Make Egypt from an agrarian county to 1st world

I do hope that you support legalizing incest between consenting adults as well. Seriously; after all, I admire consistency in regards to this.

Correct, I do, since it harms no one (key words are consenting and adults). To connect with this argument, this is something which can remain out of the hands of the Egyptian government (i.e. legal) as they establish an authoritarian society in other ways to enable growth.

They don't have to be authoritarian of course, but I think it's highly likely to happen anyway considering Egypt's position, and I'm also relying on some political science evidence which has shown that democracies in developing countries have not necessarily been better at development than authoritarian countries.

True, correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation. However, I have yet to hear an alternative explanation for this close correlation between IQ/human capital and GDP per capita.

If you don't think that cousin marriage is responsible for Egypt's likely low IQ rate (Mr. Karlin doesn't appear to have data for Egypt, but the results from countries such as Jordan and Syria aren't exactly encouraging), fine. In any case, though, based on Mr. Karlin's research, I suspect that countries which want to reach a Western standard of living should raise their IQs to Western levels. Personally, I would crack down on cousin marriage and also ensure that Egyptians had good nutrition and healthcare; now, if that's not enough, you could look at things such as having parents genetically editing their embryos for intelligence (which I certainly suspect will eventually happen in any case).

Anyway, if you have anything to add to this, please go ahead. :)

I just don't think cousin marriage is a particular big factor in this. It sounds a bit like the race and IQ arguments. The average IQ of some nations, going by some IQ studies, is as low as the high 60s (in parts of sub-Saharan Africa and Melanesia, IIRC, citing these studies). That classifies as being at the borderline of having a major intellectual disability (using the modern terminology for it). Yet these societies still function and clearly aren't run by people with mental disabilities any more than anywhere else. That right there is a major issue with the idea of IQ and economic development. And I'm fairly positive that cousin marriage's legality won't really help or hurt things.

Think of it--if cousin marriage drags down your IQ, wouldn't that imply that its practioners were low IQ to begin with, since new traits are being less introduced into the gene pool? If you had high IQ cousins and descendents repeatedly coupling, it would concentrate the genetics of that group and tend to make high IQ people (in theory). Maybe you could explain the "high IQ" cousin couples as being the elite in Egyptian society (and elsewhere) and the "low IQ" cousin couples making up the lower class and otherwise majority of the people? I think the implications of all this are a bit disturbing, definitely against common morals, and likely unscientific.

Now, raising the general IQ? Sounds good--there's really nothing wrong that can come about, and proven ways (education, nutrition, healthcare, etc.) benefit any society in many other ways.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Correct, I do, since it harms no one (key words are consenting and adults). To connect with this argument, this is something which can remain out of the hands of the Egyptian government (i.e. legal) as they establish an authoritarian society in other ways to enable growth.

OK.

They don't have to be authoritarian of course, but I think it's highly likely to happen anyway considering Egypt's position, and I'm also relying on some political science evidence which has shown that democracies in developing countries have not necessarily been better at development than authoritarian countries.

OK.

Also, for the record, I view this issue as a mixed bag; in other words, democratic countries can develop well (indeed, just look at the U.S. throughout its history), democratic countries can develop poorly (ex. Ukraine), dictatorships can develop well (ex. Kazakhstan), and dictatorships can develop poorly (ex. Zimbabwe).

I just don't think cousin marriage is a particular big factor in this. It sounds a bit like the race and IQ arguments. The average IQ of some nations, going by some IQ studies, is as low as the high 60s (in parts of sub-Saharan Africa and Melanesia, IIRC, citing these studies). That classifies as being at the borderline of having a major intellectual disability (using the modern terminology for it). Yet these societies still function and clearly aren't run by people with mental disabilities any more than anywhere else. That right there is a major issue with the idea of IQ and economic development. And I'm fairly positive that cousin marriage's legality won't really help or hurt things.

In regards to the IQ of the elite in various Third World countries, their IQ is almost certainly much higher than 70. Indeed, this is evident by the education and financial success that recent African immigrants to the U.S. have.

Thus, if a country's IQ is 70, its leaders are almost certainly going to have an IQ of much higher than that--probably higher than 100, for that matter.

Think of it--if cousin marriage drags down your IQ, wouldn't that imply that its practioners were low IQ to begin with, since new traits are being less introduced into the gene pool? If you had high IQ cousins and descendents repeatedly coupling, it would concentrate the genetics of that group and tend to make high IQ people (in theory). Maybe you could explain the "high IQ" cousin couples as being the elite in Egyptian society (and elsewhere) and the "low IQ" cousin couples making up the lower class and otherwise majority of the people? I think the implications of all this are a bit disturbing, definitely against common morals, and likely unscientific.

