Sinifying Siberia

"It is revealing that senior Chinese leaders in interviews have shown a paternalistic attitude toward all of China's immediate neighbors with the exception-to date-of Russia. Yet Russia is where the major territorial shifts may take place. That Russia has governed the Russian Far East since 1898, and other Asian territories for an even longer period of time, will not deflect China from its designs on those territories...territories lost in the last century or so-like the Russian Far East, parts of Siberia, Mongolia, and parts of Central Asia-can be claimed as well."

Sinifying Siberia

"...the collapse of the Soviet Union, leaving Siberia far removed from Russia's European heartland. This huge swath of territory from Lake Baikal to the Pacific Ocian, almost as large as Canada, is occupied by only eight million aging Russians, a number that is decling from year to year due to death and emigration. To the south of this vast, nearly empty land wait 1, 300 million Chinese.

"Better relations between Moscow and Beijing in the eighties brought a flourishing barter trade, with Siberia's raw materials flowing south in exchange for Chinese-made consumer goods. But in the nineties, with the collapse of Soviet border controls, China began to export another product to Siberia: people. Up to half a million Chinese a year are moving across the now-porous border each year, setting up shop in the Russian Far East and Siberia proper. They bring with them their families and children, and live in their own separate Chinatowns. Something like five million Chinese already live on Russian soil. If Chinese don't already outnumber Russians in these areas of cohabitation, they soon will. Russian Defense Minister Pavel Grachev warned in 1995, 'The Chinese are in the process of making a peaceful conquest of the Russian Far East...'

"...Beijing seems quietly pleased. The outflow relieves unemployment at home, facilitates trade and, most importantly, strengthens irredentist claims on lands the Chinese once ruled...."

Here is an article about China's mood.

Crises Cloud China's Olympic Mood as Quake Tests Party's Mettle

By Edward Cody
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, May 17, 2008; A07

CHENGDU, China, May 16 -- Eight is an auspicious number in Chinese tradition, and 2008 was supposed to be a joyful year, a time for celebrating at the Beijing Olympics and basking in international recognition of the country's tremendous progress under the careful leadership of the Communist Party.

It has not turned out that way.

An uprising in Tibet on March 14 focused the world's attention on the long-festering issue of China's abuse of human rights. The worldwide Olympic torch relay, conceived as a "journey of harmony," turned into a magnet for protest, embarrassing Olympic organizers, angering nationalistic Chinese and souring the mood for the Beijing Games.

And now a violent earthquake has devastated a broad patch of central China, particularly here in mountainous Sichuan province, killing up to 50,000 people. The scale of destruction is so vast -- and the horizon for a return to normalcy so distant -- that it is difficult to imagine a carefree crowd in Beijing when the Games open Aug. 8.

The clouds over 2008 have not only darkened prospects for a celebratory Olympics. They have compromised what was shaping up as a golden opportunity for President Hu Jintao and other leaders to rally support among China's 1.3 billion people for continuing the party's monopoly on power indefinitely.

Across the country, Chinese had joyfully embraced the role of Olympic host. Most also seemed to buy into the idea that -- during the Olympic year, at least -- the world was ready to overlook the party's Leninist ideology and accept its promises of eventual political reform. If other nations were willing to show patience, the party hoped, the Chinese people would be encouraged to follow suit.

The anger over torch protests and heightened security concerns that followed the Tibet crisis had already created a less friendly environment here for foreigners. The Sichuan earthquake, besides imposing a mournful mood on the whole country, has now presented China's leaders with an immediate political test that is a far cry from the uncomplicated celebration they were planning. The party has long justified its refusal to relinquish power with the argument that it alone can deliver the efficient governance and shrewd guidance China needs. And beginning at 2:28 p.m. Monday, when the 7.9-magnitude earthquake struck, the disaster area was in dire need of both.

Hu and his lieutenants appeared to realize what was at stake, moving swiftly to mobilize the party machinery. He Guoqiang, head of the party's Central Discipline Inspection Commission, publicly warned party officials of all ranks that their careers would depend on how they handled the crisis.
The party's initial response, marshaling a vast relief operation within hours, generated a groundswell of support. Even in their misery, victims expressed satisfaction at seeing rescue teams show up from the People's Liberation Army and People's Armed Police. They were also quick to thank the thousands of party-organized civilian relief workers handing out water, food and tents.

The feeling that the government was going all-out to help extended beyond the affected area to the country as a whole, according to Kang Xiaoguang, a sociologist at Beijing's Renmin University who monitors popular sentiment with opinion surveys.

"Chinese people are quite satisfied with what the government is doing," he said. "The government's response is much better than it has been in the past."

