> This immediately invalidates all the other comments saying that uniformity of behaviour/lack of entrepreneurship is a consequence of this in Japan, since it also works in Singapore where (perceived) entrepreneurship is much higher.
No, it doesn't. In Japan, that safety is a product of a culture of uniformity, which invariably results in a lack of entrepreneurship/innovation.
In Singapore, that "safety" is the product of an authoritarian government that severely curtails civil liberties and human rights. Free speech and political freedoms are restricted, chewing gum is banned for non-medical purposes, and the punishment for possessing 500+ grams of pot is a mandatory death sentence. Archaic and barbaric punishments such as caning continue to be practiced. Such an oppressive government is not something we want in the West, regardless of the "benefits."
As Benjamin Franklin said:
> They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
> I guess all those famous Japanese brands just some how happened without any entrepreneurship and their products happened without any innovation.
The Japanese are very skilled at taking what others have done and incrementally improving it. By reverse engineering American cars, they were able to beat the Americans at their own game, producing more reliable, efficient, and defect-free cars. Thanks to the cooperative nature of their society, they avoided the antagonistic relationship between the UAW and the Big 3 American automakers that led to many of the financial problems faced by the Big 3. Similar success was seen in electronics by companies like Sony, allowing them to produce high quality TVs and other high-tech consumer products.
This sort of societal cohesiveness (along with cozy government-industry relations) removed a lot of barriers to the sorts of large and capital-intensive undertakings that are common in manufacturing. But it rarely produces the sorts of game-changing innovations that Silicon Valley, and America in general, is known for. The nature of Japanese society also prevented companies from restructuring and outsourcing their manufacturing to China, which allowed South Korean (and increasingly Chinese) rivals to largely displace them in consumer electronics. There's a reason why Sony's products are so unpopular these days - they're expensive as hell. Even in the automotive industry, Toyota/Honda are starting to get overtaken by the likes of Hyundai and Kia.
> Sorry, I didn't mean for this to be snarky but seriously... Your excuses are BS and don't live up to any scrutiny. It's not an either/or thing.
Actually, the problem is that you have a very shallow understanding of the situation. This isn't the sort of thing you can really comprehend with some weekend blog-reading. The Japanese should be credited for exploiting their post-WW2 alliance with the US to rapidly transform their economy while much of the world dicked around with communism and most of the West was in no better shape than Japan itself after the destruction of WW2. But transient effects stemming from quirks of history, although intriguing, don't disprove the bigger theory.
Except my old mailman who grew up in San Francisco in the late 40s told me that nobody in his multistory apartment building when he was a kid ever locked their doors even if they went out of town. I'm not sure what the difference is but it's not authoritarianism.
No, it doesn't. In Japan, that safety is a product of a culture of uniformity, which invariably results in a lack of entrepreneurship/innovation.
In Singapore, that "safety" is the product of an authoritarian government that severely curtails civil liberties and human rights. Free speech and political freedoms are restricted, chewing gum is banned for non-medical purposes, and the punishment for possessing 500+ grams of pot is a mandatory death sentence. Archaic and barbaric punishments such as caning continue to be practiced. Such an oppressive government is not something we want in the West, regardless of the "benefits."
As Benjamin Franklin said:
> They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.