Maybe your point here has validity; I don't know--I'm not an expert on this issue myself.

However, what about if certain genes increase your intelligence when you have one copy of this gene and decrease your intelligence when you have two copies of this gene? Indeed, could that be possible?

Also, as a side note, I am well-aware that we haven't identified all of the genes which are responsible for intelligence yet.

Now, raising the general IQ? Sounds good--there's really nothing wrong that can come about, and proven ways (education, nutrition, healthcare, etc.) benefit any society in many other ways.

Great to hear! :)
 
Blue sky thinking suez works, the monarchy is restored under a regent for Faud II.
Israel forces camp David 22 years sooner, The usa makes Egypt is pet provided it adopts capitalism. With three absent wars, and a flat tax, South Korea style take off happens. Iris survived also, momer doesn't have a big uncle.
 
Make Egypt the centre of an Islamic enlightenment in the 1950s, probably as a counter-balance to Saudi Arabia and Wahhabism.
 
Blue sky thinking suez works, the monarchy is restored under a regent for Faud II.
Israel forces camp David 22 years sooner, The usa makes Egypt is pet provided it adopts capitalism. With three absent wars, and a flat tax, South Korea style take off happens. Iris survived also, momer doesn't have a big uncle.

I think actually this probably creates more problems than it solves. You would end up with a deeply unpopular monarchy installed by the West, resentment at the loss of the Sinai to Israel [an objective for Ben-Gurion] and an economy heavily geared towards the needs of Western companies. Basically you run the risk of creating similar conditions which led to the Islamic Revolution in Iran.

I'm not sure what you are referring to regarding Iris and Momer?

Make Egypt the centre of an Islamic enlightenment in the 1950s, probably as a counter-balance to Saudi Arabia and Wahhabism.

Hard to do. Nasser was keen, and supported a modernisation of Al-Azhar as a counterbalance to Wahabism, but religious policy always clashed against more orthodox atheist socialists in his group. It also doesn't remove the key problems that held back the Egyptian economy in this period.
 
Arab victory in 1948.

Later, Nasserist coups/revolutions in Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, and Sudan unify themselves into the United Arab Republic (UAR). With several other countries joining the UAR, it counterbalances Egyptian domination and becomes more of a federation than a strictly unitary regime.

The UAR becomes the heart of the Non-Aligned Movement and plays both the Americans and Soviets against each other for maximum economic benefit.

The main foes of the UAR are the conservative Sunni monarchies of the Gulf. They fight a proxy war - which they lose - against the UAR in Yemen.

The UAR is also hostile to Britain and France, but maintains good relations with the U.S. The UAR also has good relations with Turkey and Iran.

The UAR heavily backs the Algerian independence struggle. When Algeria achieves independence it joins the UAR. Morocco is terrified and aligns closer to France and the Gulf monarchies in reaction.

The UAR has large oil reserves now in addition to the Suez Canal and large land mass, population and other resources. Should be enough to industrialise and thrive if they remain stable and united.
 
Last edited:
It seems that most of the countries that dragged themselves out of poverty and became developed or improved their living standards significantly against the odds were all influenced by Confucianism (Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, China).

How about Egypt promotes some similar values in its education system and society?

Eventually it has a stable environment for foreign investment due to its low cost labour and develops along similar lines to the Asian Tigers.

But not sure if this is possible due to the culture and religion, as well as the regional instability.
 
Honestly you'd need Muhammad Ali Pasha's reforms to stick and become more deeply rooted which requires a PoD back in the 1800s. Nearly a century of colonialism, foreign influence and the economic and political consequences of those factors created a huge barrier to effectively industrializing in the 1950s or any other point in the 20th century. For all the flak Nasser is getting in this thread he took a lot of steps in the right direction towards making it happen and if he'd been a lot less bellicose re Syria, Yemen and Israel the military would've probably been much weaker and more funds would've been available for modernization programs. On the flip side, however, he kinda needed a strong military thanks to stuff like the Suez Crisis and other instances prior to deter direct foreign intervention in Egyptian domestic affairs so he was sort of stuck between a rock and a hard place.
 

PhilippeO

Banned
i think the problem with cousin marriage (especially Arabs father's brother's daughter) is that it encourage development of strong 'Clans' and strengthen ramily ties. it thus encourage nepotism and corruption while cause hindrance to nationalism /patriotism, rule of law, and respect to legal solution.

Christian countries who ban consanguinity marriage successfully destroy tribal society. And area inside Hajnal Line is first to contribute to Industrial Revolution is notable for nuclear family, late marriages, and weak extended family. East Asia who second to be successful in become First Worlder following Christianity is dominated by Confucian tenet which ban marriage to father's relative/same surname. while Arabic countries who practice FBD cousin marriage is oftejn regarded at bottom of social/institutional development.
 
