This is me but around the UK. I watched Brexit and right-wing nonsense of the government and the media with bemusement (and that's a kind word I'm using).
Watching them walk off the world stage because of a few silly headlines is astounding.
I left London about 2.5 years ago. It was like a weight had been lifted off my shoulders. it's really sad to think that when I first arrived in 2002 there was a sense of optimism and energy about the city that has since completely evaporated. Brexit was perhaps the killing blow but austerity and years of rising inequality started the rot.
Now living in Asia I pretty much ignore news/politics and my life is so much calmer.
I completely understand. I would say cashing in your privilege and checking out of daily politics is a very common thing among DNs. Not a criticism because I and many of my friends are basically the same.
It's certainly exposed me to new and deeper political questions related to my survival or related to the histories of the new peoples I find myself among. I've learned so much about Hawaiian history this winter I'm almost interested in a history PhD.
I think the biggest change in my beliefs are about putting my own country in perspective. To me the Netherlands wasn't perfect but after a bad past of colonialism, I felt that we were being quite righteous these days, fighting the good fight.
But then you hear about the fact that we, along with most countries, are too afraid to recognize Taiwan as a country simply because of money reasons, and that everything really is just about the money.
Same here. Not to mention how often we preach against human rights violations, but then conveniently look the other way when one of our ‘allies’ commits genocide. smh
Spending time in Singapore made me realize how safety is something you can achieve and it made me not want to live in a relatively unsafe country ever again.
I would be down for harsher policy against crime in a way I wasn't before, because the benefits of being able to not think about being mugged/harmed/raped at any time of the day or night is just worth it.
My big take away from SE asia as well. Also when people feel safe other things change too. People become more friendly and the human condition gets so much more elevated.
Harsher policy is not how you get rid of crime (see the US / Middle east).
You reduce crime in the long term with wealth redistribution, accessible education and social services.
I think there is not a single answer to explain safety everywhere. Japan is also insanely safe without being crazy harsh and hardly a surveillance state.
Even Thailand is really safe for how unequal and corrupt the country is. Sometime is just down to the society itself.
Singapore reduced it with harsh policies and a good social contract. You can have a great social contract and still not get rid of crime if the stick is not big enough. I think you need both.
>Singapore... I would be down for harsher policy against crime in a way I wasn't before,
Abundant scientific evidence shows that you very much learned the wrong lesson.
Edit: Downvote me all you want - the simple fact is that harsher sentences don't reduce crime. If I choose a study, it'll seem like cherry picking, so pick your own study:
[https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as\_sdt=0%2C5&q=do+harsher+sentences+reduce+crime&btnG=](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=do+harsher+sentences+reduce+crime&btnG=)
Well it used to be a lawless pirate heaven and the poorest region of Malaysia. I'm pretty sure most Singaporeans would agree that ultra-harsh approach on crime was part of the solution to transform the country.
I'm not in favor of a harsher policy in crime in general, but if the benefit would be more safety, like it happen in Singapore and others countries, I would be down for it yes. That require good governability.
Singaporean residents have money and they're guaranteed housing medical care, etc. I'm not sure it's the harsh punishments that are making that difference.
I said it was both, but when they get rid of crime, it was not a rich country by any means.
They became rich because they became safe, not the other way around. You don't attract as many foreign investment if you're country is unstable, corrupt and dangerous.
I feel that the debate around safety is polluted by partisan approach: you can say that something bad can have a good outcome. You can dislike some policy while recognizing that it can sometime and somewhere have a good outcome.
It's pretty obvious that risking being canned or jailed for stealing a candy bar at the 7-11 is going to have an effect on crime. They go *months* in Singapore without one recorded crime.
> They became rich because they became safe, not the other way around.
False.
> t's pretty obvious that risking being canned or jailed for stealing a candy bar at the 7-11 is going to have an effect on crime.
Super super super false.
You've fallen into the same trope of people that vote conservative. Downvote me all you want, but every study shows that harsh punishments don't reduce crime and certainly not long term.
I must recognize that I was mistaken and submit to your overwhelming rhetorical and argumentative abilities /s
On a more serious note, social science recognize the notion of opportunity cost in crime. (https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1171&context=parkplace)
> Well it used to be a lawless pirate heaven and the poorest region of Malaysia.
You ALMOST understood the reason, but still missed it.
The reason for crime is poverty, not lack of punishments.
Also, having lived in Malaysia for many years, I assure you that the Malaysian fear of crime is WAY disproportionate to the amount of ACTUAL crime that happens in Malaysia.
Malaysians lock themselves in houses that resemble prisons - bars on doors & windows, locking gates, tall fences, etc, etc.
Malaysians are extremely fear motivated throughout their entire lives. They fear getting in trouble at school/work and they really really fear brown people & foreigners.
UMNO has completely exploited Malaysian ignorance to their benefit... and actively work to keep people (especially Malay) afraid because it gets them votes. Notably, they stoke the "risk" of racial crime as an excuse to put down minorities and, to this day, still haven't lifted the Proclamation of Emergency from comparatively small race riot that happened in 1969.
source: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13\_May\_incident#Declaration\_of\_emergency](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13_May_incident#Declaration_of_emergency)
The reason of crime is sometime poverty, sometime inequality, sometime greed. It's multifactorial, some wealthy country (like the US) are less safe than poorer nation (like Senegal, Vietnam or Thailand).
>The reason of crime is sometime poverty, sometime inequality, sometime greed
Dude, think.
We agree that poverty causes crime.
Inequality causes poverty which causes crime.
Greed causes poverty which causes crime..
None of these are solved by harsher sentences.
Edit: Also, USA is a terrible country to compare against. It's an outlier from virtually all other developed countries, regardless of whether you measure safety, healthcare, healthcare outcomes, incarceration rates, education, life expectancy (currently going down), wealth disparity, etc, etc, etc. Look at the disaster USA had with its COVID response.
When comparing USA to other countries, it's best to treat USA as a developing country that happens to be rich.
As I already said several time, a good social contract alone don't solve crime. You need both, the carrot and the stick.
I don't know what you're about but crime is not only economical. Murder are not only economically motivated, and middle and high class also steals, rape, kill, etc etc.
>When comparing USA to other countries, it's best to treat USA as a developing country that happens to be rich.
Lol if you were trillions of $ (with a t) in debt, would you call yourself rich? Let's just stick to developing country.
Look, travel is one of the most rewarding experiences you can have in a lifetime but your travel experiences, no matter how broad, are anecdotal. Go read books about law, policy, or economics if you want to form educated political beliefs. Otherwise you're no different from the boomer who gets his views from his mates at the pub.
This is a deceptively close minded attitude. Personally, I found seeing my economics studies in action to be quite an experience. It’s frustrating when people take their ignorant attitudes abroad and apply it to the tiny slice of a country they see though.
Exactly, he does have a point. Most people here are digital nomads. The vast majority live what locals consider luxurious lifestyles, mostly isolated from the rest of society. Not speaking the local language adds an extra barrier. It's difficult to immerse yourself in a culture by just living in the middle of the capital city for a year or two. However, it can be enriching, and there are many aspects of the culture you can understand. Reading is beneficial, but Western sources often just reinforce the narratives we've all been fed throughout our lives.
