There for a moment I thought this article was commenting on current trending social issues in the US, But then again we don't have all these issues that Malaysia has things like, " official accountability. Economic growth on its own is not enough to satiate the desires of a rising middle class that is tired of being patronized by the powers-that-be. These citizens are insisting on participation, transparency, and an end to corruption." Right? Did I word that sentence right ?

I agree that there is an optimistic move toward genuine democracy in Asia, and applaud the people of Asia for demanding not just economic welfare but also a political voice. However, this in itself doesn't negate the concept of Asian Values, especially as it applies to the economic sphere.

One of the biggest problems with our "Washington Consensus" free-trade agenda is that our biggest allies, old and new democracies, still continue to practice a non-Anglo-Saxon form of government-guided, export-promotion economy. Moreover, the Asian public show no signs of abandoning that method when clearly it's produced the most remarkable economic growth in the past 50 years from Japan now to Vietnam. As we focus all of our attention at China's so-called unfair non-market economy, we need to remember that EVERY Asian nation is following that model still perfected by Japan, our oldest "democratic ally" in the region.

So if those "Asian Values" include dismissing "Anglo-Saxon"free-market capitalism as alien assaults on local mores," then I'm inclined to argue that Asian Values hasn't just survived, but has spread faster around the developing world -- Brazil, S. Africa, India, Mexico -- than any form of Anglo-Saxon free-market capitalism.

So yes, Asian Values does seem to be in retreat in terms of its political connotations. But certainly "Washington Consensus" has long been in retreat economically since the late 1990s.

The leadership of Malaysia is doing what autocrats in the Middle East have been slinging for decades. Finding cultural excuses that somehow democracy and government accountable to its people are somehow not "in the cards".

"Asian Values" is as much BS as the claim that democracy is somehow against Islam. Democracy is about giving value to a country's populace. As messy as it gets, it is a concept that is a deeply universal value. If you value human lives, you support democracy.

JYS390, my suggestion is you do a little homework as to the current state of the economies for Japan and the "Asian Tigers". From 1997 onward, much of that rapid growth stopped dead in its tracks. Most of it caused by too much centralized economic planning and political systems which were too ossified to act effectively. Many nations recovered by making economic and political changes to their usual way of operating.

Japan's economy still hasn't recovered from the end of the "bubble" in the early 1990's.

China's growth is more of a function of starting from such an abominably low point and getting to something resembling normal. Given the opacity of its economic/political situation, much of its stats have to be taken with a grain of salt.

Korea's economy recovered from the currency crisis of the late 90's by abandoning the old Japan model and breaking up its mega-conglomerates. Taking the radical step of de-centralizing the economy. Much of the growth came after the country reformed its political system to something much more democratic.

Taiwan owes much of its economic stability to democratic reform and having an economy which is fairly non-oligarchic (mostly made of small companies).

I am perplexed that FP is still talking about "Asian values" when the concept itself, along with any boasting about "the East Asian miracle", has been on the wane in Asia for years - certainly since the financial crisis of 1997-98 but even before that with the popular political upheavals in the Philippines, Korea, Taiwan and China in the 1980s. What's happening today in Malaysia, Thailand, Myanmar and even Singapore is part of a wave that started lo those many years ago. Korea and Taiwan, in particular, have shown how entrenched authoritarian governments have allowed or been forced to allow reforms that eventually led to once reviled opposition figures taking power. But then, as in Taiwan's case, it got better - and the once-authoritarian party reformed and restructured and returned to office, voted back in by the people. In China today, the hot topic is political development and reform. Who's still talking about "Asian values"? Just some American Asia watchers in DC, it would seem.

What you must understand from this lesson is that every nation, including the Asian will pass through it. Globalization that we live in now has many negative effects, one of the most important being the loss of national identity and values??. Each country should make such a plan they maintain the national values ??are not lost it, but to achieve a combination of these values ??and the global values. Just so the nation will be able to identity and will notice among other global nations. tinctura 30%

JYS390, my suggestion is you do a little homework as to the current state of the economies for Japan and the "Asian Tigers". From 1997 onward, much of that rapid growth stopped dead in its tracks. Most of it caused by too much centralized economic planning and political systems which were too ossified to act effectively porno. Many nations recovered by making economic and political changes to their usual way of operating.

Japan's economy still hasn't recovered from the end of the "bubble" in the early 1990's.

I have to disagree with the notion that the Asian Financial Crisis belied the fundamental weakness of the statist model. I and many others -- James Fallows, Ha-Joon Chang, etc. -- would argue that Japan's economic troubles were partially the result of the reforms that Washington pressured them.

The other problems with the Asian economies related to the real estate bubbles are partially related to issues of government policies and on issues of currency convertability. There are some arguments here against a statist model here (overinvestment in infrastructure), but still do not disprove the overwhelming evidence that most of the other government-supported industries were equally weak.

My final point is that I'd argue that it wasn't only East Asia that followed a state-driven model of capitalism. Germany did and continues to follow a policy where government targets certain industries and companies for development. Moreover, as Austria-UK economist Karl Polyani argues, the US followed this model in the 19th century as well. Think about it. Anytime governments (states, federal, local) gives tax breaks to attract companies -- especially targeting high-tech companies -- that is an example of state-guided capitalism at work.

The current Chicago-school dominated Washington Consensus ideals simply do not hold water to empirical evidence. Even after the Asian Financial Crisis, East Asian countries like Korea and Thailand and Malaysia did not suddenly embrace Anglo-Saxon free-market capitalism, but retrenched in their Friedrich List-ian models with some valid adjustments preventing crony capitalism. Your argument that they all saw the error of their ways and embraced the Chicago-school Friedman capitalism just isn't true.

Statist capitalism may be more susceptible to crony capitalism, but that doesn't by itself negate the model. With political democracy, one can maintain statist capitalism while using the power of free press and independent courts to check corruption.

PS: Why would MCMC copy/paste Spood's original comment? If you felt so strongly to post, why not contribute a couple of original ideas?

The Asian public show no signs of abandoning that method when clearly it's produced the most remarkable economic growth in the past 50 years from Japan now to Vietnam. As we focus all of our attention at China's so-called unfair bet365 non-market economy, we need to remember that every Asian nation is following that model still perfected by Japan, our oldest "democratic ally" in the region.

Korea and Taiwan, in particular, have shown how entrenched authoritarian governments have allowed or been forced to allow reforms that eventually led to once reviled opposition figures taking power. But then, as in Taiwan's case, it got better - and the once-authoritarian party reformed and restructured and returned bwin to office, voted back in by the people. In China today, the hot topic is political development and reform. Who's still talking about "Asian values"? Just some American Asia watchers in DC, it would seem.One of the biggest problems with our "Washington Consensus" free-trade agenda is that our biggest allies, old and new democracies, still continue to practice a non-Anglo-Saxon form of government-guided, export-promotion economy. Moreover, the Asian public show bwin bonus no signs of abandoning that method when clearly it's produced the most remarkable economic growth in the past 50 years from Japan now to Vietnam. As we focus all of our attention at China's so-called unfair non-market economy, we need to remember that EVERY Asian nation is following that model still perfected by Japan, our oldest "democratic ally" in the region.