k***g
发帖数: 7244 | 1 呵呵，大家怎么看啊？这是一个古老的话题了，两者有correlation,但是causality的方
向是从民主到经济的呢？还是从经济到民主？还是两者是相互促进的？如果是最后一种可
能，那是不是说被实证理论家骂了一个世纪的辩证主义又回来了？ | u*r
发帖数: 9 | 2 lots of studies have been done on the second question, and although there is
some controversy, most evidences suggest that economic development is
conducive to democracy, which is quite intuitive...
there seems to be much fewer study on the first one. maybe pzerworski 2000 is
an exception, and he seems to be saying that there is no definitie answer to
the question whether democracy is good for economic development. democracy can
hardly generate economic miracle, but rarely leads to economic disa
【在 k***g 的大作中提到】
: 呵呵，大家怎么看啊？这是一个古老的话题了，两者有correlation,但是causality的方
: 向是从民主到经济的呢？还是从经济到民主？还是两者是相互促进的？如果是最后一种可
: 能，那是不是说被实证理论家骂了一个世纪的辩证主义又回来了？
| k***g
发帖数: 7244 | 3 hehe,I quite agree with you but
1) For E=>D, although many scholars argue that economic development is
conducive to democracy, it is neither necessary nor suffcient for
democratization and stable democracy. India shows the non-neccesity. Sigapore
implies the non-sufficiency. They may be just outliers, or exceptions but we
do have many other examples (i.e. Middle East and some OPEC memebers, )
Theoretically, it may be that intuitive. We can argue that with the increase
of GDP per capita, the marg
【在 u*r 的大作中提到】
: lots of studies have been done on the second question, and although there is
: some controversy, most evidences suggest that economic development is
: conducive to democracy, which is quite intuitive...
: there seems to be much fewer study on the first one. maybe pzerworski 2000 is
: an exception, and he seems to be saying that there is no definitie answer to
: the question whether democracy is good for economic development. democracy can
: hardly generate economic miracle, but rarely leads to economic disa
| o*****n
发帖数: 58 | 4 这两个问题真是太大了,估计再争论几十年也没有结论. 一个原因我看是例子太少,全世界
就那么200来个国家,而且大规模民主还是最近的事情. 统计的作用有限.
Sigapore
decreasing.When
J-curve
is
to
mechanism,
【在 k***g 的大作中提到】
: hehe,I quite agree with you but
: 1) For E=>D, although many scholars argue that economic development is
: conducive to democracy, it is neither necessary nor suffcient for
: democratization and stable democracy. India shows the non-neccesity. Sigapore
: implies the non-sufficiency. They may be just outliers, or exceptions but we
: do have many other examples (i.e. Middle East and some OPEC memebers, )
: Theoretically, it may be that intuitive. We can argue that with the increase
: of GDP per capita, the marg
| u*r
发帖数: 9 | 5 1. note the word "conducive".
2. it's true that politician's time horizon is usually short in democracies.
i'm just wondering where there could be benign dictators, but no one ever talk
about "benign democratically elected politicians" who think in terms of long
term social welfare instead of his short term gain...
Sigapore
decreasing.When
J-curve
is
to
mechanism,
【在 k***g 的大作中提到】
: hehe,I quite agree with you but
: 1) For E=>D, although many scholars argue that economic development is
: conducive to democracy, it is neither necessary nor suffcient for
: democratization and stable democracy. India shows the non-neccesity. Sigapore
: implies the non-sufficiency. They may be just outliers, or exceptions but we
: do have many other examples (i.e. Middle East and some OPEC memebers, )
: Theoretically, it may be that intuitive. We can argue that with the increase
: of GDP per capita, the marg
| k***g
发帖数: 7244 | 6 Theoretically,there could be some "benign politicians". In a typical social
choice literatue,
there are two assumptions about politician: either office-oriented or policy-
oriented...
But in practice, if you could not win election, how could you pursue your
policy goals? So politicans normally put election and re-election
at the first place unless they are guaranteed tenure...
【在 u*r 的大作中提到】
: 1. note the word "conducive".
: 2. it's true that politician's time horizon is usually short in democracies.
: i'm just wondering where there could be benign dictators, but no one ever talk
: about "benign democratically elected politicians" who think in terms of long
: term social welfare instead of his short term gain...
:
: Sigapore
: decreasing.When
: J-curve
: is
| o*****n
发帖数: 58 | 7 what does it mean by "benign"? Means putting collective interests before
personal interests?
policy-
democracies.
talk
long
but we
increase
When
relative
keep
enforcement of
【在 k***g 的大作中提到】
: Theoretically,there could be some "benign politicians". In a typical social
: choice literatue,
: there are two assumptions about politician: either office-oriented or policy-
: oriented...