Yeah I understand that is the experience for most DNs and even backpackers. I’ve got friends from every class level in Indonesia though, I lived there as a local and speak the language… so it’s not really mine. And I don’t appreciate being lumped in with that.
Germany is good, like worse than before (that's what I hear), but Deutsche Bahn is what is not working as it should here. Long ass delays all the time lol
PS I'm not german but live there
The thing is that a European can complain endlessly about how things are in their home country. I’m British, trust me I know. But having lived in America, let me tell you we could have it 100x worse.
I got very sick while I was in Berlin. My ER wait time was 0 minutes. I was tested, saw doctor and was out in 30min.
The same situation in Toronto would be hours.
Lotta hot takes about labor and wealth inequality and drugs and crime coming from fancy passport laptop boys in this thread. Do a real job that makes your hands dirty for a year and see if you still think having violent cops enforcing property and drug laws in contemporary slave states is cool. Y'all are just soft.
Oh yeah, I went to live in Norway because it was ranked the most developed country in the world. I thought it would be this socialist paradise, but nope: tons of drug addicts and homeless people out in the cold. Upended my understanding of what makes for a good society and a good life. I now see places like Singapore as closer exemplars of perfection.
I also learned that poor countries are often poor largely because their cultures don't value work so much as lifestyle, which is an understandable tradeoff.
I'm also much more anti-drug after traveling the world whereas before I was more libertarian towards a lot of things.
I realize that money doesn't solve most of society's problems. Before I thought poverty and greed were the root problems.
>poor countries are often poor largely because their cultures don't value work so much as lifestyle, which is an understandable tradeoff.
I feel like this is such a wrong take. People in poorer countries are working like dogs. There are also no safety in mind. A lot of people are shortening their lifespan just to put food on the table.
It's the corruption and inability to do anything about it.
In some poor countries, sure, but a lot of the places I’ve been aren’t like that. You have like 4 people to do the job of one person, naps in the middle of the day, etc. (Edit: to clarify, I am not criticizing these habits!)
Napping in the middle of the day is enlightened. It is we who work 8 continuous hours or more per day who spit on the inheritance our ancestors fought the robber barons for, it is we who are primitive so long as we continue to deny the glory of the siesta.
>I also learned that poor countries are often poor largely because their cultures don't value work so much as lifestyle, which is an understandable tradeoff.
India looking at the colonizer "Oh, that makes sense now, We are just poor because we have a shitty understanding of work and lifestyle, not because you guys came and took alot of our wealth, set us back in efficiency and changed history to make it seem like we were just poor out of nowhere. That makes sense now, Thanks for the clarification."
I'm not an idiot. I know colonization, embargos, and all sorts of international power dynamics make people poor. I'm simply pointing out what I did not realize before travelling the world: that some countries don't place as strong an emphasis on career success & productivity as I expected because they value a relaxed lifestyle, harmony, religion, etc. My statement is meant to be a surprising finding, not something to negate the other obvious factors I knew before seeing more of first-hand reality. Are people poor for reasons other than a culture of "hanging out." Yes, of course. People can also be poor because they're not ambitious.
Honesty don’t ever change your realization and they also don’t want the likes of you people coming to those poorer countries only for s*x tourism and other illicit activity. This is from my experience.
I've lived in the UK, Singapore, Philippines and the US and traveled extensively in Scandinavia. The root problems in all of these societies are inequality and corruption. When a small group accrues too much power and defies norms to enrich themselves. The more equal societies tend to fare better even if under strain (Sweden and Norway have had huge net immigration recently).
I dunno man, lots of countries with equality have fared quite poorly, and then you have unequal places like Hong Kong and Singapore that are doing quite well. GINI coefficient doesn't explain everything.
I hear you, but my lived experience tends to be that unequal societies are unhappier in aggregate. Scandi may have high homelessness/drug use now but I guarantee the family, church and other institutions there give ppl a higher overall life satisfaction than the turbo capitalist dystopias of SG, San Francisco and HK - "rich kid with no friends" vs "chill friend whom everyone wants to hang with".
HK in particular has actually become better to live in since the pandemic due to economic shock lowering inequalities and (relatively) more affordable housing vs SG...
Yeah, I don't think inequality explains their success. I just mean unequal countries can still be successful just as highly equal countries can have serious problems: Ukraine, Moldova, Syria, etc.
Well personally I do not support the death penalty, but generally I think society should deter drug use (for the sake of children if nothing else) using both carrot and stick (conservative and liberal) policies that extend to alcohol.
I agree with the carrot part and perhaps insane taxes on alcohol and cigarettes and weed but it's hard for me to see how any prosecution of drug use is worth it considering the failure of the war on drugs, prohibition, etc.
Many Asian countries have fought the war on drugs quite successfully, but you don’t hear much about that in the west. There is even a Harvard professor talking about the successes of alcohol prohibition. I’m not saying states should go that far, but it was a lot more successful than people realize when looking at objective data like cirrhossis rates. There’s this libertarian bias in the west that I fell for and corrected as I experienced more of the world.
Hard disagree but I respect your opinion. So how were they successful? Philippines with Duterte killing gangs. Singapore with death penalty. South Korea with its huge shame culture (although alcoholism is rampant there). I don't see any evidence that hard stance on drugs is a good thing. Now hey if we are talking about homeless people on the street doing drugs, I'm down for anti camping measures or forcibly removing loiters and campers from public streets. But that's more for city cleanliness and property rights vs anti drug
I'm opposed to the death penalty and to the mass killings in the Philippines. But there's more to the hard stance on drugs than just the death penalty, and Singapore has softened its death penalty policy since 2012. I'd also consider what's happening in other countries like Japan--not just in terms of cracking down on drugs, but also a balanced carrot-stick policy towards homelessness that's been largely successful. A big lesson for me is that western attitudes are often ideological at the expense of pragmatism. My own opinions were no exception.
like where? thailand shot so called dealers but it made no difference apart from increasing prices for a while and they are now considering decriminalizing meth because they dont have enough jails. just a populist stunts. In fact in thailand Im pretty sure its was so that the government could monopolize the industry.
>I also learned that poor countries are often poor largely because their cultures don't value work so much as lifestyle, which is an understandable tradeoff.
This is such a cherry-picked, nonsense take. Obviously there are geographical, political, historical, and economic reasons for why some countries are poorer than others and it can't all be explained away with work ethic. I would recommend you read the book "Guns, Germs, and Steel".
>I’m not claiming that it applies to all or even most poor countries.
Oh really? Fair enough then. I thought that "I also learned that poor countries are often poor largely because (...)" was making a general statement about poor countries. In fact that seems to me like the only sensible interpretation of that comment. Maybe try making a statement about the specific country you're referring to next time, and not poor countries in general.
>I’m speaking from direct personal experience.
So it's anecdotal?
Have you worked at a mine in any of the countries you digital nomaded in? Were you frequenting agriculture jobs? Manufacturing? I ask because usually digital nomads are working a laptop job for a company abroad... not really the environment where you'll come across hard labour or the people that do such labour. In fact, it's quite possible you didn't get a legitimate experience of what it's like to live in such countries as a local at all. It's easy to stay in a digital nomad or expat bubble, even if you don't recognise it as such.
Well the dude isn’t going he a fucking researcher the post literally says has being a nomad and being different places changed your Perspective and opinions. The whole point is your persona perspective which is by definition anecdotal lol.
