What is the Chinese System?

No one mentioned land reforms? I think that is an important factor too.

solarz said:

What I'm trying to get at is, how did the CCP go from the days of the Great Leap Forward to a party that has consistently managed to make the right calls with regards to China's progress?

For example, they could have focused on building a financial system like the US, but instead chose to focus on infrastructure. They could have focused on the military like the Soviet Union, but chose to focus on the economy instead. The party could be rife with nepotism and incompetent appointments, but somehow it has managed to produce competent leaders for 3 decades.

Click to expand...

The cultural revolution and Great Leap Forward were the result of absolute power resting in the hands of one (increasingly senile) man.

Since then, Chinese Presidents have wielded less and less absolute power with each successive generation and a form of internal checks and balances has been established whereby the Politburo Standing Committee collectively make the most important decisions. This helps to make sure more than one view is aired, and that major decisions are critically challenged and debated before implementation.

The selection process for high office in China is also a long and arduous affect, and the higher you climb, the longer and more detailed the scrutiny.

Take members of the Standing Committee for example, none of them are young, and all of them have spent pretty much their entire adult lives in the party climbing the ladder. One cannot really hide incompetence or serious personal shortcomings for that long from everyone who they have worked with.

So while there is indeed nepotism and incompetent appointments, those sorts don't really tend last long enough to get into high office before some slip up or scandal brings them down.

While there is no real independent media scrutiny of officials in China, inside the party, factional infighting is fierce and could arguably be far more critical and thorough than any independent journalist on a crusade because party insiders would have far greater access to information and people in the know than any outsider, however determined.

In a way, I think this produces better candidates than the western election process because not only are all the candidates for Chinese high officer highly experienced technocrats who should have a pretty good idea of what their job entails and how to do it well, but there would be far less chance that spin or clever campaigning can conceal their true selves from those who decide who should be in power because the people who will be deciding on who gets which post would have either worked with those candidates themselves, or can call up people who have worked with them for years or decades to give character references.

When you consider how many candidates get found out during your typically US presidential campaign of a few months, its easy to see how improbable it would be for someone to be able to fool everyone around them for decades.

Does adding modern infrastructure to a Medieval country all it needs to build a modern nation?

I do not think it does and that the key to a modern nation is the embedding of modern, rationale psychology throughout the population.
This is the biggest contribution that the CCP has achieved in the modernisation of the nation and the biggest advantage that China has scored over India.
I contend that there was little wrong with the theory of the Great Leap Forward and that it should not have been a disaster on the scale it proved to be. I have little doubt that it failed because it was a programme based on rationalism that was being implemented by a society still mired in ancient superstition.
Somehow, something between the mid 50's and 1979 caused a Quantum Leap in social psychology which enabled economic reforms to be implemented and implemented very successfully.
The only major event I am aware of that occurred during this period is the Cultural Revolution and I can only conclude that somehow this process dragged the social consciousness, kicking and screaming, into the modern rationale world.

I also appreciate that this is not a popular viewpoint, but the evidence both in China and in other Developing countries makes; what is to my mind, a very convincing argument.

SampanViking said:

Does adding modern infrastructure to a Medieval country all it needs to build a modern nation?

I do not think it does and that the key to a modern nation is the embedding of modern, rationale psychology throughout the population.
This is the biggest contribution that the CCP has achieved in the modernisation of the nation and the biggest advantage that China has scored over India.
I contend that there was little wrong with the theory of the Great Leap Forward and that it should not have been a disaster on the scale it proved to be. I have little doubt that it failed because it was a programme based on rationalism that was being implemented by a society still mired in ancient superstition.
Somehow, something between the mid 50's and 1979 caused a Quantum Leap in social psychology which enabled economic reforms to be implemented and implemented very successfully.
The only major event I am aware of that occurred during this period is the Cultural Revolution and I can only conclude that somehow this process dragged the social consciousness, kicking and screaming, into the modern rationale world.

I also appreciate that this is not a popular viewpoint, but the evidence both in China and in other Developing countries makes; what is to my mind, a very convincing argument.

Click to expand...

The core reason why The Great Leap Forward failed so miserably, as with almost all the other projects of the time, was the insane level of "slogan-isaion" in just about every level of execution, where science and professional sense shoved aside and political sense took over everything - in the part of steel production, with crude furnace and bad mixture produce only rubbish but that's what happened in that time...the production numbers were nice but the steel were unusable for anything; when came to crop production the local offices faked production numbers or not growing the crops correctly, or in many cases both happened at the same time, so when the lean years came there were the famous famine that cannibalism weren't unheard of.

If you want an example that's related to armament, that'd be the Type 63 rifle, yeah that hybrid of a SKS with something from the AK-47...