I think actually this probably creates more problems than it solves. You would end up with a deeply unpopular monarchy installed by the West, resentment at the loss of the Sinai to Israel [an objective for Ben-Gurion] and an economy heavily geared towards the needs of Western companies. Basically, you run the risk of creating similar conditions which led to the Islamic Revolution in Iran.

I'm not sure what you are referring to regarding Iris and Momer?

The Lybians copied egypt.

Hard to do. Nasser was keen, and supported a modernisation of Al-Azhar as a counterbalance to Wahabism, but religious policy always clashed against more orthodox atheist socialists in his group. It also doesn't remove the key problems that held back the Egyptian economy in this period.
 
Arab victory in 1948.

Later, Nasserist coups/revolutions in Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, and Sudan unify themselves into the United Arab Republic (UAR). With several other countries joining the UAR, it counterbalances Egyptian domination and becomes more of a federation than a strictly unitary regime.

The UAR becomes the heart of the Non-Aligned Movement and plays both the Americans and Soviets against each other for maximum economic benefit.

The main foes of the UAR are the conservative Sunni monarchies of the Gulf. They fight a proxy war - which they lose - against the UAR in Yemen.

The UAR is also hostile to Britain and France, but maintains good relations with the U.S. The UAR also has good relations with Turkey and Iran.

The UAR heavily backs the Algerian independence struggle. When Algeria achieves independence it joins the UAR. Morocco is terrified and aligns closer to France and the Gulf monarchies in reaction.

The UAR has large oil reserves now in addition to the Suez Canal and large land mass, population and other resources. Should be enough to industrialise and thrive if they remain stable and united.
With no homeland where do the jews go?
 
OK.



You could try getting more Western agricultural technology into Egypt and thus reducing Egyptian farmers' perceived need to have more children, though.

That helps immensely in the long run, over 2-3 generations. In the shorter run it can, if it occurs rapidly, create a massive disruption in labor, the economy, and socially. Mechanization usually leads to reduction in the hired agriculture labor force before the family requirement is reduced, & it leads to consolidation of farms which removes entire families from ag. labor. When this occurs rapidly, say a 20 to 30 % reduction over a decade or two there scan be severe economic and social problems. Unless industrial growth is rapid, as it was in the US 1880 thru 1910+ the surplus labor leaving a shin king ag labor requirement results in a lot of formerly skilled and semi skilled workers chronically unemployed & working at sub survival wages.
 

oberdada

Gone Fishin'
Arab victory in 1948.

Later, Nasserist coups/revolutions in Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, and Sudan unify themselves into the United Arab Republic (UAR). With several other countries joining the UAR, it counterbalances Egyptian domination and becomes more of a federation than a strictly unitary regime.

The UAR becomes the heart of the Non-Aligned Movement and plays both the Americans and Soviets against each other for maximum economic benefit.

The main foes of the UAR are the conservative Sunni monarchies of the Gulf. They fight a proxy war - which they lose - against the UAR in Yemen.

The UAR is also hostile to Britain and France, but maintains good relations with the U.S. The UAR also has good relations with Turkey and Iran.

The UAR heavily backs the Algerian independence struggle. When Algeria achieves independence it joins the UAR. Morocco is terrified and aligns closer to France and the Gulf monarchies in reaction.

The UAR has large oil reserves now in addition to the Suez Canal and large land mass, population and other resources. Should be enough to industrialise and thrive if they remain stable and united.

Basicly a Panarabismwank, haven't seen one of those here yet...
But maybe it's time
 
Blue sky thinking Suez works, the monarchy is restored under a regent for Faud II.
Restore the monarchy? Yeah, that's never going to happen. Both in the person of Farouk and as an institution it was deeply unpopular and completely discredited with the Egyptian public. You can forget about the British as well, even with a successful Suez intervention the had absolutely no plans to stick around, this was very much a tip and run affair - get in, secure the Canal, scare the Egyptians enough for them to overthrow Nasser, negotiate a quick deal with the new leadership to return things to the way they were before the seizure of the Canal, and get out as soon as possible.
 
Restore the monarchy? Yeah, that's never going to happen. Both in the person of Farouk and as an institution it was deeply unpopular and completely discredited with the Egyptian public. You can forget about the British as well, even with a successful Suez intervention the had absolutely no plans to stick around, this was very much a tip and run affair - get in, secure the Canal, scare the Egyptians enough for them to overthrow Nasser, negotiate a quick deal with the new leadership to return things to the way they were before the seizure of the Canal, and get out as soon as possible.
without a monarchy or nasser who makes up the leadership?
 
Top