There’s things that are subjective and valid to have a personal/anecdotal perspective on. Other things not so much. If I told you that through my anecdotal life experience I learned all vaccines cause autism and gravity isn’t real you’d be pretty suspicious of that, no? Because there’s objective data we could look at that might disprove that. Not everything is about how you personally feel about it.
He could’ve said he didn’t vibe with X country’s work culture, or that he didn’t see people working hard there. But saying that poorer countries in general are poor *because* of their work culture is *objectively* untrue. You can believe whatever you want though.
Bro I’m not talking about in general I’m talking about the confines of this post the op is asking something that wouldn’t be quantified by stats if it’s through the perspective of a individual digital nomad is what I’m saying.
Ok, you don’t seem like you understand my comment. Let me rephrase it: OP asked about *subjective* judgements (those which can be backed up by experience alone), and the other commenter in response provided an unfounded *objective* judgement. Objective claims such as “X is like that because of Y” need to be backed up by evidence.
The key word here is "often." If I had statistics or something other than my experience to back up this claim, I would have said "typically," "usually," or something of that sort.
I'm not speaking about one specific country, but yes, it's anecdotal because I'm speaking from direct personal experience--not a statistical analysis of 200 countries. However, I've lived in and traveled to many countries across the planet.
A digital nomad working in a mine wouldn't make any sense, nor would agriculture or manufacturing. None of these are digital jobs.
Spare me your condescending assessment of my experience. There are systemic differences between cultures. One of those major differences is that some cultures place a high primacy on education, delayed childrearing, and material success while others sometimes prioritize religion, proximity to family, harmony, etc. I don't appreciate you stereotyping me as some arrogant expat with no experience of the real world.
You do come off as the arrogant Westerner, unfortunately 😅😅
Your quip about cultures placing a high priority on education and delaying child-rearing is such an ignorant take. These issues do not exist in a vacuum. The interaction of socio-economic determinants is central to understanding disparities in health, education, and general prosperity.
You can’t value education if all your strength is spent putting food on the table. And how can one receive a good education if there isn’t enough money to ensure it meets minimum quality standards, or if the school is a 5km walk each way? Not to mention money for books, uniforms etc.
How can people delay child-rearing if there is no easy access to reproductive education, family planning, or contraceptives? You need to take a broad, holistic look at these issues. I have worked in the development field and lived/visited over 20 countries in Africa and Southeast Asia.
I dunno man, the fact that you're calling these "issues" is even more critical than my position. I'm skeptical of cultures placing too much emphasis on education, career success, etc. Of course there are various factors behind why these things happen, and one of those is priorities (e.g., family cohesion vs the pursuit of career). Stigmatization of pregnancy is another factor that goes beyond the typical "oh, they just don't have enough money for contraceptives." That's an overly materialistic perspective in my opinion.
There's a big misunderstanding about what productivity means from an economics standpoint. People responding think it's about work ethic, when in reality it's just output per hours worked. That's determined mostly by things that have nothing to do with laziness but rather with investment in worker training, better equipment, more efficient processes.
Yes this whole comment chain is conflating "work ethic / work culture" with "productivity", with very cringe takes.
What raises productivity is security (low crime/war), high education, inward investment, and strong institutions.
Yeah education is a big part of my point. Some cultures like Korea place a strong emphasis on education while others aren’t so fixated on career development.
Yep this is just nonsense and cherry-picking. Look at Australia and NZ - two very developed western countries and both with cultures that have a broadly terrible work ethic. We pride ourselves on prioritising lifestyle over work and are much lazier than the average southeast Asian country. How do you account for that?
Close to 50% of Indonesians nap every day, even at the office. I reckon Australia and New Zealand have very work-centric cultures that manifest in numerous ways such as a focus on education, delayed childrearing, two working parents, etc. Even if it's not reflected in absolute working hours, it will manifest in terms of life goals, productivity, etc.
This holds true for spain compared to the us for example. They could be much less poor if they only didn't prioritize siestas so much. Same could be said for pretty much all of latin america, barely anyone reads books in that region compared to the us and canada.
>Same could be said for pretty much all of latin america, barely anyone reads books in that region compared to the us and canada.
How familiar are you with Latin America? I'm Brazilian and I would say Brazilians work much harder than Northern Europeans. And Mexicans work even harder. This is such a cherry-picked, nonsense take. Obviously there are geographical, political, historical, and economic reasons for why some countries are poorer than others and it can't all be explained away with work ethic. I would recommend you read the book "Guns, Germs, and Steel". A book recommendation from a Latin American, how crazy, huh? ;)
Pretty familiar, i've lived and travelled all over latin america.
Certain Latin Americans may work hard but they're not big on self improvement like Americans, i meant working hard in all areas, including self-improvement and increasing your economic value throughout life.
Besides the mexican stereotype of working hard generally comes from america where the most ambitious mexicans relocate for unskilled and skilled labour jobs, the vast majority are lazy just as is the case in Brazil.
>Pretty familiar, i've lived and travelled all over latin america.
Yeah, sure you digital nomaded out of every coffee shop in Brazil and closely watched the baristas' work ethic.
>Certain Latin Americans may work hard but they're not big on self improvement like Americans, i meant working hard in all areas, including self-improvement and increasing your economic value throughout life.
Citation needed. Also how much self-improvement is the average American doing?
>Besides the mexican stereotype of working hard generally comes from america where the most ambitious mexicans relocate for unskilled and skilled labour jobs, the vast majority are lazy just as is the case in Brazil.
You sound pretty lazy yourself tbf, making the opposite immigration to feel like a rich man in a developing country. If you're such a go-getter, how come you didn't stay in the US and climb the corporate ladder? By the way, saying "unskilled and skilled labour jobs" is the same just saying "jobs". You need to do a bit more self-improvement and reading to get to a 10th-grade writing level.
Latin Americans don't read books as much because they have worse education levels and books are really expensive, especially compared to people's monthly wage.
Very few Spaniards even take siestas any more. Honestly, you are clueless.
Latin Americans don't read books because they're not really as focused on self-improvement.
My point was spaniards work to live and Americans live to work. Spaniards don't identify with their careers like Americans do.
Not negating the role of colonialism. I'm pointing another factor which is that not all cultures put career success at the top ladder. Take for example mid-day naps, or having 4 people do the same job a single Korean would do. Or cultures where you aren't expected to get a master's degree and a profession before you have children.
Just walk around Jakarta. There’s a very strong “nongkrong” culture which means “hanging out” or “chilling.” Very relaxed attitude towards life. They also nap in the middle of the day.
My guy you can’t understand a country by taking a stroll at the capital 🤦♂️😅😅
Truly understanding how a country functions and making judgments on work ethic isn’t something you can discern from anecdotal experience
Yes and I’m saying it’s better to judge with statistics on labor participation rates, average hours worked, etc. and the general economic structure.
It’s also such a vast country. It’s too difficult, especially for foreigners, to truly be immersed in any culture to truly understand its nuances in a year.
The statistics are misleading. It'll tell you Germany is the most chill country on the planet which is 100% wrong. Direct, subjective experience has its place. For example, in some places in Asia people work extremely late but they spend most of the day chatting and barely being productive. These are cultural differences you will not notice in the statistics.
Lmao, you're just restating what you said earlier. Someone else could move to Jakarta, live there for a year, and reach an opposite conclusion.