Premier Wen Jiabao, who flew to the disaster zone Monday afternoon, made sure that the party and the government were seen responding to the catastrophe. He spent the entire week visiting devastated towns and villages, sympathizing with bereaved families and giving pep talks to military and civilian rescue teams.

Wen's on-the-scene leadership, recorded by cameras from the party's China Central Television network, was broadcast in great detail on the national news, making him the face of the party at work for the people. Not to be outdone, Hu, the president and party chief, flew down from Beijing on Friday to offer his own on-the-spot display of concern.

The thousands of Chinese civilians who volunteered to help -- or were volunteered by party organizations -- also appeared swept up in the common cause of assisting their countrymen under the party's leadership. Long caravans of relief supplies moved toward the quake zone festooned with red banners bearing party slogans popular since the 1960s.

"Fight the earthquake," they read, recalling the rallying cry of Red Guards after the 1976 earthquake in Tangshan, in northeastern China, that killed 240,000 people.

Many of the younger relief workers wore red scarves around their necks, identifying them as members of the party Youth League in which Hu started his rise in the party bureaucracy. But other volunteer groups were dispatched by private businesses; one convoy of supplies was led by a Porsche Cayenne four-wheel-drive vehicle.

"The whole society is mobilized," Kang said. "People are eager to donate money and blood."

The enthusiasm, he noted, was encouraged by the vigorous initial coverage in the tightly censored Chinese news media. The openness about the scope of the suffering in Sichuan marked a change from coverage of past natural disasters in China and, in the first few days, was matched by friendliness toward reporters and cooperation from police, soldiers and officials involved in relief operations.

As early as Tuesday, however, the Politburo's senior propaganda officials, under Li Changchun of the elite Standing Committee, met to lay down guidelines for further earthquake coverage. They knew, it seemed, that the spontaneous outpouring of good will might not last as the tragedy wears on.

According to the party's official People's Daily newspaper, Li and his lieutenants ordered journalists to make sure their coverage was inspirational and emphasized rescue and relief efforts. A reporter in Beijing said editors also received instructions not to send their own reporters to the scene and to satisfy themselves with the official New China News Agency.

The Standing Committee, meanwhile, met under Hu's leadership Wednesday and issued a statement calling on Sichuan officials to take steps to guarantee "social stability," which is the party's way of saying prevent protests. By Thursday, police, soldiers and local officials began blocking roads leading to the worst-hit areas. Their orders were to keep reporters out, they said, particularly foreign reporters.

By that point, some villagers had begun to complain that rescue officials were bulldozing ruins with people still trapped under debris. In several towns where children were killed when schools collapsed, parents accused local officials of allowing shoddy construction materials to be used in return for bribes. And the Health Ministry in Beijing handed down orders to dispose of bodies swiftly and on the spot to prevent disease.

The crisis, Hu said on his arrival in the quake zone Friday, had entered its "most crucial phase."

China's turnings seem to be as follows:

4T: 1850-1865
1T: 1865-1888
2T: 1888-1908
3T: 1908-1927
4T: 1927-1950
1T: 1950-1967
2T: 1967-1989
3T: 1989-present

Anybody see this stuff apparently floating around the Internet about the curse of the Fuwa? It's pretty frightening stuff.

China's turnings would appear to be as follows from my perspective:

4T 1931-1949
1T 1949-1966
2T 1966-1989
3T 1989-present

Does anyone have any idea what the generational birth year boundries may be in China. I am sure their equivalents of the Boomers (Red Guard Generation) are a few years behind because their Crisis ended later than ours.

Originally Posted by Wiz83

China's turnings would appear to be as follows from my perspective:

4T 1931-1949
1T 1949-1966
2T 1966-1989
3T 1989-present

Does anyone have any idea what the generational birth year boundries may be in China. I am sure their equivalents of the Boomers (Red Guard Generation) are a few years behind because their Crisis ended later than ours.

China stands to enter a 4T -- potentially a very nasty one -- should American consumer debt either become worthless or quit flowing in. Maybe the leadership will have to offer democracy as a reward for not rebelling. That might require some honest diplomacy elsewhere as an arbiter. No country can remain in a 3T mode indefinitely.

One thing is certain -- the PRC would never tolerate the sorts of financial scams in America without severe consequences upon the perpetrators. In America the consequence is public shame, something that causes little effect upon sociopathic personalities. In China, a firing squad awaits such types.

I'm surprised that few have commented on the 2008 Olympic Games. If any Chinese see this -- I congratulate your nation on putting on the greatest spectacle that I have ever seen. I commend China on underplaying politics; I saw no propaganda unless "we can do very much very well" constitutes propaganda. Busby Berkeley would have loved those performances.

