Since the end of World War II, many East Asian economies have witnessed “miraculous” growth. And with so many other nations still in poverty, economists and leaders are turning their eyes toward the “East Asian tigers” to see if they can replicate their results. Looking at the facts it is obvious that the circumstances that East Asian nations faced were very different from those that nations face today. But outside of these differences, a rough model of the East Asian miracle can be used today in Third World nations and, considering the high success rate of so many East Asian economies, would most likely see positive results. Asian economies represent the hand that the government has had in industrial affairs. Starting in the 1950s, nations like China began taking steps toward centralized government through reforms. An example of this would be the Chinese land reform of the 1950s under the new communist regime of Mao Zedong (Blecher, 2010: p.27). This land reform eliminated the oligarchic control of landowners, transforming the feudal politics of landownership into a more capitalist form of socialism in which the government is in control. This is clearly a very vital part of the industrialization process as many nations that have failed at land reform continue to find themselves struggling to climb out of poverty. A modern example of this would be Brazil, where rural landowners have blocked any kind of reform that could dismantle their rule over peasants, farmers and tenant farmers (Kay, 2002: p.1076). The institution of land reform was a vital part of industrialization in East Asia, unlike other nations it was introduced before economies got back on their feet and with... total free trade, it only opened its borders in 19th century (Chang, 2003:23). Despite this, industrialized nations, with the United States at the forefront, continue to advocate for greater “freedom” in the economies of developing nations, arguing that there is no other way to free themselves from poverty. In this way they present themselves as hypocrites calling for greater market freedom when in reality nations that practice state intervention, as they have done in previous phases, have seen greater economic success. Two prime examples would be China and India which both have a high level of state involvement in their respective markets, yet both nations have become the model for developing nations in the 21st century (Chang and Grabel, 2004: 13). But whatever the reason, the West continues to support a policy that it itself has barely used.