Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352 
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Apr 22, 2019 22:21:05 GMT
As global superpower, the United States leads the world in many categories. From its unmatched wealth, to its world-class entertainment industry, to the technological hub of Silicon Valley, America reigns. One area that it's excelled in for much of its history, however, is free market capitalism. Not only is that system America's socioeconomic bedrock, but it's also central to the nation's very culture and identity to an extent not found in other, mainly economically capitalistic nations.
If the US weren't the premier capitalist power of the world, then who could take the title instead?
What other nations had the potential to replicate, even surpass the OTL United States for sheer neoliberalism? How could such a society cultivate a lifelong economy and culture based upon laissez-fairism, entrepreneurial innovation, and passion for making money--becoming a global player, perhaps even a global superpower, that reigns to this day?
Thank you in advance, Zyobot
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Apr 23, 2019 12:14:15 GMT
As global superpower, the United States leads the world in many categories. From its unmatched wealth, to its world-class entertainment industry, to the technological hub of Silicon Valley, America reigns. One area that it's excelled in for much of its history, however, is free market capitalism. Not only is that system America's socioeconomic bedrock, but it's also central to the nation's very culture and identity to an extent not found in other, mainly economically capitalistic nations.
If the US weren't the premier capitalist power of the world, then who could take the title instead?
What other nations had the potential to replicate, even surpass the OTL United States for sheer neoliberalism? How could such a society cultivate a lifelong economy and culture based upon laissez-fairism, entrepreneurial innovation, and passion for making money--becoming a global player, perhaps even a global superpower, that reigns to this day?
Thank you in advance, Zyobot
Zyobot
Shouldn't this be in the post-1900 section if your talking about up to the present day? Also prior to ~1945 the US was highly protectionist and had a lot of government involvement in developing its economy. Which is the case of every economic great power both pre and post indistrialisation that I'm aware of. Britain is the only other power that tried laissez faire policies, free trade etc and that wasn't until it was easily the world's greatest economy and could be said to be a major factor in our relative decline since then. Possibly also in the relative decline of the US since ~1980?
Steve
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Apr 23, 2019 12:29:51 GMT
As global superpower, the United States leads the world in many categories. From its unmatched wealth, to its world-class entertainment industry, to the technological hub of Silicon Valley, America reigns. One area that it's excelled in for much of its history, however, is free market capitalism. Not only is that system America's socioeconomic bedrock, but it's also central to the nation's very culture and identity to an extent not found in other, mainly economically capitalistic nations.
If the US weren't the premier capitalist power of the world, then who could take the title instead?
What other nations had the potential to replicate, even surpass the OTL United States for sheer neoliberalism? How could such a society cultivate a lifelong economy and culture based upon laissez-fairism, entrepreneurial innovation, and passion for making money--becoming a global player, perhaps even a global superpower, that reigns to this day?
Thank you in advance, Zyobot
Zyobot
Shouldn't this be in the post-1900 section if your talking about up to the present day? Also prior to ~1945 the US was highly protectionist and had a lot of government involvement in developing its economy. Which is the case of every economic great power both pre and post indistrialisation that I'm aware of. Britain is the only other power that tried laissez faire policies, free trade etc and that wasn't until it was easily the world's greatest economy and could be said to be a major factor in our relative decline since then. Possibly also in the relative decline of the US since ~1980?
Steve
Thank you for making those points. However, I thought this thread would've best gone in 'Before 1900' due to how long it takes for nation-states to grow and develop. And I presume that'd also include ultra-capitalistic ones, even if they don't start out that way and become champions of laissez-faire later in their histories. |
|
raunchel
Commander
Posts: 1,795 
Likes: 1,182
|
Post by raunchel on Apr 24, 2019 13:08:15 GMT
To create such a state, you need one with little in the way of a long legacy of other forms of organisation, meaning other colonial states. With some luck and much earlier independence, you might get it in a country like Brazil as that has sufficient size. Of course, a larger South-American state could also do it, as long as they have good access to coal and later oil.