To be sure, I have long associated the Chinese people with excellence in pageantry that manifests itself even in times of political disarray and extreme poverty. The political disarray and extreme poverty are gone -- probably forever.

I'm not going to comment much on the sporting events; athleticism doesn't change much in spirit from decade to decade, and the sports seem much the same now as they were in... 1968. That China is now an athletic superpower is beyond question, but even that suggests the wheel of fortune for some nations' athletic programs. The Soviets had impressive athletic programs despite a decrepit economic, social, and moral order.

The Opening Ceremonies were the most dazzling spectacle that I had seen in years, if ever, even if they showed few of the computer-generated effects that Americans are accustomed to. I am satisfied now that China is not only a military and economic superpower on sheer force of numbers -- but now also a cultural superpower. Technology? Commerce? Yes.

I see a well-organized, imaginative people capable of doing anything that it sets as a collective goal.

I agree. I thought that their opening and closing ceremonies were the best I've seen in all the years I've been watching the Olympics. Lots of planning and thought went into these two events and it was spectacular.

But, the propaganda that I saw throughout the games was not necessarily done by China itself, but moreso by various advertisers.

The propaganda was Globalism. Did you catch that?

Togetherness, as one, we can accomplish anything. Ads such as the one done by Visa showing USA athletes in winning moments, achieving medals, and flashing across the screen was not "Go USA", or "USA Achieves", or anything like that. No, instead plastered across the faces of USA athletes was "Go World". Go world? What does that mean? Is Earth in competition with some other planet to achieve something that I don't know about?

In any case, China presented itself a really nice, warm, welcoming nation to everyone but their own people. Not much was spoken about all the various labor camps that produced some of the items at the Olympics, was there? China is still very much a communistic country despite the nice-nice that was shown to the world. But, I don't really think the rest of the world cares too much about that. As long as they have opened themselves up for business, no body much cares about what goes on behind the scenes in China.......do they?

Bria

Originally Posted by Bria67Xer

I agree. I thought that their opening and closing ceremonies were the best I've seen in all the years I've been watching the Olympics. Lots of planning and thought went into these two events and it was spectacular.

But, the propaganda that I saw throughout the games was not necessarily done by China itself, but moreso by various advertisers.

The propaganda was Globalism. Did you catch that?

Togetherness, as one, we can accomplish anything. Ads such as the one done by Visa showing USA athletes in winning moments, achieving medals, and flashing across the screen was not "Go USA", or "USA Achieves", or anything like that. No, instead plastered across the faces of USA athletes was "Go World". Go world? What does that mean? Is Earth in competition with some other planet to achieve something that I don't know about?

In any case, China presented itself a really nice, warm, welcoming nation to everyone but their own people. Not much was spoken about all the various labor camps that produced some of the items at the Olympics, was there? China is still very much a communistic country despite the nice-nice that was shown to the world. But, I don't really think the rest of the world cares too much about that. As long as they have opened themselves up for business, no body much cares about what goes on behind the scenes in China.......do they?

Bria

Part of propaganda is clouding the unpleasant -- such as that China has a repressive dictatorship. People may be better fed, educated, and housed, and they may have become peers of the rest of the world in consumer goods... but they are not free to speak their minds. The Communist Party of China recognizes that its ideology is not for export, unless someone does something very stupid.

China is far more than Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, cities on the Mainland that people are most likely to tour, and of course the Special Economic Zones of Hong Kong and Macao. Foreigners are far less likely to see the poorest rural areas, let alone the labor camps. To be sure, foreign tourists are more likely to visit Manhattan than Sing Sing... and a usual trip to Colorado shows Denver and the ski slopes -- not the Federal Supermax in Florence (which houses, among others the convicted and loathsome Ted "Unabom" Kaczynski.

China has a very nasty penal system. Part of the contribution to China's economic success is that those who fail due to criminal disgrace are executed. That some government official who accepts bribes or businessman commits accounting fraud that brings down a business and creates a national shame deserves to die for such a deed might be an attractive idea in some circles in America -- especially should an economic collapse rip the delusion of prosperity in America. I wonder how common Enron-style financial fraud is in America in view of the extreme concentration of bureaucratic power.

The Chinese political system is obsolete. The Communist model in practice -- that people might have some rights to vote for the lowest levels of government that allow a little semblance of democracy, and a succession of levels in turn vote for the "highest" leaders, the point at which dominant-party rule becomes fact being beyond democracy -- is obsolete.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

The Chinese political system is obsolete. The Communist model in practice -- that people might have some rights to vote for the lowest levels of government that allow a little semblance of democracy, and a succession of levels in turn vote for the "highest" leaders, the point at which dominant-party rule becomes fact being beyond democracy -- is obsolete.

I assure you the Communist Party of China does not think itself obsolete; if it did, it would be self-destructing the way the Communist Party of the Soviet Union did.

