My mind goes to the cultural acceptability of bribes comparatively between the US / West and much of the rest of the world. I can't help but wonder if things like that and the viewing nepotism as wrong don't partially explain the west's economic success compared to much of the rest of the world. By no means the only factors, nor even saying major factors, but I'd think they are in the mix.
My mind goes to the cultural acceptability of bribes comparatively between the US / West and much of the rest of the world. I can't help but wonder if things like that and the viewing nepotism as wrong don't partially explain the west's economic success compared to much of the rest of the world. By no means the only factors, nor even saying major factors, but I'd think they are in the mix.
Having a relatively incorrupt system helps. One of the things people forget, however, is that we were pretty corrupt during most of the 19th century. Especially before the Civil Service Reform.
Many administrative posts in the federal government were part of the spoils system (political appointment). Same with a lot of local offices.
Then there were things like Credit Mobilier.
Open bribes were less socially acceptable.. but they still occurred and they occurred in other less visible forms.
I would argue that it wasn't freedom from corruption that accounts for the success. It was largely a combination of culture and less-autocratic forms of government.
I think you're right. Look at a lot of the kids of musicians, actors, artists, et al, who have all the doors open to them and yet don't have the fraction of the talent the parent has.
My mind goes to the cultural acceptability of bribes comparatively between the US / West and much of the rest of the world. I can't help but wonder if things like that and the viewing nepotism as wrong don't partially explain the west's economic success compared to much of the rest of the world. By no means the only factors, nor even saying major factors, but I'd think they are in the mix.
Having a relatively incorrupt system helps. One of the things people forget, however, is that we were pretty corrupt during most of the 19th century. Especially before the Civil Service Reform.
Many administrative posts in the federal government were part of the spoils system (political appointment). Same with a lot of local offices.
Then there were things like Credit Mobilier.
Open bribes were less socially acceptable.. but they still occurred and they occurred in other less visible forms.
I would argue that it wasn't freedom from corruption that accounts for the success. It was largely a combination of culture and less-autocratic forms of government.
I think you're right. Look at a lot of the kids of musicians, actors, artists, et al, who have all the doors open to them and yet don't have the fraction of the talent the parent has.