At the same time, if you're looking at Christianity, you will need a form that is more individualistic to be dominant. Not because of anything like a work ethic or the like, but because you don't want the kind of organisation that something like Catholicism gives. You after all don't want an overly united or homogeneous society.
|
|
spanishspy
Fleet admiral
Posts: 10,366
Likes: 1,587
|
Post by spanishspy on Apr 26, 2019 4:43:48 GMT
Maybe Australia, if it plays its cards right and the US is balkanized?
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Apr 26, 2019 11:43:16 GMT
Maybe Australia, if it plays its cards right and the US is balkanized? Why Australia, do you think? Its OTL version ranks as one the best for economic freedom, sure, but how would it become a chief leader in laissez-faire capitalism? |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Apr 26, 2019 13:54:21 GMT
Maybe Australia, if it plays its cards right and the US is balkanized? Why Australia, do you think? Its OTL version ranks as one the best for economic freedom, sure, but how would it become a chief leader in laissez-faire capitalism?
I suspect at least until very near the present day it would be too underpopulated and developed to risk such an approach as it would need the government investing in a lot of infrastructure and development. Also OTL it like Canada and N Zealand depended heavily on Britain for defence so if totally independent it would need a lot of government investment in defence as well or a friendly great power to provide it. Its noticeably that all the states that achieved independence from colonial powers, including the British dominions quickly imposed tariffs against the rest of the world, including Britain because they felt it was necessary to protect their infant industries.
Laissez-faire capitalism is something that only a really powerful economic state can afford to choose.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Apr 26, 2019 15:21:04 GMT
Why Australia, do you think? Its OTL version ranks as one the best for economic freedom, sure, but how would it become a chief leader in laissez-faire capitalism?
I suspect at least until very near the present day it would be too underpopulated and developed to risk such an approach as it would need the government investing in a lot of infrastructure and development. Also OTL it like Canada and N Zealand depended heavily on Britain for defence so if totally independent it would need a lot of government investment in defence as well or a friendly great power to provide it. Its noticeably that all the states that achieved independence from colonial powers, including the British dominions quickly imposed tariffs against the rest of the world, including Britain because they felt it was necessary to protect their infant industries.
Laissez-faire capitalism is something that only a really powerful economic state can afford to choose.
Alright. Would you say it's likely that the only nations that have implemented something truly resembling laissez-faire on such a sheer scale IOTL would've been Great Britain in her prime and the United States? |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Apr 26, 2019 15:56:07 GMT
I suspect at least until very near the present day it would be too underpopulated and developed to risk such an approach as it would need the government investing in a lot of infrastructure and development. Also OTL it like Canada and N Zealand depended heavily on Britain for defence so if totally independent it would need a lot of government investment in defence as well or a friendly great power to provide it. Its noticeably that all the states that achieved independence from colonial powers, including the British dominions quickly imposed tariffs against the rest of the world, including Britain because they felt it was necessary to protect their infant industries.
Laissez-faire capitalism is something that only a really powerful economic state can afford to choose.
Alright. Would you say it's likely that the only nations that have implemented something truly resembling laissez-faire on such a sheer scale IOTL would've been Great Britain in her prime and the United States?
Hard line laissez faire only Britain from circa 1850-1930 and the US say since 1945. Britain has something of a l-f approach for much of the time since 1979 but apart from the high level of government interference to unbalance the market it no longer has the resources to maintain such a burden.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Apr 26, 2019 18:08:45 GMT
Alright. Would you say it's likely that the only nations that have implemented something truly resembling laissez-faire on such a sheer scale IOTL would've been Great Britain in her prime and the United States?
Hard line laissez faire only Britain from circa 1850-1930 and the US say since 1945. Britain has something of a l-f approach for much of the time since 1979 but apart from the high level of government interference to unbalance the market it no longer has the resources to maintain such a burden.