The CPC knows its own inefficiency, but sincerely believes that only its iron first can prevent civil war in China. China's last civil war is still within living memory -- it ended with the Taiwan stalemate in 1949. Chinese civil wars tend to last a LONG time -- if not dominating a 3T and 4T (as the last one did -- the Qing Dynasty was overthrown in 1911 and the Chinese government was not stable until '49) then they can last a saeculum or longer. Chinese history is traditionally presented as a succession of dynasties over a united China, but the truth is that for about 1/3 of history, China was divided into several kingdoms.

China is currently undergoing the largest internal migration in the history of the human race. More than a hundred million Chinese have left the rice paddies and wheat fields to become factory workers in the great cities of the coastline. There is now a massive income imbalance between the provinces. If the government fails to mediate the differences in wealth and power, things could be very nasty indeed. At the same time, they're conducting the largest mass reproduction experiment in history, the "one-child policy". A world without siblings is massively unnatural and producing very strange social results.

In short -- they're riding a tiger by the tail. It's not really clear what the results of unleashed democracy would be in China. Even ideally, democracy would have to be phased in among a people for whom self-government is a completely alien idea (while China has a long history of meritocracy, the examinations were always imposed from above, not below). However, fear, greed, corruption, and inertia prevent the implementation of freedoms in China.

I don't particularly like the People's Republic regime, but I'm really not sure trying to do too much too fast is a wise idea. We can lobby for improving the conditions of prisoners, cultivating local accountability, and encouraging the People's Congress to be less of a rubber-stamp and more of a functional legislature. But a destabilized China is NOT in the world or the American interest, so prodding the PRC too much is massively unwise.

Originally Posted by catfishncod

I assure you the Communist Party of China does not think itself obsolete; if it did, it would be self-destructing the way the Communist Party of the Soviet Union did.

No political system, even on the brink of ruin through its own rottenness, considers itself obsolete. Assessments of obsolescence from the outside are often more wishful thinking of a would-be conqueror. The healthiest systems seem to be those that can bend with the times. That likely explains why the Hanoverian monarchy remains intact despite predictions in the summer of 1940 from Berlin that the system was doomed.

Of course Communism is an obsolete system of economics -- but what of the political structure? It could be that the best economic times that the Chinese people have ever known give some legitimacy to the system. I am of the opinion that the Commies in central and Balkan Europe granted democracy for one reason only -- to save their own skins. The one Commie leader who chose to tighten the repression in Europe paid the ultimate price for his blunder. People may be afraid of democracy because the one effort to establish democracy in China (1912) led to warlord rule and a really-nasty plutocracy/kleptocracy. I can't figure any well-defined ideology of the CPC other than self-preservation.

The CPC knows its own inefficiency, but sincerely believes that only its iron first can prevent civil war in China. China's last civil war is still within living memory -- it ended with the Taiwan stalemate in 1949. Chinese civil wars tend to last a LONG time -- if not dominating a 3T and 4T (as the last one did -- the Qing Dynasty was overthrown in 1911 and the Chinese government was not stable until '49) then they can last a saeculum or longer. Chinese history is traditionally presented as a succession of dynasties over a united China, but the truth is that for about 1/3 of history, China was divided into several kingdoms.

The usual measure of a historical period in China is of course the dynasty -- a time often encompassing several saecula:


China

* Xia Dynasty (2100–1600)
* Shang Dynasty (1600 BC–1046 BC)
* Zhou Dynasty (1046 BC–256 BC)
* Qin Dynasty (221 BC–206 BC)
* Han Dynasty (206 BC–220)
* Three Kingdoms (220–265)
* Jin Dynasty (265–420)
* Southern and Northern Dynasties (420–589)
* Sui Dynasty (581–618)
* Tang Dynasty (618–907)
* Song Dynasty (960–1279)
* Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368)
* Ming Dynasty (1368–1644)
* Qing Dynasty (Manchu) (1644–1913)

PRC rule over the Chinese Mainland is now nearly sixty years old, which suggests that people who know times before that in China are themselves old. China has a heritage of despotic rule capable of ordering anything. It can be at the same time ruthless, efficient, and wasteful.

China is currently undergoing the largest internal migration in the history of the human race. More than a hundred million Chinese have left the rice paddies and wheat fields to become factory workers in the great cities of the coastline. There is now a massive income imbalance between the provinces. If the government fails to mediate the differences in wealth and power, things could be very nasty indeed. At the same time, they're conducting the largest mass reproduction experiment in history, the "one-child policy". A world without siblings is massively unnatural and producing very strange social results.