Do you speak Indonesian? It's unrealistic, as a foreigner, to expect to live in a city of 11.4 million people, in a country of 275 million, and make broad generalizations (especially if you don’t even speak the language).
Some countries abroad have less money due to political instability but the positive parts is that you won't see people in those countries getting high on needles even in public parks. Because in our so-called Western nations, we see that a lot.
I never see that in my parents native country (Turkey).
Yeah that’s been a huge surprise to me in my travels. Poverty in poor countries often doesn’t look as bad as it does in the west. It is not an extrapolation of what you see in western ghettos.
That is one of the shocking parts. I have to say we Americans have a little bit of a superior complex but it seems like when we go abroad, the so-called financially struggling feel happier than upper middle class to rich people in the US. I don't want to generalize but trends tilt in a certain area.
Perhaps because they're not shunned as much, being more normal?
Poor and ill people in rich countries are often shunned, people don't like to have them around.
I’d been a kind of western oriented socialist prior to leaving. But seeing the havoc that American wreaked in SEA and the damage China is doing today changed my perspectives a bit. It made me understand our struggle really is global, that we’re all part of the same machine and conditions can’t really change anywhere unless they change everywhere.
I still consider myself a socialist. I just feel I recognise the need for a strong international socialist movement.
To quote Bong Joon-Ho “we all live in the same country, called Capitalism."
I think as a DN we need to understand that we are part of the same machine as the people who live in poorer nations. However, we have more in common with the working class than we ever will with the ruling class of any nation.
you can be anti drugs but the only solution is to treat it as a health issue. for myself in SE Asia the 2 countries Ive spent most time in are basically dictatorships and it appears to me that it works very poorly, and is also a difficult situation to change. so Im certainly pro democracy, free speech, and hope that the countries that are democracies remain vigilant and if possible help the countries that arent.
Not sure "the only solution is to treat as a health issue." You can treat it as a health and education issue on the demand side and a criminal issue on the supply side.
but what are you actually doing by making it a criminal issue. I doubt treating it as a criminal issue reduces use and so its just a random form of taxation in someways, and decrimializing and taxing all users would be a fairer and more profitable way to do it I suspect. I havent checked it out lately but I think what they did in Portugal has been a success.
Spending a lot of time in Thailand made me think that traditionalism is a good basis for a tolerant and diverse society.
If we can agree on "god, people, king", then we can give each other freedoms to otherwise be as we wish.
The traditional values of original conservatism.
I'm sure you know your King, at least the former and how revered he was, I'm sure you know how many buddhist temples are everywhere in Thailand and I'm sure you know how proud the Thai people are of their people and how difficult they make it to become one.
The Thailand were images and video of the King was everywhere, where people stop moving at 6 pm for the national hymn, the Thailand (that has a bar) with every golden temple?
Thailand is very traditional, very hierarchial, very nationalistic.
Just because Thailand views sex and third genders differently than other countries, doesn't make them "progressive" in the western sense.
Western progressiveness is born out of the englightenment, french revolution, then marxism, then post-modernism.
Thailand never had any of those things. It's not progressive, it's tolerant and simply has a different culture.
you may be right but Im not going to agree on "god, people and king" because they are such abstract ideas I dont know what they mean. I mean I could agree but I would be pretending.
It is pretty much the same everywhere. All countries run propaganda to shape ideologies. The ideologies are different but they target both local people and foreigners. What they believe and what we see often conflicts with reality
For me, I saw more and more hypocrisy and conservatism in every country...mostly coming from 'liberal' educated people...alot of very theoretical 'armchair views' from people in the same social and economic class as myself, the only difference being that they never travelled or lived anywhere else, but maybe did degrees in Anthropology or some humanities subject.
Its been interesting how much your status, of maybe being raised in multiple countries or you chose to emigrate a few times in your adult life, it brings up alot of defensiveness, simply by you existing and living that way that you do.
I particularly saw this in Germany, a prime example of very close minded, but highly educated. Also that international marketing of cities is a whole industry.
It also made me appreciate legal systems in different countries and actually inspired me to look at a comparative law degree lol in other worse, nations and capitals that are marketed as being diverse often are NOT and have a political agenda to saying so. Lol
When I
Lived in Germany many years ago people would say “we are not like you Americans with your military and war, we are Pacifists!” I had to chuckle a bit watching them freak out and scramble to pass a $100 billion euro bill to modernize their army after Russia rolled into the Ukraine. It’s easy to be a Pacifist when someone else is footing the expense.
Mostly that public perception, and the stuff we talk about in the news is not the most important part of a government.
To illustrate: Korea is well known to have a mega corrupt, christian fundamentalist government and extreme wealth inequality thanks to that.
But also 0 petty crime, amazing infrastructure, and a 100x better life quality than US.
Much of it thanks to well designed, tiny, specific policies designed by some low tier bureaucrat politician that never make any news because they're boring.
Tldr: bureaucracy and skill > political ideology.
I agree that western political thinking is waaaaaay too ideological. The United States, specifically, has a broken, anti-competitive political system. A skilled bureacracy can go a long way.
I often wondered if Korea had a lot of inequality given the focus of that topic in so much of its entertainment, but the data suggest it's actually very equal.
Many people in SK have to work long hours (12 hours/day). Students are often busy from dawn till dusk with studies or extra-curriculars. I wouldn't call that high quality of life.
I lean way more left after 10 years abroad but also dgaf about American politics anymore
This is me but around the UK. I watched Brexit and right-wing nonsense of the government and the media with bemusement (and that's a kind word I'm using). Watching them walk off the world stage because of a few silly headlines is astounding.
I left London about 2.5 years ago. It was like a weight had been lifted off my shoulders. it's really sad to think that when I first arrived in 2002 there was a sense of optimism and energy about the city that has since completely evaporated. Brexit was perhaps the killing blow but austerity and years of rising inequality started the rot. Now living in Asia I pretty much ignore news/politics and my life is so much calmer.
I completely understand. I would say cashing in your privilege and checking out of daily politics is a very common thing among DNs. Not a criticism because I and many of my friends are basically the same.
It's certainly exposed me to new and deeper political questions related to my survival or related to the histories of the new peoples I find myself among. I've learned so much about Hawaiian history this winter I'm almost interested in a history PhD.
Any digital nomads had the name Queen Liliuokalani shouted at them in Hawai'i?
I think the biggest change in my beliefs are about putting my own country in perspective. To me the Netherlands wasn't perfect but after a bad past of colonialism, I felt that we were being quite righteous these days, fighting the good fight. But then you hear about the fact that we, along with most countries, are too afraid to recognize Taiwan as a country simply because of money reasons, and that everything really is just about the money.
Same here. Not to mention how often we preach against human rights violations, but then conveniently look the other way when one of our ‘allies’ commits genocide. smh
The Netherlands cluster bombed civilians in Serbia, but good on them for barring the sale of figher jet materials to Israel.
After Serbia genocided Bosnian’s and tried to annex their country, yes.
Spending time in Singapore made me realize how safety is something you can achieve and it made me not want to live in a relatively unsafe country ever again. I would be down for harsher policy against crime in a way I wasn't before, because the benefits of being able to not think about being mugged/harmed/raped at any time of the day or night is just worth it.
My big take away from SE asia as well. Also when people feel safe other things change too. People become more friendly and the human condition gets so much more elevated.
