Seems like a response to @bkhoshim's op-ed @gazeta_uz on democratisation as a reason of economic growth. Experts at the Center for Economic Research warn that democracy may not be a panacea for all economic and political problems in #Uzbekistan. (thread) https://podrobno.uz/cat/obchestvo/yavlyaetsya-li-demokratiya-panatseey-dlya-resheniya-vsekh-ekonomicheskikh-i-politicheskikh-problem-v/

Referring to the works of other economists experts at CER argue that economic growth leads to democratisation and stable democracies depend on high GDP per capita, wide literacy and education and urbanisation. They provide cases of Chili, South Korea, Taiwan, Spain and Portugal.

They provide cases of Singapore and Chile coined by the West as autocratic regimes but maintained a high level of economic freedom and ensured a fairly high level of well-being. They also add that most of the developed countries became rich precisely during the monarchical rule.

They also argue that in our current world where there is a domination of democracy there is a certain bias towards this political system and considerations of historical aspects of state and economic development are absent.

Shocking! They argue in developing countries with no advanced technologies, low production costs are ensured by very low wages, which was the main factor in the Korean and Chinese "economic miracle". Therefore, democracy for them is a barrier for a public consensus on low wages.

Here is the neoliberal paradox! How disgusting to treat citizens as a mere commodity of the production process. So the recipe for "Uzbek economic miracle" is the exploitation of Uzbek people for the sake of GDP growth? So trade unions and civil society are bad for econ. growth?