Roland S. Persson's (2012a) argument is that there is a dominant research culture in the field of gifts and talents, which must of necessity distort research and practice in cultures which are different. He ties this to the dominance of the global economy and points to the need for more cross-cultural studies. In this commentary, the author points out that it is impossible to disagree with the thrust of Persson's (2012a) scholarly paper, but at the same time, difficult to draw practical conclusions from it, other than to say that the recognition of cultural context and cross-cultural research is a "good thing", and differences should be recognised for their possible effects. What Persson (2012a) has written in his paper cannot be said too often. The evidence from the accumulated data is clear: That in helping the educational needs of the gifted, all too often political, religious and social attitudes are more influential than actual resources. Yet there are discernible international trends. Overall, in most of the world, enrichment and open access to high-level resources are becoming more favoured than acceleration in a limited area of study, except for such talents as music, dance and sport. The most obvious current change in international outlook is away from the provision of specific gifted education for the acceptable few, towards a more democratic approach, involving collaboration between everyone involved.