100 million in a population of 1 billion does not have quite the impact of 30 million in 100 million. In proportion, the internal migrations within the USSR during World War II and even the mass migration of American blacks from the South to the North and West are even bigger. The Chinese government wisely chose to put consumer goods ahead of heavy industry once they allowed a capitalist economy; consumer goods are more marketable than producer goods. I can't imagine some sort of federalism as a partial solution; not even the United States is capable of dictating everything from Washington D.C.

In short -- they're riding a tiger by the tail. It's not really clear what the results of unleashed democracy would be in China. Even ideally, democracy would have to be phased in among a people for whom self-government is a completely alien idea (while China has a long history of meritocracy, the examinations were always imposed from above, not below). However, fear, greed, corruption, and inertia prevent the implementation of freedoms in China.

Democracy rarely comes into existence suddenly and without precedent only to persist. Prosperity does NOT guarantee democracy; look at the oil sheikhdoms. Neither does intellectual sophistication among the people; Russia is arguably as literate and educated as America. Look at the American heritage; some parts of the new American republic were quite democratic (Massachusetts stands out) because there had been a long heritage of representative government and widespread participation in the process. Some Southern States had systems almost completely devoid of democracy until about 1965.

I don't particularly like the People's Republic regime, but I'm really not sure trying to do too much too fast is a wise idea. We can lobby for improving the conditions of prisoners, cultivating local accountability, and encouraging the People's Congress to be less of a rubber-stamp and more of a functional legislature. But a destabilized China is NOT in the world or the American interest, so prodding the PRC too much is massively unwise.

The solution might be to telescope the political system so that the chains of command are shorter. In theory one allows greater formal participation in the electoral process from one low level (there might be some democracy at the village level, but that's as far as it goes). It's as if in America one might have somewhat-free elections for a small-town city council or a precinct in a large city, but the council selects the mayor, some aggregation of mayors elects the county government, and up to the highest political body that chooses the President. Allowing direct elections for increasingly-superior levels of government is one way to establish democracy over ten to twenty years.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

No political system, even on the brink of ruin through its own rottenness, considers itself obsolete.

Tautological -- those that do, immediately reconfigure so that they are not obsolete... or immediately die. Gorbachev is an example.

The healthiest systems seem to be those that can bend with the times. That likely explains why the Hanoverian monarchy remains intact despite predictions in the summer of 1940 from Berlin that the system was doomed.

The traditional class system of Britain started dying in 1914 when the Etonites and the doughboys were stuck in the trenches together. But the House of Windsor meant more than the class system.

The usual measure of a historical period in China is of course the dynasty -- a time often encompassing several saecula:

That's the traditional measure of a historical period. But it often obscures the reality. Allow me to demonstrate:

* Xia Dynasty (2100–1600)
* Shang Dynasty (1600 BC–1046 BC)
The Xia and Shang correspond to the late Stone Age and the Bronze Age in China. We can study them through archaeology, but there are no good historical records until the:
* Zhou Dynasty (1046 BC–256 BC)
The first few saecula of the Zhou Dynasty (1046-771 BC, a period of 275 years or around four seculae in an age of poor health) were known as the Western Zhou; the Zhou had a coherent kingdom then. After the royal line was broken in a revolt by the queen's father in 771, the capital transferred to her home, forming the Eastern Zhou. However, in reality, the power of the throne slipped and the dukes began to assert independence (similar to the Holy Roman Empire in medieval Europe). During the Spring and Autumn Period (771-481 BC, around four saecula) they struggled for power under the banner of the titular Zhou king; by the Warring States Period (403-221 BC, two well-defined saecula) they were kings and the Zhou a rump state. The miniscule royal lands of the Zhou were conquered in 256 as part of the consolidation, hence the break in the time period.

The point is that from around 600 BC to 221 BC, the concept of a united China was a fraud.
* Qin Dynasty (221 BC–206 BC)
Qin Hi-shuang-di, First Emperor -- a complete and total bastard. Burned the libraries. Killed thousands building the Great Wall. So despised that his son sat the throne only a handful of years before the revolts caught up with him.
* Han Dynasty (206 BC–220)
A true dynasty -- indeed, the archetypical dynasty. The compilation of Chinese history into dynasties is a tradition begun at the Han court. Even so, the dynasty ruled two saecula (to 9 AD) before a disruption by reformer/usurper Wang Mang. A distaff member of the dynasty restored Han rule at the end of that 4T (25 AD) and won two more saecula for his house before the Han collapsed into:
* Three Kingdoms (220–265)
The very name implies the division of China. Briefly, the country was held together by the:
* Jin Dynasty (265–420)
but this was fleeting. Conquest was not complete until 280, and in 311 revolts forced the abandonment of the capital at Chang'an (now Xi'an). After that only South China was imperial; North China was held by the Sixteen Kingdoms. The Jin finally succumbed to revolts in the next 4T, leading to:
* Southern and Northern Dynasties (420–589)
Two very turbulent saecula, where a new dynasty showed up in either North or South China every turning. This was put to an end by the:
* Sui Dynasty (581–618)
who conquered North China in 577 and South China in 589. Like the Qin dynasty, success went to their head and overtaxation and overbuilding (particularly on the Great Wall) caused replacement by:
* Tang Dynasty (618–907)
who were another real dynasty, though their power was broken at the end of their second saeculum by the An Shi rebellion (755-763). In the by now familiar pattern, the last saeculm of the dynasty was used by nobles to acquire local power to set up for another period of disunity.