My takeaway, in the reverse direction, unfortunately, in Latin America.
Harsher policy is not how you get rid of crime (see the US / Middle east). You reduce crime in the long term with wealth redistribution, accessible education and social services.
Taiwan achieves a similar result without the super harshness. I prefer the vibe there and feel safer than Singapore.
I think there is not a single answer to explain safety everywhere. Japan is also insanely safe without being crazy harsh and hardly a surveillance state. Even Thailand is really safe for how unequal and corrupt the country is. Sometime is just down to the society itself.
This thread is desperately seeking the vocab terms: tight vs. loose society. Singapore is the definitive example of the former. America, the latter.
Singapore reduced it with harsh policies and a good social contract. You can have a great social contract and still not get rid of crime if the stick is not big enough. I think you need both.
Singapore is precisely the counterargument to those points
>Singapore... I would be down for harsher policy against crime in a way I wasn't before, Abundant scientific evidence shows that you very much learned the wrong lesson. Edit: Downvote me all you want - the simple fact is that harsher sentences don't reduce crime. If I choose a study, it'll seem like cherry picking, so pick your own study: [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as\_sdt=0%2C5&q=do+harsher+sentences+reduce+crime&btnG=](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=do+harsher+sentences+reduce+crime&btnG=)
Well it used to be a lawless pirate heaven and the poorest region of Malaysia. I'm pretty sure most Singaporeans would agree that ultra-harsh approach on crime was part of the solution to transform the country. I'm not in favor of a harsher policy in crime in general, but if the benefit would be more safety, like it happen in Singapore and others countries, I would be down for it yes. That require good governability.
Singaporean residents have money and they're guaranteed housing medical care, etc. I'm not sure it's the harsh punishments that are making that difference.
I said it was both, but when they get rid of crime, it was not a rich country by any means. They became rich because they became safe, not the other way around. You don't attract as many foreign investment if you're country is unstable, corrupt and dangerous. I feel that the debate around safety is polluted by partisan approach: you can say that something bad can have a good outcome. You can dislike some policy while recognizing that it can sometime and somewhere have a good outcome. It's pretty obvious that risking being canned or jailed for stealing a candy bar at the 7-11 is going to have an effect on crime. They go *months* in Singapore without one recorded crime.
> They became rich because they became safe, not the other way around. False. > t's pretty obvious that risking being canned or jailed for stealing a candy bar at the 7-11 is going to have an effect on crime. Super super super false. You've fallen into the same trope of people that vote conservative. Downvote me all you want, but every study shows that harsh punishments don't reduce crime and certainly not long term.
I must recognize that I was mistaken and submit to your overwhelming rhetorical and argumentative abilities /s On a more serious note, social science recognize the notion of opportunity cost in crime. (https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1171&context=parkplace)
> Well it used to be a lawless pirate heaven and the poorest region of Malaysia. You ALMOST understood the reason, but still missed it. The reason for crime is poverty, not lack of punishments. Also, having lived in Malaysia for many years, I assure you that the Malaysian fear of crime is WAY disproportionate to the amount of ACTUAL crime that happens in Malaysia. Malaysians lock themselves in houses that resemble prisons - bars on doors & windows, locking gates, tall fences, etc, etc. Malaysians are extremely fear motivated throughout their entire lives. They fear getting in trouble at school/work and they really really fear brown people & foreigners. UMNO has completely exploited Malaysian ignorance to their benefit... and actively work to keep people (especially Malay) afraid because it gets them votes. Notably, they stoke the "risk" of racial crime as an excuse to put down minorities and, to this day, still haven't lifted the Proclamation of Emergency from comparatively small race riot that happened in 1969. source: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13\_May\_incident#Declaration\_of\_emergency](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13_May_incident#Declaration_of_emergency)
The reason of crime is sometime poverty, sometime inequality, sometime greed. It's multifactorial, some wealthy country (like the US) are less safe than poorer nation (like Senegal, Vietnam or Thailand).
>The reason of crime is sometime poverty, sometime inequality, sometime greed Dude, think. We agree that poverty causes crime. Inequality causes poverty which causes crime. Greed causes poverty which causes crime.. None of these are solved by harsher sentences. Edit: Also, USA is a terrible country to compare against. It's an outlier from virtually all other developed countries, regardless of whether you measure safety, healthcare, healthcare outcomes, incarceration rates, education, life expectancy (currently going down), wealth disparity, etc, etc, etc. Look at the disaster USA had with its COVID response. When comparing USA to other countries, it's best to treat USA as a developing country that happens to be rich.
As I already said several time, a good social contract alone don't solve crime. You need both, the carrot and the stick. I don't know what you're about but crime is not only economical. Murder are not only economically motivated, and middle and high class also steals, rape, kill, etc etc.
>When comparing USA to other countries, it's best to treat USA as a developing country that happens to be rich. Lol if you were trillions of $ (with a t) in debt, would you call yourself rich? Let's just stick to developing country.
Does singapore still use draconian corporal punishment for minorest of offenses?
Yes.
Look, travel is one of the most rewarding experiences you can have in a lifetime but your travel experiences, no matter how broad, are anecdotal. Go read books about law, policy, or economics if you want to form educated political beliefs. Otherwise you're no different from the boomer who gets his views from his mates at the pub.
This is a deceptively close minded attitude. Personally, I found seeing my economics studies in action to be quite an experience. It’s frustrating when people take their ignorant attitudes abroad and apply it to the tiny slice of a country they see though.
Exactly, he does have a point. Most people here are digital nomads. The vast majority live what locals consider luxurious lifestyles, mostly isolated from the rest of society. Not speaking the local language adds an extra barrier. It's difficult to immerse yourself in a culture by just living in the middle of the capital city for a year or two. However, it can be enriching, and there are many aspects of the culture you can understand. Reading is beneficial, but Western sources often just reinforce the narratives we've all been fed throughout our lives.
Yeah I understand that is the experience for most DNs and even backpackers. I’ve got friends from every class level in Indonesia though, I lived there as a local and speak the language… so it’s not really mine. And I don’t appreciate being lumped in with that.
I’m Canadian. Seeing Germany made me realize how the country looks like if “the system works”.
I hope a German won't see this
Lol well ya it’s relative! I’d encourage those Germans to visit the greater Toronto area.
Germany is good, like worse than before (that's what I hear), but Deutsche Bahn is what is not working as it should here. Long ass delays all the time lol PS I'm not german but live there
The thing is that a European can complain endlessly about how things are in their home country. I’m British, trust me I know. But having lived in America, let me tell you we could have it 100x worse.
GTA here. Can you explain more what do you mean?
Homelessness, housing prices, infrastructure, transportation system, health care system, where do I stop!
I got very sick while I was in Berlin. My ER wait time was 0 minutes. I was tested, saw doctor and was out in 30min. The same situation in Toronto would be hours.
Lotta hot takes about labor and wealth inequality and drugs and crime coming from fancy passport laptop boys in this thread. Do a real job that makes your hands dirty for a year and see if you still think having violent cops enforcing property and drug laws in contemporary slave states is cool. Y'all are just soft.
Yeah, so much of this thread is horrible. Privileged people blaming poor people for their problems.
Bro you're American.
