A History of Social Contracts Around the World in the Last Century

Sometimes when there is a real threat from the Left, the Rich consent to a “social contract.” This has happened in numerous places. The US in the Depression, with the threat of Communism hanging over their heads..

Western Europe, once again with a threat of Communism.

It never happens without a serious threat though. The rich only give up stuff as a compromise to fend off something a whole lot worse.

In places like Latin America, social contracts are more or less impossible. Most of the 3rd World is like that. Social contracts usually only happen in more modernized states. The 3rd World is characterized by backwards elites that never give up anything at all without massive violence.

Mexican elites did give up stuff, but it took a horrible revolution that killed 5% of the population to do so.

Same thing in El Salvador. It took 70,000 dead to get the rich to compromise a bit.

They compromised in Costa Rica too in 1947, but I don’t understand why.

There was also a social contract under Peron in Argentina for reasons that are hard to figure.

It’s notable that both Argentina and Costa Rica are White. Social contracts are much more likely in White than in non-White countries.

Social contracts occurred in the Arab World because the Arab-Islamic World is socialism-friendly. They don’t like the idea of massive wealth accumulations and people with nothing to eat. Something about evolving in the desert I guess…

A social contract took place in Taiwan as a way to ward off Communism from China. Similar thing in Japan. Asians are sort of natural socialists too, like Arabs. They don’t like the idea of folks starving. Guess they’ve seen plenty enough of that.

In addition, those are collectivist cultures, possibly due to Buddhism. Radical free market capitalism won’t fly to well in a Buddhist society. The Buddha surely would not have approved of neoliberalism. It’s against everything he taught. There is another thing. These are homogeneous and extremely ethnocentric societies. If a Japanese person is starving or homeless, this strikes at the heart of every Japanese person, as he is automatically your brother on account of ethnicity. That man on the street under a pup tent may as well be your cousin.

Thailand is one of the few Asian countries that has avoided wealth redistribution. The rest – Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and China, did it with guns. The Thai Communists had a lot of support due to SE Asian culture, but they eventually quit. They were resurrected recently in the Red Shirt riots, which was a classic socialist movement led by many former Communist guerrillas.

The Philippines has avoided wealth redistribution due to a horrible Spanish colonial culture that turned it into Latin America in Asia. Nevertheless, there is a huge Communist insurgency going on.

The situation in Indonesia is awful for a Southeast Asian country, but they had a huge Communist movement that was massacred by the state and the CIA. 1 million people were killed in 1965 to put that down. As in Pakistan, Islam gets in the way of justice.

Social contracts have been impossible in India, Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh, probably due to Hindu culture with its caste system in which the poor feel that they are ordained by God to their place. Caste and vile Indian culture has cemented in feudal relations in the entire subcontinent, even in Islamic nations like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh.

Where wealth redistribution is prevented by peaceful means, as in South Asia, efforts shift to guns and bombs. The Nepalese Maoists have 40% of the government. There is a vast Maoist insurgency in India and a smaller one in Bangladesh. Sri Lanka has seen some nasty Maoist insurgencies. Afghanistan saw a Communist government for 15 years. Pakistan is an outlier.

Sub-Saharan Africa seems quite hopeless. Tribalism and worship of kings who steal it all and leave their subjects with crumbs mean that Africans apparently think it’s their lot to starve.

There is a militant redistributionist effort in South Africa though. Zimbabwe confiscated White farms. But in these places, the race factor was important. Africans won’t tolerate White grabbing it all and leaving them with crusts and heels, but apparently they let they don’t mind their own people doing it to them.

African tribalism is the worst. One tribe gets in power and tries to grab everything in the country and leave all the other tribes without a thing. The tribe in power thinks this is completely normal. Those out of power probably think it’s normal too. Those on the outside mostly plot to overthrow the tribe that’s in now so they can get in themselves and steal it all for their tribe. There’s little sense of justice in the continent. Everything is a zero-sum game.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

16 thoughts on “A History of Social Contracts Around the World in the Last Century”

  1. Dear Robert
    I must issue with your implied claim that India is highly inegalitarian. It is not. The two most important indicators of inequality are the Gini index (0 is perfect equality and 100 is perfect inequality) and the R/P 10% ratio, that is, the ratio of the average inome of the richest 10% to the average income of the poorest 10%.

