Could mass layoffs in China result in a violent crackdown on unrest by the CCP?

i agree with crobato there. "long-term" is a very crucial point. can you imagine UK carrying out the enclosure movement under today's democratic system? i remember some american scholar said the american government plans for what happens four years later while the Chinese government plans for what happens twenty years later. this is not always true but it does hold in most cases.

as for the CCP "failing". it depends on what your definition of failing is. say if a few uni students go kabooey like they did in 89. would you consider that failing? it was actually considered to be quite a success by the party leaders as Deng's hardline reaction brought 20 years of stability in China, which in turn ensured 20 years of unprecedented growth rate. so even the 89 Tiananmen square incident isnt failing. so what is failing? its very difficult to imagine anything worse than that to happen. dont underestimate the CCP, remember that ever since its creation it has beaten every foe it has met. so many ppl tell me that during the great leap forward/three years of natural disasters 30 million ppl died of hunger, well if that is indeed true and the ppl didnt rebel, they are not gonna start now when the future looks much more promising for China even compared to the US

China's laid off worker are mostly former farmers, so called migrant workers, unlike workers in US or EU, they will always have they countryside home and land to return on, while city folks would rarely work in those factories, and they will always have the social inssurence to live on if they lose job, although not much.

well its been nearly 20 years and people keep bringing up Tianamen Square 89, I dont understand why dont they bring up the British Empire terror around the world several centuries ago while their at it. They hasnt been a crackdown since 89, all of these so called crackdowns happening in China are just officer inspecting the situation, its between the owners and the workers, not CCP problem.

Ive never understood why people say China lacks freedom of speech, people can demonstrate but anything that isnt related to politics. So called freedom of western society isnt so "free" if you look at the constitution and legislations they are many things that supress freedom. Freedom is a broad meaning word, and freedom of speech which people mention the most is just but one on the list.

the current situation isn't too violent, as the one in Tibet. remember 89 crackdown china forces didnt have nonlethal equipment back then, so they had to use live ammunition to disperse the protest, as it was getting a bit restless.

I will also repeat something previously stated, that many of the close downs in the low end shake out at the Coast,are in fact crafty low cost relocations to the Interior, which is another reason why so many migrants are heading back inland.

As others have said most of the protests are over back wages and so much of the problem revolves around the technicalities of winding up and the advantages/demerits of relocation vs new start up, when it comes to grants and other state assistance for new ventures in the Interior Provinces.

If anybody doubts this then simply understand that with the lowest expectation for growth in China over the next couple of years to be 7.5%, then clearly new jobs and more are replacing those being "lost" on the Coast.

With regards to the government creating more jobs, it isn't as hard as people probably have thought. Sichuan Earthquake has provided the government the perfect place to start. Entire towns in the affected area have to be rebuilt, and that's going to require massive amounts of manpower to do. If the government could manage this situation correctly, I believe unrest due to unemployment is perhaps not as severe as we have thought.

The BBC reporter Quentin Sommerville reports large areas of deflation in China. In many instances wages are halved. Would this be the straw that broke the camels back?
For many yrs many of Chinas population have willingly put up with hardship so as to make a better life for their children, but through deflation, they could possibly see themselves going backwards, which casts a different light on the situation.

crobato said:

That's how accountability in the PRC goes. In a democratic country, with biparty or multiparty setup, one party can blame the other party for the woes. In the PRC, there is only one party, and no one can blame another party but the Party.

Click to expand...

Whether there is another political party to blame or not isn't the end of it, as the CCP can still blame others, such as "malcontents", "foreign agents", "splittists", etc.

Personally I think you'll find find the hardliners in the CCP would be willing to see civilians be beaten to a bloody pulp or shot by the PLA if there were more riots such that the government's position was being threatened. Whether the CCP would change, step aside or initiate a crackdown would depend on who was in control or took control of the government and armed forces at the time.

In regards to growth, it has been widely reported that the Chinese government believes it needs 8% a year to absorb the millions of new entrants to the work force.

The lowest 2009 estimate is currently 7%, not 7.5%. Neither would be sufficient.

Mr T said:

Whether there is another political party to blame or not isn't the end of it, as the CCP can still blame others, such as "malcontents", "foreign agents", "splittists", etc.

Personally I think you'll find find the hardliners in the CCP would be willing to see civilians be beaten to a bloody pulp or shot by the PLA if there were more riots such that the government's position was being threatened. Whether the CCP would change, step aside or initiate a crackdown would depend on who was in control or took control of the government and armed forces at the time.

In regards to growth, it has been widely reported that the Chinese government believes it needs 8% a year to absorb the millions of new entrants to the work force.

The lowest 2009 estimate is currently 7%, not 7.5%. Neither would be sufficient.

Click to expand...

***********************************************************************the truth is any government will do whatever is necessary to eradicate any destabilizing factors. look at how the americans put down the LA riot in 95. the revered general macarthur and eisenhower took part in the bloody crackdown of american WWI veterans. (i forgot which year) its perfectly legit for a government to take necessary measures to suppress irrational political discourses. this is politics, not day-dreaming in a university political science class where everything you say would not generate serious consequences.
as far as i am concerned, 7% is still a breeze ahead of anything the US and UK can conjure within the next decade.
afterall, so the CCP will crackdown on the unrests, what would the west do about it? just talk like they did in march?:china:

Mr T said:

Whether there is another political party to blame or not isn't the end of it, as the CCP can still blame others, such as "malcontents", "foreign agents", "splittists", etc.

Click to expand...

You can't do that when it comes to economic matters.

Personally I think you'll find find the hardliners in the CCP would be willing to see civilians be beaten to a bloody pulp or shot by the PLA if there were more riots such that the government's position was being threatened. Whether the CCP would change, step aside or initiate a crackdown would depend on who was in control or took control of the government and armed forces at the time.

Click to expand...

We'll see but Tianammen experience, far from an exercise in futility, did change and traumatized the CCP. More and more the leaders are coming from the same generation that led that uprising.

In regards to growth, it has been widely reported that the Chinese government believes it needs 8% a year to absorb the millions of new entrants to the work force.

Click to expand...

Every country has millions of new entrants to the work force every year. You expect them not to riot when they don't get jobs? Chinese government set high standards for themselves every year, nothing wrong with that.

Every Chinese in the PRC can read the news, and even in economic downturns, they know their government (unlike some others) are doing the best it can and is not the blame for the downturn.

pla101prc said:

......as far as i am concerned, 7% is still a breeze ahead of anything the US and UK can conjure within the next decade.
........

Click to expand...

Yup, as I've said before of the current financial crisis, even with 7% in China & recession in the developed countries, it'll actually increase the rate of China's catching up in terms of GDP when one sees that it was 11% & 2-3% respectively prior to the crisis.

The so-called needing at least 8% of growth due to the large workforce size is one of the funnier 'myths' often used by many western sources. I've not seen anyone quoting any scientific studies why this is so.
Probably it has much to do with China has a habit of picking 8% as its growth estimation for as long as I can remember even when it turned out to be closer to 12%, so the western sources just 'picked' this number.
Not to mention those commentators probably know China's growth is not likely to fall too much so they pick an easy target like 8% so easier to claim 'victory' with regard to their prediction of a Chinese slowdown I guess.
Had some good laughs lately when I see some sources even claiming again without quoting any studies that China needing more than 8%, the highest I've seen is 10%.

BTW, I wouldn't worry too much about the CNN report at the top of the thread. It's nothing but regurgitation of layoff reports to fill news space really. When/if these journalist decide to do more research like coming up with numbers to compare the current layoffs with the past, then I'll pay attention.