Movie Review: Examine the videos of Huang and Pattanaik through the eyes of globalization. Each of the presenters is making the argument that Western industrial development does not overwhelm culture, and that their 'lesser developed' countries have much to teach the West. Do you agree, disagree and why?
- Medical Doctor Devdutt Pattanaik, in his presentation entitled: “East vs. West -- the myths that mystify,” shared his views about the difference between “the world” (logos) and “my world” (mythos). He gave mythological and real-world examples about objective and subjective truths. My personal stance is that I do not subscribe to Pattanaik’s idea between the myths that mystify –East vs. West; more so, in its significant relation to globalization. Although, one culture differs from another, a myth is simply a fantasy made real by some people’s wild imagination. On the contrary, a natural phenomenon can be tested and verified for scientific and objective truth.
Despite the fact that India (East) differs from its counterpart nations, Pattanaik’s insistency on subjective truth using various characters from Indian and Greek mythologies do not prove his case in today’s globalized setting. Pattanaik, in my understanding, mixed ‘realities’ with myths despite the fact that globalization calls for a standard. Culture, though, it plays a significant role for businesses, it is only thus in a particular geographic region. For example, the East has its own way of dealing with customers; the same holds true in the West. Oxymoronically, Pattanaik is in some ways committed the fallacy of generalization, but in another instance – he did not. The reason is obvious; he used both logos and mythos collectively, yet poorly, when he distinguished the East from West, and vice versa. Then, even if Pattabaik cited the Future group in India as his individual example, it is just a particular and confined case. Pattanaik said that in a diverse and dynamic markets/businesses, the institutionalized best practices developed in China, Japan, America and Europe will not work in India because of the latter’s mythic structure. Further, Pattanaik insisted that, in order to see how the market and organization behave, one should understand their individual mythology. I believe that Pattanaik’s viewpoints, illustrations, mythologies, etc. are all besides the point concerning globalization (or specifically, in view of businesses, organizations, and market dynamics worldwide).
I cannot see precisely how he used “the world” and “my world” in making a comparison between the East and West. Pattanaik was too confined in India that he even asserted that cultures and mythologies affect “individual thinking,” which is true, but not in the case of taking pride in “breaking the rules.” May I claim that India, according to Pattanaik, is driven by myths of ‘their world’ and not by the global standard .Hence, it is not surprising if someone will feel more of “exasperation” from his presentation because he is a medical doctor and not a business expert. Thus, even when Pattanaik believed that “globalization is taking place” (maybe it is true for some, or most part of the world), I am not sure why should other countries across the world should do business with India if it will not play by the rules. I cannot even understand why Pattanaik boasted of the use of “mostly” for “the process to invoice hospital” and for not putting value to ethical standards, such as the “right[ness] or wrong[ness] in what you do in life.” Unlike Pattanaik, I cannot even find a reason and the emotion why I should not “care for the processes.” Instead, Pattanaik has just been sensitive in understanding the Indian setting/context (and not the world, in general) just to make a customer happy “because the customer is God.” May I say that in today’s global setting, not everyone will subscribe to mythology, less subjective truth – except perhaps, if we play the game inside of our own backyard. Thus, I disagree with Pattanaik’s rhetorical assertions that “‘Western industrial development’” does not overwhelm culture and that “lesser developed” countries have much to teach the West. My reason is that India has not yet provided enough proofs why myths (mythos), mythologies, and subjective ‘truth’ should be regarded in high esteem. Just like what Dr. Pattanaik said, despite the fact that he had received a standing ovation in his TED talk, he took up different jobs except mythology that “does not pay, well, until now.”
Explicably, Shanghai’s model of economic growth posits that the infrastructure view positively affected China’s economic development. China can implement / act immediately on the building and rolling out of its infrastructure while India cannot because of the forms of their government – which are both true. I also believe Huang that the infrastructure view is not a full-proof guarantee for economic growth such that it even caused the collapse of the Soviet Union (in 1989). Then again, Huang said that the infrastructure view cannot solely account for why China did better in the late 1990s than India. But then again, Huang claimed that the infrastructure view is also a cause for economic growth. But, what about democracy if it is bad for economic growth? Why do some economists prefer authoritarian governments? Huang gave examples: India is democratic while Pakistan is not. There are countries who are under authoritarian regimes and yet they did not succeeded (e.g., South Korea vs. North Korea, Taiwan vs. China during Zedong’s, etc.). There is no conclusive evidence worldwide that authoritarian regimes have a systematic edge over democratic form of government in terms of economic growth.
Huang said that democracy does not stifle growth. However, he pointed out in details that China has a better GDP growth than India, higher literacy rate, and excellent raw fundamentals (e.g., human capital, public health and egalitarianism). Unlike China, India has many things to do to catch up in improving fundamentals (e.g., basic education and health) because it is beset with systematic biases and discrimination, for instance, against women (that is, gender inequality). China, who has an authoritarian government, is not such statically and dynamically. Huang even emphasized that over time China has become less authoritarian and more democratic. This is apparent because of China’s economic growth, which will only take place if change is embraced – yes, even “political reforms” for a “widely shared benefits” on its economic growth.
I think that in such as short time, Huang, as an economist and professor, had delivered his presentation to the point. He even retorted that comparing superstar China to India is not appropriate except when India is compared instead to other emerging economies. However, what I did not like about Huang’s presentation is the use of other countries. He should just have focused more his discussion using statistics and illustration between the “two countries” – China and India. But the question remains: Does Huang “is making the argument that Western industrial development does not overwhelm cultureDo you agree, disagree and why?” I agree with Huang that the Western industrial development does not overwhelm culture, but not with “lesser developed” countries to teach the former – except perhaps for China who continuously proves to the world its economy’s robustness.
China E-Commerce Seen Spiking. Vol. 202.108 . WWD: Women's Wear Daily. Business Source Complete, 22 November 2011. Web. 18 April 2013.
China, The Next Superpower? Vol. A15. Investors Business Daily. Business Source Complete, 11 March 2011. Web. April March 2013. <18>.
Does democracy stifle economic growth? Perf. Yasheng Huang. TED Conferences, LLC, 2013. Web. 17 April 2011.
East vs. West -- the myths that mystify. Perf. Devdutt Pattanaik. TED Conferences, LLC, 2009. Web. 17 April 2013.
Global Political Outlook. Vol. 2. Uganda Defence & Security Report. Business Source Complete, May 2011. Web. 18 April 2013.
Regan, Stephen. China: Growth Of The Next Superpower. Vol. 23. Recruiter. Business Source Complete, 12 May 2010. Web. 18 April 2013.