The political interloping were at its worst during the Cultural Revolution, which I think we all know the stories too well. Probably only the most critical pieces like the nuclear programme got spared, and the Forbidden City was physically garrisoned by PLA or we won't be seeing anything today.

So, after the Mao got stuffed and put on display, the Gang of Four got trialed and executed, what the leadership under Deng Xiaoping told everyone is "ok, the old way didn't work, let's try something else" so came the reform...there're a few idiots(or "the Left" as they are usually classified under) now and then embrace the old ways - and since it's China we're talking about, "a few" can still be quite a number and very noisy - but overall the reform is no turning back. In the years since the reform, science and professionals now leads the way, national and industrial standards (some argued those are copies of the Western systems, but a good system is one that worthy to emulate) are subsequently established and followed.

It was through 10 years of utter insanity that the Chinese realized what really don't work, thus people throw themselves into the reform and largely didn't look back. However, quality of its citizens - which give the Chinese tourists a really bad name these days - needs a lot of work to bring up to the level of the contemporary standards. The Chinese psyche need a lot of improvements to weed out the mentality that makes selling shoddy and harmful products.

That's what give China a new footing since 1980s, otherwise it'd already collapse following Mao's death.

The Cultural Revolution wasn't imo superstition or incompetence, i think it was more a deeper political issue, one that emerges in all revolutions, see the excesses of the French revolution and the terror of Robbespirre to see what i mean.

Fear, resentment and coming to terms with the failures of the previous regimes, it leads to seeking the opposite extreme to destroy all who oppose the direction that will bring salvation to the people.

I think Parag Khanna said it best about the China Model "The China model works for China because no other country has that kind of discipline"

For the quote jump to 1:01:40

The Chinese economy was stifled from the late 1950s to 1980, so the "astronomical" rise of its economy is expected once a freer market is introduced. The only leadership here is a shift from a dogmatic approach, to a pragmatic approach. Other than that, it is building a sound infrastructure, and encouraging exports.

A similar rise could be expected of North Korea, if they ever decide to open their economy. Its location by being between two economic powerhouses, China and South Korea, is very suitable for an export economy.

Ryz05 said:

The Chinese economy was stifled from the late 1950s to 1980, so the "astronomical" rise of its economy is expected once a freer market is introduced. The only leadership here is a shift from a dogmatic approach, to a pragmatic approach. Other than that, it is building a sound infrastructure, and encouraging exports.

A similar rise could be expected of North Korea, if they ever decide to open their economy. Its location by being between two economic powerhouses, China and South Korea, is very suitable for an export economy.

Click to expand...

It's nigh impossible to duplicate that in N.Korea, the kind of 100% track change China undertook needs a leadership that can shove aside both the objections from the old guards and the inner demon that distract you from the ultimate goal.

For one, Deng Xiaoping could do so because he was one of the last remaining big-shots who fought the civil war and within the inner circle, that's rallying prestige kind of assets. It's with such assets and grit that he could thumb down the heated argument of ideology and gave rise to the "black cat, white cat" argument that got everyone focused. But what the N.Korea got, that little fat kid? He's just an obscure prince who is on the throne because his family name, without his uncles and aunts on his side he probably couldn't rally a platoon of men, less a nation to stay functional as it is.

Next is the political atmosphere...in China even though Mao is still regarded as a quasi-deity, even the CCP have to admit he bears some responsibilities to the disasters, but in N.Korea, the 2 Kims are lord almighty and the entire ideology build upon it, to admit the Kims made mistakes in the past will bring the whole house down, so don't even think they'd do it on their own.

"Kim the 2nd" tried some reforms in his lifetime, but he was such a paranoid all efforts became half-arsed and axed not long after it was launched.

The only way to induce change in N.Korea is when their folks are so starved that hunger overpower the voices of the Big Brother, and they tear the country down themselves, or an invasion by foreign powers to smash their idols and bring their gods down to earth (much like that famous photo of General MacArthur and Emperor Hirohito)...whichever way it may be, changes in N.Korea will first require at least a 6-digit death toll.

That said, China's change also comes at a very heavy price and the scars still not fully healed to this day. Still, it's such toll that makes Chinese became pragmatic and embrace the reforms.

So no, China's experience can't be duplicated, unless you're ready to stomach the heavy price for it.

I very much agree with the above post. Don't expect North Korea to open up anytime soon. Hope the masses somehow manage to revolt against their leaders to stave off continuous plagues. China did extremely well opening up its economy - naturally, the massive population greatly accelerated the process. Something which may not really occur in North Korea. Though it is a valid point that the country is well positioned to succeed in terms of exports if things did improve.

But look at . The manufacturing and service industries really gained ground while the agricultural sector contracted dramatically. North Korea is a starving country full of peasants...such changes would need much more time to take effect.