Paul Goble
Staunton,
August 5 – In the course of his current debate with economist Andrey
Illarionov, social commentator Igor Klyamkin makes an important point that is
all too often overlooked in Russia and elsewhere: authoritarian modernization
is an increasingly problematic notion in the post-industrial world (kasparov.ru/material.php?id=5B599B42DCC6E).
Many countries in the 20th
century sought to use authoritarian methods in order to catch up with the
industrial development of the most advanced states, but now in the
post-industrial era, such methods don’t work nearly as well. To put it bluntly,
dictators can build (or rebuild) factories but they can’t achieve breakthroughs
in information technology by the same methods.
And what this means in turn is that
those countries which try to rely on authoritarian methods alone are likely
doomed to fall even further behind those which have more open systems and allow
for greater creativity – perhaps one of the reasons that authoritarians in many
countries confuse re-industrialization with development.
The former is easier for them to
talk about and of course control, but it is of declining importance in terms of
the breakthroughs that are required to make genuine development possible. The authoritarians can build models of Silicon
Valley as Moscow has tried to do; but their creations won’t be able to create what
those in other democratic countries do.
Instead, they are likely to repeat
the inherently self-contradictory outcome that was captured brilliantly in an
old Soviet anecdote about scientists supposedly
marching through Red Square on May Day with a sign reading “the Soviet microchip,
the largest microchip in the world.”
No comments:
Post a Comment