If I remember correctly, the US once implemented high tariffs in large part to collect much of the government's revenue--even at its economic system's most unhinged in the 19th Century. But going back to the topic at hand, are there any nations that you speculate could've become laissez-faire colossuses in a world that'd (admittedly) be much different from OTL? One suggestion I've seen is a British Empire that somehow survives and maintains its economic prosperity. Another is a China where Hong Xiaoquan doesn't come to power, and a certain dynasty that promotes uber-capitalistic policies takes control of the country. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Apr 27, 2019 10:52:24 GMT
Hard line laissez faire only Britain from circa 1850-1930 and the US say since 1945. Britain has something of a l-f approach for much of the time since 1979 but apart from the high level of government interference to unbalance the market it no longer has the resources to maintain such a burden.
If I remember correctly, the US once implemented high tariffs in large part to collect much of the government's revenue--even at its economic system's most unhinged in the 19th Century. But going back to the topic at hand, are there any nations that you speculate could've become laissez-faire colossuses in a world that'd (admittedly) be much different from OTL? One suggestion I've seen is a British Empire that somehow survives and maintains its economic prosperity. Another is a China where Hong Xiaoquan doesn't come to power, and a certain dynasty that promotes uber-capitalistic policies takes control of the country.
Very true on the high US tariffs as they were I think the primary source of government revenue throughout the 19thC and significant well into the 20th. Plus they were used to restrict imports to 'protect' US industries, most notoriously in the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930 which is often considered a factor in deepening and prolonging the world wide depression.
I think you basically need a major economic power that commits so completely to the liassez faire ideology either because the dominant elite believes in it or because their already the dominant world economic power and think it will be beneficial to them. Possibly if Germany did even better in the late 19thC and early 20th, obviously avoiding WWI and some problems prevent either US or Russia appearing as major rivals. Or a much more successful France than keeps and settles much of N America.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Apr 27, 2019 15:22:30 GMT
I wonder if a British Empire that avoids World War One as well as the Great Depression might be able to retain its mantle of laissez-faire champion over the course of the 20th Century.
America, of course, would still likely rival the Brits in this arena regardless.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,238
|
Post by stevep on Apr 27, 2019 15:57:56 GMT
I wonder if a British Empire that avoids World War One as well as the Great Depression might be able to retain its mantle of laissez-faire champion over the course of the 20th Century. America, of course, would still likely rival the Brits in this arena regardless.
The problem with that is that Britain was a declining power in relative terms, partly because other powers were catching up with industrialisation and a number of those had greater resources. Partly also because in my opinion anyway laissez faire is a disastrous approach in a protectionist and interventionist world. Britain lost a lot in terms of both economic development and also social strength as it dropped further behind its main rivals such as Germany and the US especially.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Apr 27, 2019 16:12:10 GMT
I wonder if a British Empire that avoids World War One as well as the Great Depression might be able to retain its mantle of laissez-faire champion over the course of the 20th Century. America, of course, would still likely rival the Brits in this arena regardless.
The problem with that is that Britain was a declining power in relative terms, partly because other powers were catching up with industrialisation and a number of those had greater resources. Partly also because in my opinion anyway laissez faire is a disastrous approach in a protectionist and interventionist world. Britain lost a lot in terms of both economic development and also social strength as it dropped further behind its main rivals such as Germany and the US especially.
Hmm. I'd suggest a Russia that somehow gets its shit together before World War One enters the picture, but its absolute monarchism would make free market capitalism exceedingly difficult to pull off at the beginning of the 20th Century.
I already had that 1721 POD where Peter the Great democratizes the Empire, but people pointed out that there were problems with making it happen. It's probably something of a cheap shot, but I wonder if at least liberalization might happen if the Tsar were to have a mind-wracking nightmare that makes him do a one-eighty.
|
|
