Tthe countries that can address the political economy of business in Southeast Asia — historically a family affair — will be best placed to capitalise on the investment story of Southeast Asia
All in History
Tthe countries that can address the political economy of business in Southeast Asia — historically a family affair — will be best placed to capitalise on the investment story of Southeast Asia
But if we can hold off zombie interest groups for public policy, learn not to put human beings on pedestals, but simply take what their best and wisest decisions are for ourselves, while respecting our own mental health and that of everyone around us, maybe we’ll get through 2025 alright.
Whatever happens with global politics following the year of elections — especially with the US presidential election — navigating the waters of global policy means navigating “swamps, deserts and chasms”.
So, as we aspire to be “innovative” or “creative”, we must learn to be better at evaluating plausible useful counterfactuals. Playing too safe doesn’t really get us anywhere beyond what may be in textbooks. And being too unanchored just creates arguments as useful as those in YouTube comments.
It isn’t just our national finances that can ill-afford such populist measures, it is our entire development path. Can we come together to better understand our elite social terrain, and make moves towards a more sustainable future?
Perhaps a rule of thumb is as follows: “If you’re unsure, always choose against the status quo and always choose new.” Tradition is safe, but only innovation can get us where we need to go.
Many key ingredients of economic development require long-term planning, a greater tolerance for the long-term (patience) means that these ingredients may get to be fully cooked as well.
Global politics have historically coincided with the advancement of science and technology, in large part because global competition — be it among companies, firms or individuals — allows for greater funding of innovation. We are in such an “era”.
We need to be comprehensive of the mountains of potential data that we have lying all around us. Researchers have used tomb epitaphs, folklore stories and naming conventions from the past — can we challenge ourselves to be as creative and, more so, to digitise our data accordingly?
“New blood” necessarily means going against the status quo. That status quo can be entrenched for a variety of reasons, among which are the types of bonds developed since teenage-hood, forged in boarding schools across the nation.
It is not enough for policymakers to announce important ambitions and policy promises, we need all of Malaysia’s collective brain — our institutions, our cultural norms — to want to change as well. And that can be difficult.