Here we get to another Big Lie. Your list is incomplete. As with the Northern and Southern Dynasties Period, North and South China were ruled differently. In the north, we had the:
* Liao Dynasty (907-1125)
who controlled the area from Xi'an to the site of Beijing, until conquered by the Western Liao (who were a minor Mongol tribe). In the south, there was the:
* Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms Period (907-960)
who duked it out for a half saeculum until someone won:
* Song Dynasty (960–1279).
However, they were all wiped out by Genghis Khan, whose descendents set up shop as the:
* Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368)
for a saeculum, until a native revolt set up the:
* Ming Dynasty (1368–1644)
who ruled for three great saecula until the Manchurians conquered the now centralized government at Beijing and Nanking, establishing the:
* Qing Dynasty (Manchu) (1644–1913)
who got three saecula themselves, collapsing under the tutelage of Ci Xi.

China has a heritage of despotic rule capable of ordering anything. It can be at the same time ruthless, efficient, and wasteful.

Indeed, that is the norm in Chinese history.

It's as if in America one might have somewhat-free elections for a small-town city council or a precinct in a large city, but the council selects the mayor, some aggregation of mayors elects the county government, and up to the highest political body that chooses the President.

Indeed, in some Southern states pre-Civil Rights it effectively worked that way.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...onomy-dongguan

Look for things to turn violent in China if their hot economy slows significantly.

China plans big economic stimulus.

You wonder if there are also plans for a social security-like system to boost domestic consumption and bribe the folks into not getting so upset during the downturn.

I'll settle for a closer-to-biggie mp3 recorder for my little degen 1121.

a further note re: Chinese electronics

Since writing that last message I ingeniously stepped on my degen 1121's stock telescoping antenna (which wasn't so good for it).

Nevertheless, they responded to my email within 24 hours and are sending a new one free of charge with no shipping charge either. They also addressed another issue I was having with genuinely useful information.

I'll refrain from wasting our hosts' hosts' server space describing the numerous ass-poor customer service experiences from lazy little brats working for American companies except to say that more than a year after first contacting HP customer service for the first time (and contacting them more than two dozen times since using every available means of 18th century and later communications technology) they have yet to be able tell me if I got the right battery with my notebook.

If this is any indication of what's ahead American companies have another thing coming.

One further-further note: most of the products I (we) buy from China seem to have been made for foreign firms. But this little feature-rich radio was designed, engineered, and built by a Chinese company. It suggests to me a different kind of corporate culture [at least vis a vis consumer electronics] than what we've come to expect from Japan: in a certain way more clever. It's like the Japanese read the results of their focus groups but the Chinese read your mind; they know what you want before you want it.

China's New Left.

For China’s new left, old values

Young movement views state power as remedy for free-market inequalities

By Ariana Eunjung Cha
updated 4:46 a.m. CT, Sun., April 19, 2009

BEIJING - Zuo Dapei took the microphone and declared that China's leaders were going in the wrong direction. The country had become too capitalist. Things would improve, he continued, only if the state reasserted its control over corporate assets.

The crowd of about 220 people, who had come to hear Zuo and other authors and academics speak on the topic of "Unhappy China," cheered.

For a growing number of Chinese, the solutions to the problems of the country's present -- including the income gap between rich and poor and the manipulation of the court system by state officials and company executives -- lie in its past, with the teachings of Mao Zedong.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here

Although Chairman Mao continues to be revered here as the visionary who founded the country and transformed it into a world power, the Communist Party has broken from many of his ideals through market-based reforms over the past three decades.

Not everyone has been supportive of this shift, and a nostalgia for the old days has increased amid the global financial crisis. The most influential critics, known collectively as the New Left, are not like the dissidents or political exiles of a previous generation. They are not calling for an overthrow of the Communist regime. Their recommendations and criticisms are, instead, based on a belief that state power can redress the injustices created by free markets, privatization and globalization. Their views are also characterized by a fierce nationalism and criticism of the West.