    Here are the figures for some countries:
    Country……..R/P 10%…Gini index
    India……………9.6…………36.8
    Sweden………..6.2…………25
    US………………15.9………..40.8
    Switzerland……9.0………..33.7
    UK……………….13.8……….36
    Colombia………63.8……….58.6
    Vietnam…………6.9…………34.4

    Regards. James

  2. Africa was parceled up by Europeans with no regard to pre-existing ethnic boundaries. In Africa, tribe, ethnic group or whatever is as important as race is here, if not more so. I think they need their seperate territories.

    1. I think they need their seperate territories.

      Interesting coming from you. I mean, aren’t you the CRT integrationist who wants us all to come together and get along and deconstruct all of our “privileges” and “social constructs?”

      So let me ask you this: Are you willing to extend this idea of separation to whites and blacks here in the U.S, as well as whites and non-whites in other parts of the world?

      1. If whites and blacks were butchering each other with machetes in the streets like what goes on in parts of some civil war torn African countries, then hell yeah I’d want to separate. I don’t think the situation here between blacks and whites is anything comparable to what you saw between Hutus and Tutsis.

  3. “There’s little sense of justice in the continent. Everything is a zero-sum game”.

    Uhm, don’t communists think life is a zero-sum game. . . ?

  4. If you think that south-east Asians are ‘natural socialists’ then you obviously don’t know many south-east Asians.
    A more hard-headed,selfish and grasping peole would be very difficult to find anywhere on earth.

  5. “The situation in Indonesia is awful for a Southeast Asian country, but they had a huge Communist movement that was massacred by the state and the CIA. 1 million people were killed in 1965 to put that down. As in Pakistan, Islam gets in the way of justice.”

    Can you actually give an example of how Islam gets in the way of justice in Indonesia, Robert? There are all kinds of injustice in Indonesia, but very little of it has to do with Islam. Indonesia is one of the most secular-minded Islamic nations in the world, and nothing like Pakistan. What gets in the way of justice has always been corruption and authoritarianism.

  6. After the massive democratic revolution in Indonesia, the new democratic leader was kept out of power by ISLAM. She could only get back into power by doing a deal with the devil (TNI). That’s pretty central to what’s wrong with Indonesia.

    And what’s Eurasian Sensation doing reading race-realist blogs like this? You’re a pretty famous race denier.

    1. I never knew I was famous for anything, Carl. But excuse me if I like to read a wide variety of things.

      How did “ISLAM” keep the “new democratic leader” (I assume you are talking about Megawati) out of power? The man who was elected as president ahead of her (Wahid) was considerably more moderate than her.

      Indonesia has plenty of problems, but Islam is hardly the worst of them.

      1. Well, I thought you were famous. Maybe it’s just me who reads your blog, though. You’re a talented writer. I didn’t say you shouldn’t read race realist blogs, I’m just pleasantly surprised to see you do, and I wonder what you get out of it.

        I assume your question is rhetorical.

        We didn’t say Islam was the worst. Robert listed it as number 3, behind the state and the CIA. Which seems about right to me.

        I can give you more examples of Islam getting in the way of justice in Indonesia if you didn’t like that example. You only asked for one, presumably on the assumption that there weren’t any.

        1. Not trying to defend Islam here. I just thought the sentence “As in Pakistan, Islam gets in the way of justice” was a fairly lazy characterisation of Indonesia, which is one of the very few Muslim countries that manages to keep religion and State separate (mostly).

          I’m not sure what Robert meant in writing that, but since the rise of Obama, I’m used to hearing Americans being clueless about Indonesia. Comparing it to Pakistan in this way smacks of that… which is why I was hoping Robert would clarify.

    2. And what’s Eurasian Sensation doing reading race-realist blogs like this? You’re a pretty famous race denier.

      Hey, people comment on a variety of blogs. I know I do.

      By the way, Eurasian, any new interesting and intense debates involving Thad over at Abagond?

      Thad sure knows how to tick people off! 😉

    1. Yeah, I’ve stopped reading Abagond, but out of all the commenters, I’ve always regarded you and Thad as the most reasonable/making the most sense.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *