Why "the West" gets China wrong

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Player 0

Junior Member
Throughout many religions pride is denounced and humility and open mindedness applauded, pride to the point of denying reality is self-destructive, not addressing reality with little more than just falling back on stereotypes is all the more reason to trust others more than you trust yourself.

The problem with democracies is that people are always willing to indulge their vices and their governments will reflect this.
 
D

delft

Brigadier
Player 0 said:
Throughout many religions pride is denounced and humility and open mindedness applauded, pride to the point of denying reality is self-destructive, not addressing reality with little more than just falling back on stereotypes is all the more reason to trust others more than you trust yourself.

The problem with democracies is that people are always willing to indulge their vices and their governments will reflect this.
Click to expand...
To illustrate your last point today's edition of my Dutch newspaper carries an article about the prisons of California. It says that people will vote for politicians, police chiefs and district attorneys that put more people in jails and for longer periods despite the fact that criminal gangs and the Aryan Brotherhood organize themselves within the jails to be more effective when members get out again. Besides keeping 200 000 people in jail costs California $10b on a budget of $96b, more than the state can afford.

Another point, when I was a student the friend of neighbor who studied journalism told that some of her fellow students were not interested in news. What kind of journalists did they become?
 
SampanViking

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
The big news today (as you will no doubt read in detail in the Economics thread, is that China's second quarter growth has "declined" to 7.5% year and year and is the the 5th consecutive slowdown quarter.

I know it is annoying to read that the effect of long term collective flat-lining by the worlds developed economies reducing China's growth from a rate that tripled every decade, to one that merely doubles, is somehow distress, especially given that much of it is the result of deliberate, planned policy to move national development into its next phase.

Please remember however that the China's growth and success undermines every major intellectual and ideological narrative that the West has been preaching since WW2. There is huge fear that the West is losing intellectual and moral authority and so is seeking to shore up its position and talk China down.

It is the highest possible stakes, not only for the souls of the entire Developing world but for the growing numbers of highly disaffected citizens in Europe and North America as well.
 
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
Just realized this thread got stickied. Cool! :)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The push toward urbanization is and will be one of the biggest economic factors in China. I am especially encouraged to read that the Chinese gov't is moving people out of dangerous mountain areas and replanting forests. Human inhabitation is very aptly described as a cancer upon the natural environment of China. Villagers who live in those mountains are forced to deforest the hills in order to subsist. This in turn triggers deadly landslides and increases the silt content of the arterial waterways, further exacerbating the water shortage.

People in North America have it easy. Get out of the cities and you can find miles and miles of wild lands with not a soul in sight, except the cars on the highways.

In China, it's completely different. I once took a train from Shanghai to Xinjiang. I passed by a plethora of bewilderingly different landscapes, all of which had one thing in common: people. Signs of human inhabitation was everywhere, from the rice fields of Jiangsu to the caves and mud huts in Sha'anxi. The only exception was at the end of the trip, when we entered the Gobi desert. That was the only place in China where I did not see signs of human inhabitation everywhere.

It is a fact that urban living, given a similar quality of life, is far more efficient than rural living. In China's case, population consolidation makes a lot of sense. It will improve the quality of life of tens of millions of people as well as decrease the burden on the natural environment.

Coupled with advancements in green technology, China's future mega-cities might well be its solution to environmental and economic sustainability.
 
A

airsuperiority

Captain
solarz said:
Just realized this thread got stickied. Cool! :)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The push toward urbanization is and will be one of the biggest economic factors in China. I am especially encouraged to read that the Chinese gov't is moving people out of dangerous mountain areas and replanting forests. Human inhabitation is very aptly described as a cancer upon the natural environment of China. Villagers who live in those mountains are forced to deforest the hills in order to subsist. This in turn triggers deadly landslides and increases the silt content of the arterial waterways, further exacerbating the water shortage.

People in North America have it easy. Get out of the cities and you can find miles and miles of wild lands with not a soul in sight, except the cars on the highways.

In China, it's completely different. I once took a train from Shanghai to Xinjiang. I passed by a plethora of bewilderingly different landscapes, all of which had one thing in common: people. Signs of human inhabitation was everywhere, from the rice fields of Jiangsu to the caves and mud huts in Sha'anxi. The only exception was at the end of the trip, when we entered the Gobi desert. That was the only place in China where I did not see signs of human inhabitation everywhere.

It is a fact that urban living, given a similar quality of life, is far more efficient than rural living. In China's case, population consolidation makes a lot of sense. It will improve the quality of life of tens of millions of people as well as decrease the burden on the natural environment.

Coupled with advancements in green technology, China's future mega-cities might well be its solution to environmental and economic sustainability.
Click to expand...
It's a good direction. Of course next thing coming up would be strenuous years of education on environmentalism and social responsibilities, and this on is something I'm hopeful of in regards to China.
 
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
airsuperiority said:
It's a good direction. Of course next thing coming up would be strenuous years of education on environmentalism and social responsibilities, and this on is something I'm hopeful of in regards to China.
Click to expand...

Actually, the problem is not education. Most Chinese people are highly aware of the need for environmental protection. The problem lies with the stress of 1.4 billion people. For example, a factory that pollutes a river may be at the same time providing jobs to a hundred former farmers who would otherwise have gone back to deforesting hills to earn a subsistence living. The local government would then be faced with a dilemma: tighter environmental regulations might cut into the factory's profits and in turn encourage the investors to move elsewhere.

The good news is, as China's standard of living is rising, domestic consumption is easing the pressure of low-wage manufacturing, so at least the Chinese economy is slowly moving towards a more sustainable model. The bad news is, this movement may be too slow to save the environment without other forms of intervention.
 
A

airsuperiority

Captain
solarz said:
Actually, the problem is not education. Most Chinese people are highly aware of the need for environmental protection. The problem lies with the stress of 1.4 billion people. For example, a factory that pollutes a river may be at the same time providing jobs to a hundred former farmers who would otherwise have gone back to deforesting hills to earn a subsistence living. The local government would then be faced with a dilemma: tighter environmental regulations might cut into the factory's profits and in turn encourage the investors to move elsewhere.

The good news is, as China's standard of living is rising, domestic consumption is easing the pressure of low-wage manufacturing, so at least the Chinese economy is slowly moving towards a more sustainable model. The bad news is, this movement may be too slow to save the environment without other forms of intervention.
Click to expand...

Insightful. I personally think though, while economy is important, China had almost reached a stage where intentional slowdown of economic growth is more sustainable than a fast one. This is because every economic model and systems have their own maximum efficiency, and once you attained it, you can't get any better until you upgrade the system to the next and better model. And this, in my opinion, includes a lot of moral, social ethical responsibilities, education, and just all those stuffs in general.

This is of course one of those examples. The guy mentioned something about some users "recycling" old content, and that is alarming. Of course it's unlikely for regular folks to associate recycling with recycling toxins, but this video will show one of the many continuing issues of China
[video=youtube;Mc_f-FmJVmw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc_f-FmJVmw[/video]
 
solarz

solarz

Brigadier
airsuperiority said:
Insightful. I personally think though, while economy is important, China had almost reached a stage where intentional slowdown of economic growth is more sustainable than a fast one. This is because every economic model and systems have their own maximum efficiency, and once you attained it, you can't get any better until you upgrade the system to the next and better model. And this, in my opinion, includes a lot of moral, social ethical responsibilities, education, and just all those stuffs in general.
Click to expand...

Agreed. This brings me to another Western myth on China, that the communist government has to keep up the strong economic growth in order to keep their legitimacy.

This is simply wrong. The CCP's legitimacy depends on giving Chinese people good living standards. That is different from economic growth.

Deng's market reforms worked on the principle of letting a portion of the country become rich first. However, this was just a means to an end. This principle allowed rapid economic growth at the price of social upheavals due to the large wealth gap. Now that China's economy has grown strong enough, Xi's government is enacting the second part of the plan: leverage this wealth to improve the lives of the very poor in China.

This might mean a slower GDP growth, but that doesn't mean it's a bad thing. Far from it in fact.
 
SampanViking

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
solarz said:
Agreed. This brings me to another Western myth on China, that the communist government has to keep up the strong economic growth in order to keep their legitimacy.

This is simply wrong. The CCP's legitimacy depends on giving Chinese people good living standards. That is different from economic growth.

Deng's market reforms worked on the principle of letting a portion of the country become rich first. However, this was just a means to an end. This principle allowed rapid economic growth at the price of social upheavals due to the large wealth gap. Now that China's economy has grown strong enough, Xi's government is enacting the second part of the plan: leverage this wealth to improve the lives of the very poor in China.

This might mean a slower GDP growth, but that doesn't mean it's a bad thing. Far from it in fact.
Click to expand...

This is not simply a myth, it is a very old and outdated myth. Every myth does have roots in a true story however and this is no exception.

When Deng initiated economic reform in 79, the calculation (undoubtedly quite correct) is that the PRC would need to grow at an average of 7- 7.5% pa for the duration of the main traditional phase of switching from a command to market orientated economy to ensure enough new jobs would be created to absorb new young workers created from population growth and re-employ older workers laid off by bloated state industries. There was a danger is that is growth was persistently below this level that unemployment would lead to serious social discontent and eventual disorder.

In the event China has had over thirty years at mostly double digit growth, substantially in excess of the minimum requirement. This has built considerable, Political, Economic and Social Capital reserves for the CCP which means that any current slowdown will be nothing more than a soft landing.

I do not think anyone here would have difficulty appreciating the need for sustainability over "headline" growth.

A couple of things to watch for over the next twelve months.

1) Guangdong Province due to become the first individual Province to cross the $1 Tr pa GDP barrier - others to follow in the next few years

2) Growth rates for most Interior Provinces still growing at double digit speed.
 
P

Player 0

Junior Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Just thought this looked relevant and wanted to post this.

China must be open and allow a more free environment for its academics if only to counter these attempts to twist the narrative, nothing would be better to diminish calls to an end for democracy than to see those who promote democracy as being inherently hostile to China.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top