Into the spotlight
Although the New Left has been publishing position papers in journals and on the Internet since the 1990s, the global financial crisis has brought the group's leading figures into the spotlight as never before. Their rise comes as the Communist Party, which has held absolute power since 1949, faces growing discontent over unemployment, contaminated infant formula that has sickened more than 300,000 babies, shoddy construction that led to the collapse of thousands of school buildings during last year's Sichuan earthquake and corruption among public officials at all levels.

In a country where the state is often quick to crush criticism, Communist officials have tolerated the New Left, which is just one part of a broader phenomenon of emboldened Chinese questioning officials and speaking out about the failings of their government.

In what commentators have called a "patriotic movement," ordinary citizens, or "laobaixing," are increasingly seeking to find a way to participate in government in order to improve it: to educate themselves about policymaking, to influence legislation and to increase transparency and accountability.

The new passion for politics can be seen in the existence of public seminars such as the one at which Zuo spoke this month. It is apparent in the popularity of such books as "Unhappy China" -- a collection of essays that reject the government's policy of increased international cooperation to help the world out of the financial crisis and argue that China should use its power to further its own position. There is also a new, wildly popular genre of fiction called "officialdom novels."

The books focus on the messy, behind-the-scenes workings of high-level government in China. One series, "The Beijing Office Representative," tells the story of a municipal official who observes real estate developers and company executives offering bribes or sex to government officials in exchange for favors. Another, called "The Mayor's Assistant," is told through the eyes of the assistant to a deputy mayor who watches as his boss gradually becomes more and more corrupt and, in the end, is sentenced to death for his crimes.

Appeal built on work of academics

The New Left's appeal is built on the work of prominent academics, including Zuo, 58, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and Tsinghua University professors Cui Zhiyuan, 47, and Wang Hui, 50. They have become especially popular among young people, farmers and laid-off factory workers.

Wang, a professor of humanities who is considered the leading New Leftist, has said that China is caught between two extremes: "misguided socialism" and "crony capitalism."

"The common objective of China's New Left is to create an understanding of the full implications of China's current policies. I think if people see what is really happening in China, they might be less excited about reforms," he said.

Zuo has been critical of the robber barons who took advantage of the privatization of state enterprises. He has argued that because they did not have to pay back government-run banks and did not adequately compensate workers, they essentially looted the state's coffers.

"Look at health-care system reform, property market, and education reform -- all of them have deviated from benefiting the ordinary Chinese public under the huge influence of those interest groups that argue in the name of reform," Zuo said in an interview after his talk.

Wang Xiaodong, 55, one of five authors whose works are included in "Unhappy China" and a speaker at the event with Zuo, said in an interview that he has been disillusioned with the current leadership.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here

"Today in China, those elite are lazy and do nothing. They failed to generate any innovations even after spending all that money from taxpayers," he said. "China's current achievements are more a product of efforts by industry workers, rural workers."

A gathering place
The Utopia bookstore -- named after the perfect sociopolitical-economic system of Sir Thomas More's imagination and located northwest of Tiananmen Square in Beijing -- has become the premier gathering place for these intellectuals and their supporters.

Members include environmental activists, songwriters, Internet programmers and entrepreneurs, few of whom are shy in speaking out at the weekly meetings. Although attendees of the seminars have been variously described as pan-Leftists, Maoists or nationalists, many participants say they reject labels but are united in their passion to make sure the rewards of China's development are shared equally among all its citizens.

Blogger Yang Songlin, a 60-year-old who used to run his own business in Henan province, said he began to attend the meetings because of his concern that China had veered from its founding principle of helping the ordinary man. "Bureaucrats, big bosses and intellectual elite formed a joint, strong interest group while Chinese laobaixing, like workers and rural farmers, were marginalized and benefited little from the reform process," he said.

Another regular, Chang Xiangle, a 29-year-old copy shop owner from Shandong province, said he became interested in the meetings as he observed what he called the "uncured disease of the capitalist system." He has been fighting government officials and developers in his home town who have, in his view, illegally seized land from farmers. In the Mao era, he said, there was little corruption because there was a powerful system of checks and balances.

A different path
Filled with books such as "Secret History of the American Empire: Economic Hit Men, Jackals and the Truth About Global Corruption," "Empire of Debt" and "Against Capitalism," the Utopia bookstore is a reflection of the group's philosophies.

Fan Jinggang, 32, Utopia's manager and a former graduate student in Marxism at Peking University, said sales of books about Mao have increased tenfold since the economic crisis began.

During 30 years of capitalist-style economic reforms pioneered under Deng Xiaoping, Fan said, "we had been sticking to one goal: America's today is China's tomorrow, and we should work for that." Now, with the United States in crisis, Fan said, "Chinese people are beginning to reflect on this phenomenon -- whether the financial crisis is not only purely economic or financial but something that arose because of a development-path issue, that there might be a problem for us to pursue such a path."

