Thanks for the clarifications on your points. I enjoyed the dialogue.
I look forward to your future posts.

Great comments. Very insightful. But I think in parts we’re sort of talking past each other.

For instance, I’m not denying that South Korea endured a dictatorship. It’s a historical fact. But I inferred that you were of the impression that the dictatorship was somehow a necessary trade-off for industrialization to happen, when there was nothing at all inevitable about it. I think we’re both agreed that the country would have been better off with a more free political system to begin with.

Whether or not Seoul had telephones and trolley cars at the turn of the century is a also a bit moot, I think. The hinterland — basically, everywhere in Korea except central Seoul, was not particularly developed. Korea was a virtual non-entity in the global economy at the time, basically a pre-industrial state. It’s not unrealistic or demeaning to Korea to point this out, particularly given the dramatic progress it made in the last century.

As for it’s later political development, I’m not saying that democracy is a necessary precursor to economic development. China is proof that this is not the case, at least to a certain level of development. But a democracy governed by rule of law is an inherently more stable form of government, which is always good for business.

The point of the article was not to show that the Middle East could precisely follow South Korea’s model of political and economic development to get out of the rut it’s in. We both know the Arab world and Iran will have to find it’s own way. On the other hand, these regimes could certainly do worse than emulate the way that South Korea managed to mobilize its people and policies to pull themselves up.

As for the incentive of why they might wish to do so, it’s only partly to do with providing a better life for their citizens. Even more to the point, the nations of the Middle East must open up their political and economic systems if they wish to avoid seeing the kind of chaos and wanton bloodshed we typically associate with apocalyptic sci-fi films.

Thanks for coming by! Looking forward to your input in future.

I don’t understand why you’d say “dictatorship was not the price of industrialization, and then acknowledge that “plenty of countries have industrialized while their political systems opened up.” Reducing the legacy of Korea’s authoritarian rule to a response to the North seems to completely overlook the fact that rulers like Park Chung Lee were directly responsible for Korea’s unprecedented rate of growth because he stifled all forms of free speech, and tortured anybody who dared form anything resembling a labor union. His motto for laborers was “go to work under the stars, return home from work under the stars.” Because the peasant ajummas and ajesses that were breaking their backs to build the nation put nearly all their earnings (pithy though they were) into securing an education for their single child, were uprisings like Gwangju able to occur. Despite my hyperbolic remark, my intention was that quality education in Korea has had a long a profound influence on how their society has been structured, and it directly influenced their rapid ascent in the latter half of the 20th century.

The comparison between the Middle East and South Korea is an odd one, given that freedom was not the cause of South Korean economic prosperity after the Korean War, and I think you’re leaving out a crucial part of Korean history to support your argument. Furthermore, I think the historical comparison obfuscates the importance of the question on how exactly South Korea did develop so rapidly, as I take contention with this remark – “From a xenophobic and technologically backward hermit kingdom at the turn of the twentieth century.” Xenophobic, maybe that’s a bit extreme, but accurate of their psychological mentality, but hardly of their trade relations. Technologically backward, I don’t think so. By 1904, Seoul was the first city in East Asia to have electricity, trolley cars, a water system, telephones, and telegraphs all at the same time. Furthermore, all the companies that supplied these services were American firms. Japanese colonialism did nothing but stop an already progressive force that was well underway before Occupation. To take the position that Korea was decrepit and backward at the turn of the century makes it all the more difficult to understand Korea’s position in the world today.

There’s a logical gap I left out in my mention of Gaza, but without going too much into detail in this post, Hamas makes it impossible for an alternative education in Gaza, as demonstrated by their torturing and firing of thousands of public school teachers across the Strip, and subsequent replacement with Hamas Jihadists. Since there’s no education alternative, the problem grows worse by the day, making it harder for them to revolt against Hamas themselves. In this I agree with you that there’s a deficiency of democracy in the Arab countries with little alternative for change which fuels radicalism. So I suppose I’d ask you how the leaders of the Arab world are given the incentive to transform themselves.

First off, dictatorship was not the price of industrialization. Plenty of countries have industrialized while their political systems opened up. Their autocratic political system was a function of the threat from the North and not-too-subtle emulation of the Japanese Imperial system (which ordinary Koreans hated).

Next, it’s kind of silly to say education was valued more than land or monetary wealth. Rather, education was seen as a means to pass civil service exams so as to be eligible for grants from the state of land and wealth. It’s the same thing in any society today — education is the key to success.

As for Gaza, I’m not sure I get your point. Gaza isn’t poor because of lack of education funding (although that doesn’t help). Gaza is and probably always will be dependent on the generosity of larger patrons to survive. As part of a larger state, the area one day be viable, but no one knows how that will turn out.

Even in the pre-Joseon Dynasty period, Korean Confucian society placed the education of their children in matters of ethics, science and politics as the utmost virtue, valued more than land or monetary wealth.

Gaza can’t become the Hong Kong of the Middle East, when there’s no education expenditures (and UNWRA hardly counts, as they supply the buildings and little else).

Fund education initiatives to counter Hamas, and soon, you’ll have an educated youth like Iran, then revolution.