suggesting the rule of law (in general) be fostered globally. It might be helpful to note that wealthy countries tend to have the rule of law. The two go hand-in-hand. Not coincidentally, China has both a per-capita GDP and a rule of law score somewhat lower than that of Thailand.
China is not a wealthy country, it just builds concentrations of wealth on the backs of a billion people. Like many totalitarian dictatorships it puts on a good show by eating away at the values of a well-balanced society. Law is, naturally, one of the first casualties.
To support the rule of law is not to be a bully - it is to stand up to those who would be bullies.
Of course the US is a bully in some ways (see the note on assassinations), which is one reason I'm suggesting a shift a policy.
The Road To A Post-Corona Boom (Foreign Policy) - Part 3
It appear the virus got out because China preferred harsh suppression of what was actually happening to any sort of helpful admission. They shut down transparency, they censured doctors for sharing the reality, they banned Taiwan from sharing their very early findings and they moved mountains to keep it all quiet. With the rule of law, none of this would have been able to happen quite so easily. Given warning and data (both of which were available), the world could have prepared far more effectively. Two more months of notice could have done us all a lot of good.
Local authorities afraid of extra-legal punishment and central authorities unable to accept accountability led directly to the virus being what it is.
The Road To A Post-Corona Boom - Part 1
@[DRM](user:130312) @[Gary Anderson](user:4798) @[Bill Myers](user:24893) my take on China...
talkmarkets.com/.../the-road-to-a-post-corona-boom-foreign-policy-part-3
The Road To A Post-Corona Boom (Healthcare) - Part 2
Third part added... foreign policy...
talkmarkets.com/.../the-road-to-a-post-corona-boom-foreign-policy-part-3
Stop The Corona Insanity - The Data
World population is 7.6 billion. 1% is 76 million. 5/1000s of that is 380,000. WorldOMeter reports 355,000 deaths. I think it's pretty clear there will be at least another 30,000.
I do think it is highly dangerous, but I also think the extent of our shutdown is also highly dangerous. I support social distancing and masks, but not the shutdown of businesses around the world.
The Road To A Post-Corona Boom - Part 1
Third part added... foreign policy...
talkmarkets.com/.../the-road-to-a-post-corona-boom-foreign-policy-part-3
The Road To A Post-Corona Boom (Healthcare) - Part 2
We have an incentive system that rewards better health outcomes. We just need to adjust the structure so it also rewards better cost outcomes. It is like setting up a system of subsidized cars that only allows the very nicest cars on the road - paid for by third-party car providers with actual drivers having no incentive to shop around individually. They'll be nice cars, but they will cost a lot more than they should.
The Road To A Post-Corona Boom (Healthcare) - Part 2
I asked. Nothing yet.