Originally Posted by MillieJim

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...onomy-dongguan

Look for things to turn violent in China if their hot economy slows significantly.

No question about that. I've realized for a couple years now that China isn't nearly as stable as one may think. Something like 20,000 protests every year I think, many of which can turn very violent. I wouldn't be investing in China, that country is a powder keg.

Furthermore, what happens when the Dalai Lama dies? What then would stop thousands of disenfranchised Tibetans from going on a real, violent rebelion?

China is already preparing for that. They've already chosen a pro-Beijing boy for the reincarnation of the person who determines the reincarnation of the Dali Lama. The Dali Lama says its a different boy, however the priests in Tibet are split on the decision. I read an article on the BBC website about it.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Chas'88

China is already preparing for that. They've already chosen a pro-Beijing boy for the reincarnation of the person who determines the reincarnation of the Dali Lama. The Dali Lama says its a different boy, however the priests in Tibet are split on the decision. I read an article on the BBC website about it.

~Chas'88

Good point. The Chinese see exactly the same thing coming, and sure they will try some desperate measure to ensure their grip over the Tibetans. But how many Tibetan Buddhists are going to take the word of an oppresive, communist atheist government in religious issues? China can try it, but it won't influence anything the Tibetans do. If anything, their attempts at imposing a pro-Chinese puppet head of Tibetan religion will only make the Tibetans hate them even more. China's attempted hijacking of Tibetan Buddhism will invariably fail.

I'm watching a PBS documentary about China since 1989, which is describing China as an outwardly prosperous (in the coastal cities) powderkeg. Beneath the glitz, a situation is described that indicates that an mass uprising is just a matter of time, despite all that the Chinese government can do to suppress the people.

Originally Posted by SVE-KRD

I'm watching a PBS documentary about China since 1989, which is describing China as an outwardly prosperous (in the coastal cities) powderkeg. Beneath the glitz, a situation is described that indicates that an mass uprising is just a matter of time, despite all that the Chinese government can do to suppress the people.

1989 was the start of China's 3T. It's unclear whether the Chinese 4T has yet begun. Though the economy there is suffering and shedding jobs, China has so far avoided the official "recession" designation, unlike Japan, Europe, and North America.

FWIW:

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20090823tp.html



"The Powell Doctrine has never applied to any nation except the U.S., because, until now, the overwhelming force standard could not be met by anyone else. However, this, according to a significant new report, is no longer the case. At least with respect to the possible invasion of the independent, off-shore island of Taiwan, China can boast of its own Powell Doctrine."

4T Crisis War, anyone?

Back to Playwrite:

I'd still love to know: When PW was supposedly visiting SE Asia, did he bother to check out the "Anti-War" movement's handiwork in the re-education camps, and in the killing fields? The answer seems to be NO...

Back to Haymarket':

I'd still love to know: Who paid Haymarket's Military Service Tax? Come on, I know you're retired, Haymarket. I'd think it'd be easy to go check out the old county draft records from 1971. You can look the guy up, and thank him for his inconvenience...

Originally Posted by haymarket martyr

WARNING: The poster known as jamesdglick has a history of engaging in fraud. He makes things up out of his own head and attempts to use these blatant lies to score points in his arguments. When you call him on it, he will only lie further. He has such a reputation for doing this that many people here are cowed into silence and will not acknowledge it or confront him on it.

Anyone who attempts to engage with glick will discover this and find out you have wasted your time and energy on an intellectual fraud of the worst sort.

-So cry many Boomers (self-professed Lefties, mostly) whenever they fail to explain their hypocritical self-justifications, their double-standards, and their double-think forays into evil. Perhaps their consciences bother them, perhaps not. Who knows.

China has cornered world production of strategic rare earth metals is starting to leverage this.

Even tighter limits on production and exports, part of a plan from the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, would ensure China has the supply for its own technological and economic needs, and force more manufacturers to make their wares here in order to have access to the minerals

In each of the last three years, China has reduced the amount of rare earths that can be exported. This year’s export quotas are on track to be the smallest yet. But what is really starting to alarm Western governments and multinationals alike is the possibility that exports will be further restricted.

...

China produces over 99 percent of dysprosium and terbium and 95 percent of neodymium. These are vital to many green energy technologies, including high-strength, lightweight magnets used in wind turbines, as well as military applications.

([sidebar:] Toyota’s Prius hybrids use several pounds of neodymium, a rare earth, in their electric motors.)

Originally Posted by TimWalker

I suspect that we will develop a strong distrust of both Islam and China

That prediction's a no-brainer - it's already happening!