Is there a bigger succes story than this?

>used to be an agrarian dictatorship devastated by war only a couple of decades ago with barely any industry to speak of
>small population and no natural resources to speak of
>state introduced a brutal but effective education capaign
>nowadays it's one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, with a booming industry, educated people and a first rate standard of living
They should be an example to us all.

Attached: 2000px-Flag_of_South_Korea.svg.png (2000x1333, 67K)

>They should be an example to us all.
We should all become US satellite to join a get-rich-quick scheme only to have the world's most suicidal population and adopt a work ethic akin to robots?

Pretty much that also happened to the other three Asian Tigers, and nowadays it's also happening in Macau and China and to a lesser extend in other countries like Chile, UAE or Malaysia.

>educated people and a first rate standard of living

poppycock

Proof free markets and capitalism make everything better.

Shanghai was declared a Special Economic Zone in 1991, now it's the only non-shit area in China.

It is because Korea used Japan and America well.
South Korea is defending North Korea and China,
Japan was forced to support Korea.

Until the 1990s, Korea was a backward country,
It was collapsing in 1997 due to the Asian economic crisis.
Since then, the United States and Japan have started to attack Korea economically.
(Do not believe 100% of America)

Since South Korea 's President 'Kim Dae jung' has overcome the IMF crisis, South Korea has reached its present state.

The ineffective, corrupt Korean big corporations went bankrupt and made them compete abroad.
Daewoo, Korea's second-largest conglomerate, went bankrupt during this period.
(Until the 90's, Korean companies were poor companies.)

In the case of Taiwan, which was similar to that of Korea, until the early 2000s, it was richer than Korea, and even downplayed Koreans.

However, Taiwan was satisfied with subcontracting Japanese and American companies.
Taiwan did not make their own big company.

However, Korea has started to make its own company brand and to challenge into the world.
(In fact, this is because Korea did not believe in Japan and America.)

At first, the world laughed at Korean products and Korean companies
However, Korea did not give up until the end and challenged and achieved various achievements.
(Many countries fail at this stage: Brazil, Russia, Malaysia, etc.)


Since the 90s, Korea has started to cultivate cultural industries and has started to build IT infrastructure quickly.

This is because the 21st century was expected to be the era of culture and information.
Eventually, by the year 2012, the Korean Culture was dominant in Asia.

It is the fourth industrial revolution era in the future.
(AI, Big Data, Automatic Operation, 3D Printer, Virtual Reality, Semiconductor, Robot, etc.)
A country that quickly reads this era and plans first, will remain the most successful country In the next 10 to 20 years,

no.
Thailand, the Philippines, Malaysia, South America and so on all adopted capitalism and the free market system. But it failed.
That is not all.

I have never seen any South korean to be happy.

based!

Britain is also dominated by the United States.

The present age can not resist the power of the United States.

And in proportion to population, plastic surgery is more common in Europe, America, and South American countries than Korea.

during the cold war, the USA invested heavily on making capitalist countries at the borders of the communist world become marvels of capitalism.
South korea, Taiwan, west germany, Hongkong,
the USA gave them billions and free technology so they dont fall into communism.

The rich people don't want to bother with creating a internal market. They want to sell things that doesn't need to much thinking to the first world like fruits, sugar and cacao. The poor can have slave jobs in a sweatshop or be waiters or tourist guides.

>Thailand
Second Largest Economy in SE Asia
>Philippines
Had an ultra-corrupt government, multiple coups, and several commie insurgencies well into the 90's
>Malaysia
One of the fastest growing economies in the world.
>South America.
Chile has one of the least nationalized economies in the world and it has the highest standard of living in South America. Venezuela has one of the most nationalized economies in the world and it has the third lowest standard of living in Latin America (despite having a fuckton of oil)

Capitalism with constitutionally-backed rights to property is the single greatest economic system in existence. That's why you are so much better off that North Korea.

US support is also a reason,
Countries like Korea, Taiwan and Germany have no resources.
So in the end they were forced to develop the manufacturing industry.

Latin American and Southeast Asian countries, on the other hand, have a lot of resources and food. There were also tourism resources.

In the twentieth century, these differences did not show much,
However, in the 21st century, there has been a widening gap between countries that have developed manufacturing and those that have not been interested in manufacturing.

If you read this book, your thoughts will change.
Capitalism and the free market are important,
But government intervention and protectionism are also essential.

Attached: 51aiApKuWrL._SX324_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (326x499, 35K)

Sure, but to a very limited extent, hence why I mentioned "constitutionally-backed rights to property" in my second post. The role of the government in an economic system of voluntary exchange is to protect and enrich this system of voluntary exchange through constitutionalism, military defense, infrastructure spending, and (to an extent), public education.

First country to invent a writing system that isn't garbage.

to me, the "Studwell hypothesis" seems very simplistic, countries like South Korea and Taiwam were already better off compared to other Third World countries in other metrics like education and living standards and that cannot be really capture in GDP per capita terms.

and his book doesn't really deal with the whole of Asia, but only with a region of it (North-East Asia)

>implying you're not the 51st state

and land reform policies were tried in other countries but they didn't succeed