I'm leaving Japan tomorrow having cycled around Kyushu for five weeks with my family. We have given the kids (2 and 4 years old) more independence than home (Australia) because of how safe it has felt. The lack of public bins has been difficult though, especially as we have nappies and are camping - sometimes carrying a few kilos of various types of rubbish. We've been through a bunch of the dying towns which has been interesting; sometimes we saw only 70+ year olds for a few days. While travelling I've reflected often on the things which could be possible if only people in my local area did just. Or more like *didn't* - nicer public parks and gardens, being able to leave a bike locked up with parts being stolen from it (in South Korea and Japan you can leave even luggage attached to an unlocked bike without fear of anything being stolen).
Perhaps from a Western perspective obligations to wives and parents could be seen as oppressive. Considering the failure rate of new businesses, it would be prudent for almost everyone to talk their friends and family out of entrepreneurship.
The most ambitious and talented could succeed in bold new ventures but setting the expectations of average people at greatness is delusional. Expecting greatness from average people in the hope of nurturing the next genius entrepreneur does not make such a genius or the potential benefits to society any more likely. America's brain drain as explicit policy and defunding the regulatory state does, however, make those potential benefits more likely.
Diligent conformity as a cultural norm is far superior to demanding greatness from all. The ultra talented will violate that norm without encouragement from the wider society, as they should, as long as bureaucrats stay out of the way.
I suggest that there's a difference between "everyone just X" as an *input* to a plan/system/suggestion and "...and then everyone will X" as an *output* of a system.
Or, put another way, the most important word in "everyone won't just..." is 'just', not 'won't'. Japan didn't 'just' coordinate like that - they built their entire society from the ground up to achieve it, and it came with significant preconditions and consequences.
The correct understanding of the line is as a dismissal of any suggestion that tries to skip or ignore those preconditions and consequences, not as a dismissal of the whole idea of coordination. (This being the internet, I make no claim that people actually do understand it that way...)
I'm leaving Japan tomorrow having cycled around Kyushu for five weeks with my family. We have given the kids (2 and 4 years old) more independence than home (Australia) because of how safe it has felt. The lack of public bins has been difficult though, especially as we have nappies and are camping - sometimes carrying a few kilos of various types of rubbish. We've been through a bunch of the dying towns which has been interesting; sometimes we saw only 70+ year olds for a few days. While travelling I've reflected often on the things which could be possible if only people in my local area did just. Or more like *didn't* - nicer public parks and gardens, being able to leave a bike locked up with parts being stolen from it (in South Korea and Japan you can leave even luggage attached to an unlocked bike without fear of anything being stolen).
Perhaps from a Western perspective obligations to wives and parents could be seen as oppressive. Considering the failure rate of new businesses, it would be prudent for almost everyone to talk their friends and family out of entrepreneurship.
The most ambitious and talented could succeed in bold new ventures but setting the expectations of average people at greatness is delusional. Expecting greatness from average people in the hope of nurturing the next genius entrepreneur does not make such a genius or the potential benefits to society any more likely. America's brain drain as explicit policy and defunding the regulatory state does, however, make those potential benefits more likely.
Diligent conformity as a cultural norm is far superior to demanding greatness from all. The ultra talented will violate that norm without encouragement from the wider society, as they should, as long as bureaucrats stay out of the way.
I suggest that there's a difference between "everyone just X" as an *input* to a plan/system/suggestion and "...and then everyone will X" as an *output* of a system.
Or, put another way, the most important word in "everyone won't just..." is 'just', not 'won't'. Japan didn't 'just' coordinate like that - they built their entire society from the ground up to achieve it, and it came with significant preconditions and consequences.
The correct understanding of the line is as a dismissal of any suggestion that tries to skip or ignore those preconditions and consequences, not as a dismissal of the whole idea of coordination. (This being the internet, I make no claim that people actually do understand it that way...)