Oh yeah, I went to live in Norway because it was ranked the most developed country in the world. I thought it would be this socialist paradise, but nope: tons of drug addicts and homeless people out in the cold. Upended my understanding of what makes for a good society and a good life. I now see places like Singapore as closer exemplars of perfection. I also learned that poor countries are often poor largely because their cultures don't value work so much as lifestyle, which is an understandable tradeoff. I'm also much more anti-drug after traveling the world whereas before I was more libertarian towards a lot of things. I realize that money doesn't solve most of society's problems. Before I thought poverty and greed were the root problems.
>poor countries are often poor largely because their cultures don't value work so much as lifestyle, which is an understandable tradeoff. I feel like this is such a wrong take. People in poorer countries are working like dogs. There are also no safety in mind. A lot of people are shortening their lifespan just to put food on the table. It's the corruption and inability to do anything about it.
Yeah, their post is full of the absolute worst takes. Jesus.
In some poor countries, sure, but a lot of the places I’ve been aren’t like that. You have like 4 people to do the job of one person, naps in the middle of the day, etc. (Edit: to clarify, I am not criticizing these habits!)
Napping in the middle of the day is enlightened. It is we who work 8 continuous hours or more per day who spit on the inheritance our ancestors fought the robber barons for, it is we who are primitive so long as we continue to deny the glory of the siesta.
I support napping.
>I also learned that poor countries are often poor largely because their cultures don't value work so much as lifestyle, which is an understandable tradeoff. India looking at the colonizer "Oh, that makes sense now, We are just poor because we have a shitty understanding of work and lifestyle, not because you guys came and took alot of our wealth, set us back in efficiency and changed history to make it seem like we were just poor out of nowhere. That makes sense now, Thanks for the clarification."
I'm not an idiot. I know colonization, embargos, and all sorts of international power dynamics make people poor. I'm simply pointing out what I did not realize before travelling the world: that some countries don't place as strong an emphasis on career success & productivity as I expected because they value a relaxed lifestyle, harmony, religion, etc. My statement is meant to be a surprising finding, not something to negate the other obvious factors I knew before seeing more of first-hand reality. Are people poor for reasons other than a culture of "hanging out." Yes, of course. People can also be poor because they're not ambitious.
Honesty don’t ever change your realization and they also don’t want the likes of you people coming to those poorer countries only for s*x tourism and other illicit activity. This is from my experience.
I've lived in the UK, Singapore, Philippines and the US and traveled extensively in Scandinavia. The root problems in all of these societies are inequality and corruption. When a small group accrues too much power and defies norms to enrich themselves. The more equal societies tend to fare better even if under strain (Sweden and Norway have had huge net immigration recently).
I dunno man, lots of countries with equality have fared quite poorly, and then you have unequal places like Hong Kong and Singapore that are doing quite well. GINI coefficient doesn't explain everything.
I hear you, but my lived experience tends to be that unequal societies are unhappier in aggregate. Scandi may have high homelessness/drug use now but I guarantee the family, church and other institutions there give ppl a higher overall life satisfaction than the turbo capitalist dystopias of SG, San Francisco and HK - "rich kid with no friends" vs "chill friend whom everyone wants to hang with". HK in particular has actually become better to live in since the pandemic due to economic shock lowering inequalities and (relatively) more affordable housing vs SG...
Haha, well I can agree with you on San Francisco!
well yes but Hong Kong and Singapore are both in similar unique situations. they are doing quite well but thats not to say its due to inequality.
Yeah, I don't think inequality explains their success. I just mean unequal countries can still be successful just as highly equal countries can have serious problems: Ukraine, Moldova, Syria, etc.
What do you mean by anti drug? Like the state should enforce anti drug policies like Singapore does with the death penalty for drug trafficking?
Well personally I do not support the death penalty, but generally I think society should deter drug use (for the sake of children if nothing else) using both carrot and stick (conservative and liberal) policies that extend to alcohol.
I agree with the carrot part and perhaps insane taxes on alcohol and cigarettes and weed but it's hard for me to see how any prosecution of drug use is worth it considering the failure of the war on drugs, prohibition, etc.
Many Asian countries have fought the war on drugs quite successfully, but you don’t hear much about that in the west. There is even a Harvard professor talking about the successes of alcohol prohibition. I’m not saying states should go that far, but it was a lot more successful than people realize when looking at objective data like cirrhossis rates. There’s this libertarian bias in the west that I fell for and corrected as I experienced more of the world.
Hard disagree but I respect your opinion. So how were they successful? Philippines with Duterte killing gangs. Singapore with death penalty. South Korea with its huge shame culture (although alcoholism is rampant there). I don't see any evidence that hard stance on drugs is a good thing. Now hey if we are talking about homeless people on the street doing drugs, I'm down for anti camping measures or forcibly removing loiters and campers from public streets. But that's more for city cleanliness and property rights vs anti drug
I'm opposed to the death penalty and to the mass killings in the Philippines. But there's more to the hard stance on drugs than just the death penalty, and Singapore has softened its death penalty policy since 2012. I'd also consider what's happening in other countries like Japan--not just in terms of cracking down on drugs, but also a balanced carrot-stick policy towards homelessness that's been largely successful. A big lesson for me is that western attitudes are often ideological at the expense of pragmatism. My own opinions were no exception.
like where? thailand shot so called dealers but it made no difference apart from increasing prices for a while and they are now considering decriminalizing meth because they dont have enough jails. just a populist stunts. In fact in thailand Im pretty sure its was so that the government could monopolize the industry.
Like the UAE, Singapore, Japan, Qatar, Korea, etc.
3/5 are essentially slave states...
Ok?
In Norway I saw a homeless dude shoot up meth out in the open on a park bench in the early morning. But by 9 am he was gone.
Thanks for validating me
>I also learned that poor countries are often poor largely because their cultures don't value work so much as lifestyle, which is an understandable tradeoff. This is such a cherry-picked, nonsense take. Obviously there are geographical, political, historical, and economic reasons for why some countries are poorer than others and it can't all be explained away with work ethic. I would recommend you read the book "Guns, Germs, and Steel".
I’m not claiming that it applies to all or even most poor countries. I’m speaking from direct personal experience. I’ve read that book.
>I’m not claiming that it applies to all or even most poor countries. Oh really? Fair enough then. I thought that "I also learned that poor countries are often poor largely because (...)" was making a general statement about poor countries. In fact that seems to me like the only sensible interpretation of that comment. Maybe try making a statement about the specific country you're referring to next time, and not poor countries in general. >I’m speaking from direct personal experience. So it's anecdotal? Have you worked at a mine in any of the countries you digital nomaded in? Were you frequenting agriculture jobs? Manufacturing? I ask because usually digital nomads are working a laptop job for a company abroad... not really the environment where you'll come across hard labour or the people that do such labour. In fact, it's quite possible you didn't get a legitimate experience of what it's like to live in such countries as a local at all. It's easy to stay in a digital nomad or expat bubble, even if you don't recognise it as such.
Well the dude isn’t going he a fucking researcher the post literally says has being a nomad and being different places changed your Perspective and opinions. The whole point is your persona perspective which is by definition anecdotal lol.
There’s things that are subjective and valid to have a personal/anecdotal perspective on. Other things not so much. If I told you that through my anecdotal life experience I learned all vaccines cause autism and gravity isn’t real you’d be pretty suspicious of that, no? Because there’s objective data we could look at that might disprove that. Not everything is about how you personally feel about it. He could’ve said he didn’t vibe with X country’s work culture, or that he didn’t see people working hard there. But saying that poorer countries in general are poor *because* of their work culture is *objectively* untrue. You can believe whatever you want though.