: But in practice, if you could not win election, how could you pursue your
: policy goals? So politicans normally put election and re-election
: at the first place unless they are guaranteed tenure...
| u*r
发帖数: 9 | 8 are you saying that dictators have a higher chance of being benigh than
elected politicians? it may be true, but the same assumption about human
naturue, or the distribution of the different types of human nature among
politicians, should be hold about elected officials and dictators. probably a
difference is that dictators are guaranteed tenure, so they can pursue their
policy goals more easily, as you said. it's probably true. but on the other
hand dictators are not immune from pressures eithe
【在 k***g 的大作中提到】
: Theoretically,there could be some "benign politicians". In a typical social
: choice literatue,
: there are two assumptions about politician: either office-oriented or policy-
: oriented...
: But in practice, if you could not win election, how could you pursue your
: policy goals? So politicans normally put election and re-election
: at the first place unless they are guaranteed tenure...
| k***g
发帖数: 7244 | 9 hehe, I think benign dictator just means rational dictator. en, for instance,
if a person owns a firm and he is rational, then he will try his best to make
profits through better managment, D&R,and innovation. As a result,he could get
more money and his employees will benefit as well.
Similarly, if a dictator is rational, he will try his efforts to pursue good
policies and make his state wealthier. His people will benefit as well.
But human beings are not necessarily rational, or his ability to
【在 o*****n 的大作中提到】
: what does it mean by "benign"? Means putting collective interests before
: personal interests?
:
: policy-
: democracies.
: talk
: long
: but we
: increase
: When
| k***g
发帖数: 7244 | 10 1. hehe, just as I said in the last post. If a dictator is rational, he must
be policy-oriented, which means he will carry out good policies in order to
make him and his people weathier and happier. But if a politician is rational
he must be office-oriented, which means he will try to win election and re-
election first.
Since we assume that people are rational, it seems dictators have a higher
possibility to pursue good policies. (This assumption may be problematic, as
I discussed in the last p
【在 u*r 的大作中提到】
: are you saying that dictators have a higher chance of being benigh than
: elected politicians? it may be true, but the same assumption about human
: naturue, or the distribution of the different types of human nature among
: politicians, should be hold about elected officials and dictators. probably a
: difference is that dictators are guaranteed tenure, so they can pursue their
: policy goals more easily, as you said. it's probably true. but on the other
: hand dictators are not immune from pressures eithe
| u*r
发帖数: 9 | 11 i don't understand why a rational dictator must be policy-oriented rather than
office-oriented. if we're talking about narrow rationality, it's just about
personal gains, and in that case boty types are predatory, and the welfare of
the society is not in their agenda. They consider the welfare of the society
only to keep them in office, so that they can continue to be predatory. If
we're talking about broad rationality or enlightedn self interest, boty types
could be policy or social welfare ori
【在 k***g 的大作中提到】
: 1. hehe, just as I said in the last post. If a dictator is rational, he must
: be policy-oriented, which means he will carry out good policies in order to
: make him and his people weathier and happier. But if a politician is rational
: he must be office-oriented, which means he will try to win election and re-
: election first.
: Since we assume that people are rational, it seems dictators have a higher
: possibility to pursue good policies. (This assumption may be problematic, as
: I discussed in the last p
| v******a
发帖数: 45075 | 12 no empirical evidence support this yet
I posted twice on CN, quote some economist, no one paid attention to it though
heihei
【在 k***g 的大作中提到】
: 呵呵，大家怎么看啊？这是一个古老的话题了，两者有correlation,但是causality的方
: 向是从民主到经济的呢？还是从经济到民主？还是两者是相互促进的？如果是最后一种可
: 能，那是不是说被实证理论家骂了一个世纪的辩证主义又回来了？
| k***g
发帖数: 7244 | 13 Since his tenure is guranteed, a rational dictator does not need to pay as
much attention to election as politicians do. So he is not office-oriented. It
is true that his position is not always safe. But the cost to overthrow a
dictator is much more expensive than election normally. So a dictator is less
office-oriented.
A myopia dictator may just exploit his country and people and become a
predator. But if he is long-sighted and rational, he should know the best way
to maximize his gains is to
【在 u*r 的大作中提到】
: i don't understand why a rational dictator must be policy-oriented rather than
: office-oriented. if we're talking about narrow rationality, it's just about
: personal gains, and in that case boty types are predatory, and the welfare of
: the society is not in their agenda. They consider the welfare of the society
: only to keep them in office, so that they can continue to be predatory. If
: we're talking about broad rationality or enlightedn self interest, boty types
: could be policy or social welfare ori
| u*r
发帖数: 9 | 14 but so is an elected official. see levi's "of rule and revenue".
It
less
way
about
society
higher
problematic,
there
it.
stable.
【在 k***g 的大作中提到】
: Since his tenure is guranteed, a rational dictator does not need to pay as
: much attention to election as politicians do. So he is not office-oriented. It
: is true that his position is not always safe. But the cost to overthrow a
: dictator is much more expensive than election normally. So a dictator is less
: office-oriented.
: A myopia dictator may just exploit his country and people and become a
: predator. But if he is long-sighted and rational, he should know the best way
: to maximize his gains is to
|
|
