A Technocratic Trainwreck
China’s first deadly high-speed rail accident is something that we should take note of, sadly and soberly. It is quite possibly the story of a cover-up of technocratic incompetence.
Megan McArdle has an incisive blog post on the events at The Atlantic. Her piece counters the notion, fashionable in some circles, that technocratic autocracies are more capable of solving complex problems than democracies.
Otherwise said: it is an effective, Hayekian rebuttal to Thomas Friedman.
The Friedman Fallacy is typical of many of our public intellectuals, and it goes like this: China is ruled by a highly educated benevolent autocracy that is much more capable of discerning what must be done swiftly, devising a unified strategy, sinking the necessary resources into projects immediately, and producing results. Friedman’s preferred term for this caste of rulers is “relatively enlightened”, although we are left to guess relative to what.
In contrast, Friedman implies that democracies waste too much time deliberating action. They can’t continue schemes from one administration to another. They muddle through with half-measures and compromises. Their various institutional checks are barriers to getting things done. They appear messy.
McArdle concludes with this biting observation:
We don't know that this accident was caused by China's autocratic political system; even the best-run systems do occasionally have accidents. But what's emerging from behind the shiny pictures of whizzy trains and smiling engineers is a story of overreach, corruption, and possibly disastrous construction shortcuts. We should not lament the fact that we couldn't do anything like this here.
Indeed. Removing the rose-colored glasses, the reality is that China is not merely a rising power but a still-developing nation with massive internal problems and a political culture that is not as adept at solving them as some in the West would have us believe. Our hearts go out to the victims and families involved in these terrible events, but our heads ought to be clear in thinking through their causes.
- Comment (11)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
Democracy used to do things just fine. Victor Davis Hansen has a great take on it here. People also forget that "benign dictators" can certainly do things swiftly, devise a unified strategy, sink the necessary resources into projects immediately, and produce results. However, they aren't going to do the right things 100% of the time. Thus, they will do bad things with equal swiftness and efficiency. In my mind, China has been so backward for so long, that they're still on a streak of doing totally obvious things, and therefore have been lucky so far. Maybe we're in the early stages of an undiscovered new way of effective governance via China's model, but I highly doubt it. Their blunders will only catch up with them.
Oct '10
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
BIG is the beginning and end of this issue. BIG benevolent dictatorships get big things done quickly and efficiently. And they often get replaced by BIG, corrupt and dangerous autocracies which not only destroy the good works of the previous autocrat, but then set about to destroy any good thing there is..
Small democratic governments do not accomplish great and noble things. They remain out of the way so great and noble things, BIG, that is, are done by free people pursuing their free dreams unencumbered. When they are replaced by BIG government BIG and IGNOBLE things are accomplished.
What we have now in America isn't appreciably better than China has when it comes to getting BIG things done.
Only a FREE and good people can have the small government that allows for BIG and NOBLE accomplishments.
Edited on Jul 26, 2011 at 10:42amJun '10
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
Politics is based on the all important cohesion of loyalty—party, tribe. or clan. Commerce and engineering are based on the all important cohesion of competence. Rarely the twain shall meet.
Feb '11
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
You're right, of course, about the Friedman Fallacy. Authoritarian regimes are not nearly as efficient as they sometimes appear from the outside, and to the extent they *are* efficient in the short term, they accomplish this by destroying the individual initiative on which *future* efficiencies depend. (The same is true of corporations which are excessively founder/CEO-driven.)
Because of the nature of railroad operations, I would hypothesize that rail safety in a given society is a pretty good indicator of a number of social factors. With this in mind, there have been a two Washington Metrorail accidents in recent years which should be extremely disturbing:
1)Driver was denied permission to switch from automatic to manual control, in icing conditions, despite there being plenty of evidence that programming did not properly handle such conditions. He was killed when train slid into one in front of it.
2)Last year about 10 people were killed due to false "track clear" indications from signaling system...again, these was plenty of data pointing to this as potential problem. NTSB has expressed extreme concern about Metro's "safety culture," or lack thereof.
Also issues with falsified signal reports from inspectors in NYC.
Feb '11
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
Also...there was a really awful WSJ op-ed a week or so ago by former Microsoft C.O.O. Robert Herbold, in which he basically took Friedman's position on the wonderfulness of the Chinese way.
Edited on Jul 26, 2011 at 12:26pmJul '10
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
Yes, yes, but they banned plastic bags, so it kind of balances out.
Sep '10
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
I have one word that will encapsulate this discussion,...Enron.
China is doing wonderfully for now, but I would not be surprised that they are buoyed more by increases in cash flow than in profits on particular transactions. We tend to focus on China's obvious successes in using under-utilized, cheap labor. Does anyone think that high speed rail makes more sense in China than it does in California? How many bad deals are done that we don't talk about?
May '10
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
From the dictatorship that Tom Friedman envies so much: "...Hong Kong University's China Media Project said propaganda authorities have ordered media not to send reporters to the scene, not to report too frequently and not to link the story to high-speed rail development. 'There must be no seeking after the causes [of the accident], rather, statements from authoritative departments must be followed,' said one directive. Another ordered: 'No calling into doubt, no development [of further issues], no speculation, and no dissemination [of such things] on personal microblogs!'"
May '10
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
The Japanese are following this story with eagle eyes. The general consensus on one morning show was "I can't understand that country!" Japanese don't like accidents.
1. The Japanese shinkansen has NEVER had an accident in 40 or 50 years.
2. The Chinese played off the French, Germans and Japanese against each other in order to steal their technology. Now the Chinese are trying to undercut them all on the international market.
---
Lesson: The Chinese are playing hardball and don't mind if they cut a few corners in the process.
Edited on Jul 26, 2011 at 9:58pmMay '11
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
^^ Well I don't think those countries' rail export industries have much to worry about now; no-one is going to touch the Chinese made system with a 40 foot pole.
Also, when looking at the merits of technocratic autocracies, it's necessary to compare ALL of them over a period of time, not just one unique example that happens to be doing OK for the moment. Open democracies are still miles in front, all things considered.
Mar '11
Re: A Technocratic Trainwreck
Don't get me wrong, by the way--infrastructure projects in any country present plenty of opportunities for cutting corners, corrupt bargains, shotty practices, extortion and fraud. See Big Dig, The.
But these temptations and problems are exacerbated in autocratic states by the complete lack of any political accountability mechanisms or market forces. Autocrats are willing, and able, to disregard any pesky externalities in the quest to show they can do impressive things quickly.
Lives lost in the process? Merely collateral damage; a noble sacrifice for the good their comrades will enjoy.....