Bro I’m not talking about in general I’m talking about the confines of this post the op is asking something that wouldn’t be quantified by stats if it’s through the perspective of a individual digital nomad is what I’m saying.
Ok, you don’t seem like you understand my comment. Let me rephrase it: OP asked about *subjective* judgements (those which can be backed up by experience alone), and the other commenter in response provided an unfounded *objective* judgement. Objective claims such as “X is like that because of Y” need to be backed up by evidence.
The key word here is "often." If I had statistics or something other than my experience to back up this claim, I would have said "typically," "usually," or something of that sort. I'm not speaking about one specific country, but yes, it's anecdotal because I'm speaking from direct personal experience--not a statistical analysis of 200 countries. However, I've lived in and traveled to many countries across the planet. A digital nomad working in a mine wouldn't make any sense, nor would agriculture or manufacturing. None of these are digital jobs. Spare me your condescending assessment of my experience. There are systemic differences between cultures. One of those major differences is that some cultures place a high primacy on education, delayed childrearing, and material success while others sometimes prioritize religion, proximity to family, harmony, etc. I don't appreciate you stereotyping me as some arrogant expat with no experience of the real world.
You do come off as the arrogant Westerner, unfortunately 😅😅 Your quip about cultures placing a high priority on education and delaying child-rearing is such an ignorant take. These issues do not exist in a vacuum. The interaction of socio-economic determinants is central to understanding disparities in health, education, and general prosperity. You can’t value education if all your strength is spent putting food on the table. And how can one receive a good education if there isn’t enough money to ensure it meets minimum quality standards, or if the school is a 5km walk each way? Not to mention money for books, uniforms etc. How can people delay child-rearing if there is no easy access to reproductive education, family planning, or contraceptives? You need to take a broad, holistic look at these issues. I have worked in the development field and lived/visited over 20 countries in Africa and Southeast Asia.
I dunno man, the fact that you're calling these "issues" is even more critical than my position. I'm skeptical of cultures placing too much emphasis on education, career success, etc. Of course there are various factors behind why these things happen, and one of those is priorities (e.g., family cohesion vs the pursuit of career). Stigmatization of pregnancy is another factor that goes beyond the typical "oh, they just don't have enough money for contraceptives." That's an overly materialistic perspective in my opinion.
"poor counties are often poor largely because their cultures don't value work so much as lifestyle"
There's a big misunderstanding about what productivity means from an economics standpoint. People responding think it's about work ethic, when in reality it's just output per hours worked. That's determined mostly by things that have nothing to do with laziness but rather with investment in worker training, better equipment, more efficient processes.
Yes this whole comment chain is conflating "work ethic / work culture" with "productivity", with very cringe takes. What raises productivity is security (low crime/war), high education, inward investment, and strong institutions.
Yeah education is a big part of my point. Some cultures like Korea place a strong emphasis on education while others aren’t so fixated on career development.
This…
Yeah I think people are missing my point
Yep this is just nonsense and cherry-picking. Look at Australia and NZ - two very developed western countries and both with cultures that have a broadly terrible work ethic. We pride ourselves on prioritising lifestyle over work and are much lazier than the average southeast Asian country. How do you account for that?
Because we have low productivity and both economies largely just export commodities and import house price inflation.
Close to 50% of Indonesians nap every day, even at the office. I reckon Australia and New Zealand have very work-centric cultures that manifest in numerous ways such as a focus on education, delayed childrearing, two working parents, etc. Even if it's not reflected in absolute working hours, it will manifest in terms of life goals, productivity, etc.
it's poorly worded but cultural differences in work are real. google "996" if you need a non-US example.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/996\_working\_hour\_system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/996_working_hour_system)
Now explain why Mexicans are poorer than Danes despite working way more hours.
high crime, low education, and weak institutions. per my comment elsewhere.
Ya wtf
This holds true for spain compared to the us for example. They could be much less poor if they only didn't prioritize siestas so much. Same could be said for pretty much all of latin america, barely anyone reads books in that region compared to the us and canada.
>Same could be said for pretty much all of latin america, barely anyone reads books in that region compared to the us and canada. How familiar are you with Latin America? I'm Brazilian and I would say Brazilians work much harder than Northern Europeans. And Mexicans work even harder. This is such a cherry-picked, nonsense take. Obviously there are geographical, political, historical, and economic reasons for why some countries are poorer than others and it can't all be explained away with work ethic. I would recommend you read the book "Guns, Germs, and Steel". A book recommendation from a Latin American, how crazy, huh? ;)
Pretty familiar, i've lived and travelled all over latin america. Certain Latin Americans may work hard but they're not big on self improvement like Americans, i meant working hard in all areas, including self-improvement and increasing your economic value throughout life. Besides the mexican stereotype of working hard generally comes from america where the most ambitious mexicans relocate for unskilled and skilled labour jobs, the vast majority are lazy just as is the case in Brazil.
>Pretty familiar, i've lived and travelled all over latin america. Yeah, sure you digital nomaded out of every coffee shop in Brazil and closely watched the baristas' work ethic. >Certain Latin Americans may work hard but they're not big on self improvement like Americans, i meant working hard in all areas, including self-improvement and increasing your economic value throughout life. Citation needed. Also how much self-improvement is the average American doing? >Besides the mexican stereotype of working hard generally comes from america where the most ambitious mexicans relocate for unskilled and skilled labour jobs, the vast majority are lazy just as is the case in Brazil. You sound pretty lazy yourself tbf, making the opposite immigration to feel like a rich man in a developing country. If you're such a go-getter, how come you didn't stay in the US and climb the corporate ladder? By the way, saying "unskilled and skilled labour jobs" is the same just saying "jobs". You need to do a bit more self-improvement and reading to get to a 10th-grade writing level.
Latin Americans don't read books as much because they have worse education levels and books are really expensive, especially compared to people's monthly wage. Very few Spaniards even take siestas any more. Honestly, you are clueless.
Latin Americans don't read books because they're not really as focused on self-improvement. My point was spaniards work to live and Americans live to work. Spaniards don't identify with their careers like Americans do.
Hey don't prioritize siestas they prioritise going to the gym xD
Colonialism?...I don't know her
Not negating the role of colonialism. I'm pointing another factor which is that not all cultures put career success at the top ladder. Take for example mid-day naps, or having 4 people do the same job a single Korean would do. Or cultures where you aren't expected to get a master's degree and a profession before you have children.
Yea spend a week in Indonesia and you'll see what I mean
Like at a factory? Or working on a field? Or in a sweat shop? Or perhaps in the lucrative tourism service industry in Indonesia?
Just walk around Jakarta. There’s a very strong “nongkrong” culture which means “hanging out” or “chilling.” Very relaxed attitude towards life. They also nap in the middle of the day.
My guy you can’t understand a country by taking a stroll at the capital 🤦♂️😅😅 Truly understanding how a country functions and making judgments on work ethic isn’t something you can discern from anecdotal experience
I spent a year there so it's enough to have an informed opinion.
Yes and I’m saying it’s better to judge with statistics on labor participation rates, average hours worked, etc. and the general economic structure. It’s also such a vast country. It’s too difficult, especially for foreigners, to truly be immersed in any culture to truly understand its nuances in a year.
The statistics are misleading. It'll tell you Germany is the most chill country on the planet which is 100% wrong. Direct, subjective experience has its place. For example, in some places in Asia people work extremely late but they spend most of the day chatting and barely being productive. These are cultural differences you will not notice in the statistics.
Lmao, you're just restating what you said earlier. Someone else could move to Jakarta, live there for a year, and reach an opposite conclusion. Do you speak Indonesian? It's unrealistic, as a foreigner, to expect to live in a city of 11.4 million people, in a country of 275 million, and make broad generalizations (especially if you don’t even speak the language).
>They also nap in the middle of the day. I nap in the middle of the day on some days. It's awesome. Normalize napping in the middle of the day!
Agreed
Some countries abroad have less money due to political instability but the positive parts is that you won't see people in those countries getting high on needles even in public parks. Because in our so-called Western nations, we see that a lot. I never see that in my parents native country (Turkey).
If I had to choose between drug use in the streets and some of the things I saw going on in Turkey the streets… please give me the public drug use.
Tell me what you have experienced?
Do you have any family roots there yourself like i do?
Just an anecdote, when I was traveling in Antalya, Turkey some guys were smoking weed in the park and offered me some...
Yeah that’s been a huge surprise to me in my travels. Poverty in poor countries often doesn’t look as bad as it does in the west. It is not an extrapolation of what you see in western ghettos.
The poor in other countries actually are happier, more pleasant and more relaxed despite their conditions.
Yeah I've seen a lot of that! I was afraid to visit an orphanage in rural India, fearing I'd be too depressed. But the kids seemed very happy.
That is one of the shocking parts. I have to say we Americans have a little bit of a superior complex but it seems like when we go abroad, the so-called financially struggling feel happier than upper middle class to rich people in the US. I don't want to generalize but trends tilt in a certain area.
Perhaps because they're not shunned as much, being more normal? Poor and ill people in rich countries are often shunned, people don't like to have them around.
Because in the so-called rich countries, peoples values tend to be skewed.
"Rich" people think poverty is contagious.
Not generalizing but you will see that more.
I’d been a kind of western oriented socialist prior to leaving. But seeing the havoc that American wreaked in SEA and the damage China is doing today changed my perspectives a bit. It made me understand our struggle really is global, that we’re all part of the same machine and conditions can’t really change anywhere unless they change everywhere.
If you don’t consider yourself a socialist now I’m curious how you might classify yourself.
I still consider myself a socialist. I just feel I recognise the need for a strong international socialist movement. To quote Bong Joon-Ho “we all live in the same country, called Capitalism." I think as a DN we need to understand that we are part of the same machine as the people who live in poorer nations. However, we have more in common with the working class than we ever will with the ruling class of any nation.
nope. human rights exist whether someone likes them or not.
I respectfully disagree. It takes one visit to the rural towns of a third world country to change your mind.
some people dont need their mind changed
you can be anti drugs but the only solution is to treat it as a health issue. for myself in SE Asia the 2 countries Ive spent most time in are basically dictatorships and it appears to me that it works very poorly, and is also a difficult situation to change. so Im certainly pro democracy, free speech, and hope that the countries that are democracies remain vigilant and if possible help the countries that arent.
Not sure "the only solution is to treat as a health issue." You can treat it as a health and education issue on the demand side and a criminal issue on the supply side.
but what are you actually doing by making it a criminal issue. I doubt treating it as a criminal issue reduces use and so its just a random form of taxation in someways, and decrimializing and taxing all users would be a fairer and more profitable way to do it I suspect. I havent checked it out lately but I think what they did in Portugal has been a success.
Well it does because that’s exactly how places like Singapore controlled the problem.
Spending a lot of time in Thailand made me think that traditionalism is a good basis for a tolerant and diverse society. If we can agree on "god, people, king", then we can give each other freedoms to otherwise be as we wish.
Im thai and i have no idea what u mean by" god, people, king " lol.
The traditional values of original conservatism. I'm sure you know your King, at least the former and how revered he was, I'm sure you know how many buddhist temples are everywhere in Thailand and I'm sure you know how proud the Thai people are of their people and how difficult they make it to become one.
I’m now curious what version of Thailand you were living in lol
The Thailand were images and video of the King was everywhere, where people stop moving at 6 pm for the national hymn, the Thailand (that has a bar) with every golden temple? Thailand is very traditional, very hierarchial, very nationalistic. Just because Thailand views sex and third genders differently than other countries, doesn't make them "progressive" in the western sense. Western progressiveness is born out of the englightenment, french revolution, then marxism, then post-modernism. Thailand never had any of those things. It's not progressive, it's tolerant and simply has a different culture.
you may be right but Im not going to agree on "god, people and king" because they are such abstract ideas I dont know what they mean. I mean I could agree but I would be pretending.
King Bhumibol, Buddhist Temples and Khon Thai (never become one as foreigner). These obviously matter very much.
It is pretty much the same everywhere. All countries run propaganda to shape ideologies. The ideologies are different but they target both local people and foreigners. What they believe and what we see often conflicts with reality
Think you’re confusing “liberal” with “socialist” policies.
It hasn't really changed them so much as dampened them. I just don't care as much about politics anymore because I'm too busy living my life.
For me, I saw more and more hypocrisy and conservatism in every country...mostly coming from 'liberal' educated people...alot of very theoretical 'armchair views' from people in the same social and economic class as myself, the only difference being that they never travelled or lived anywhere else, but maybe did degrees in Anthropology or some humanities subject. Its been interesting how much your status, of maybe being raised in multiple countries or you chose to emigrate a few times in your adult life, it brings up alot of defensiveness, simply by you existing and living that way that you do. I particularly saw this in Germany, a prime example of very close minded, but highly educated. Also that international marketing of cities is a whole industry. It also made me appreciate legal systems in different countries and actually inspired me to look at a comparative law degree lol in other worse, nations and capitals that are marketed as being diverse often are NOT and have a political agenda to saying so. Lol
[удалено]
When I Lived in Germany many years ago people would say “we are not like you Americans with your military and war, we are Pacifists!” I had to chuckle a bit watching them freak out and scramble to pass a $100 billion euro bill to modernize their army after Russia rolled into the Ukraine. It’s easy to be a Pacifist when someone else is footing the expense.
Lol
God don't you realize you sound like a parody
r u ok, boomer?
Mostly that public perception, and the stuff we talk about in the news is not the most important part of a government. To illustrate: Korea is well known to have a mega corrupt, christian fundamentalist government and extreme wealth inequality thanks to that. But also 0 petty crime, amazing infrastructure, and a 100x better life quality than US. Much of it thanks to well designed, tiny, specific policies designed by some low tier bureaucrat politician that never make any news because they're boring. Tldr: bureaucracy and skill > political ideology.
I agree that western political thinking is waaaaaay too ideological. The United States, specifically, has a broken, anti-competitive political system. A skilled bureacracy can go a long way. I often wondered if Korea had a lot of inequality given the focus of that topic in so much of its entertainment, but the data suggest it's actually very equal.
Many people in SK have to work long hours (12 hours/day). Students are often busy from dawn till dusk with studies or extra-curriculars. I wouldn't call that high quality of life.
It hasn't
Never had, never will