Like I said to someone else, please visit china before passing Judgements. Your views of innovation is correct and I feel that the chinese government is promoting innovation. I think its in Shanghai where skill personnel are offered 1,000,000 RMB cash just for moving to shanghai. I think the Government right now, like you said, is restricting 'social innovation' or those who want social change. Which i think is understandable and i support cause china has really only experienced about 30-40 years of stability. that is really short and I support he government for not wanting to risk it. once china is at a stage where political reform is demanded by the public, the government will not be able to stop it. Just like any other country that changed to a democratic political structure. the previous government did not want that but because of the pressure from the public, it had no choice. Right now, people are stuggling to make ends meet. Let me give you an example, in Qingdao (1 of the fasted growing cities in china) the average income overall is around 4000 RMB per month (approx $600 US). the real estate prices for the city is averaged at around 10,000-12,000 RMB per square meter ( I know this cause i just bought a house there..hehe..). the bank right now requires a 50% initial payment of the house. So for a average sized house, its about 800 thousand to a million. How long you think that would take an average family to buy a house? People don't care about political rights in china...they care about when they can finally afford a house. Yes there are those like Liu who has everything in his daily life so that he can complain about all this. what about those who don't. Please...for all of you that think political freedom and other human rights issues are a big deal in china...please go to china and see for yourself. Everyone is working over hours to make ends meet. again....down the track...its a totally different story. I read an article when a couple of years ago which was a really good one by a professor in New Zealand. He more neutral in his assessments unlike most of the articles regarding china which are mostly extremely negative, concentrating on a few negative aspects. He said that in 40-50 years, Chinese political structure will undergo a reform, not by want by as a necessity because of the evolving of the general public. I support this theory. Right now people care more about how much they are making.
I for one respectfully disagree that average Indians enjoy better quality of life than average Chinese. I don't know what your definition of quality of life is, but if you look at the social economic development index defined by UN, China is ahead in almost every category: illiterate rate, infant mortality rate, average education level, average income, average lifespan, poverty rate, etc etc. The biggest contrast is the infrastructure. New Delhi looks like only on the level of a small Chinese city, Bombay and Calcuta can't even be mentioned as the peers of Beijing and Shanghai. Last year I visited China and India, certain parts of Shanghai were full of Indians, but I could not say the same to New Delhi and Mombay. I am very curious why loads of Indians think they are living a better quality of life than the Chinese even though they never visited China and make the comparison. Their only news source are probably the Indian times and the Hindustan. The free press of India is really a joke, worse than FOX and CNN. Ok, too much wake up, I hope you a good dream.
who gave you the right to judge whether I know nothing about the chinese society or government? Anyway..when did i say freedom of speech is a hindrance to economic growth? I said right now...those that challenge the chinese government are viewed upon by the government as someone who is affecting social stability. I am against all those who are creating instability. You are right, prosecuting in the name of stability is wrong. What about other countries once prosecuting their citizens who were fighting for human rights? everything takes time. China has only been stable for 30-40 years. Before , it was a mess due to one reason or another. Let it develop and see. The government does not dictate what the population wants. as the general citizens of china evolve, the political structure will too. Just like how China went through an economic revolution in 1978, technically its against communist beliefs but it was done because it has to. same with other aspects as well. Are you seriously saying the social stability is not the foundation of economic growth? if china went through an political reform, how much resources are gonna be needed? are foreign human rights groups gonna pay for it? no. again, the general public in china will be more than happy for tax money to be spent of economic growth, education, medical, transport...etc. its just that because the chinese public don't have the privileges that other areas of the world take for granted. once they have all this, then they can consider political reform (obviously the government will be against it, but once the general public demand it, the government really have no choice IMO). Because i grew up overseas, i know what i had compared to those who did not have it and know that the word 'freedom' means nothing if you don't have other basic nessicities. Just out of curiosity, where are you from? Have you been to the country sides in china? have you seen what the conditions are like? I am from Zhao yun, in shandong and grew up in a very poor family. In fact my dad at a stage begged for food. so i know what it is like to have NOTHING. you ever fight for food before? I have. SO please don't judge me. I was one of the lucky ones to have a chance to go study overseas at a very early stage in my life. I understand how it feels to have nothing at all. as your statement regarding me living outside of China, yes I am not in china. Infact I said this in another post, I just bought a house in china and will be moving back next year after I graduate simply because right now, china has more opportunities than anywhere else (again IMO). and in term of 五毛黨, no I don't know what it is. actually i just looked it up and found out. But no I am not. So what if i feel that. I thought you are pro freedom of speech. Then why are you labelling me for say what i believe in? I am not labelling you as a anti chinese or racist against china by disagreeing with me am I? In all seriousness, I am not disagreeing with what you are saying. I am just stating that IMO, China is not 'there' yet. It needs time.
Speaking to various friends and acquaintances who have been to China and India, not a single person places India above China in really anything: quality of life, modernization, education, anything. Everyone felt like India is a decade or two behind China in terms of development. So I really don't understand why people compare the two countries. I want to say that Japan and S. Korea are better comparisons of how to modernize a country, given their wide success. But I feel that both countries' governments are also very heavy handed and pushed their developments. In general, it's much easier to facilitate change when you have an authoritarian government, whether it be good or bad. I always joke with Chinese friends that in China, all it takes to make a change is for an official to hand down an order. While in the US, congress deliberate for months for everything short of declaring war. One can see upside and downside for both scenarios. One is dependent on leaders knowing what's right for the country. The other is dependent on the people knowing what's right for the country. Quite frankly, especially with the recent fox news/tea party/anti-everything phenomenon, I can't say with conviction that the people are the best choice to make decisions.
Well, the way it is going, China will either catch up with the US economically in 20 years if they (the Chinese) work hard, or in 5 years if they (the Americans) stumble even more. My bets are on the Americans stumbling even more Especially if America, the smartest country in the world, elects Sarah Palin to become POTUS... twice! (just like George Bush eh... :grin: ) P.S. I was just advised by a senior wealth management advisor from a major international bank to short the dollar. What do you think? :grin:
I don't see why it is a sham democracy. The Indian voters were then free to vote for their leaders and speak out freely, as they are free to vote and speak now. Looks like in your view, even with ability to vote and free speech, there are still more "conditions" to satisfy before a country can reach a proper "democracy" standard. An actual sham democracy may be the US itself. Only 2 political parties, receiving hundreds of millions of donations, beholden to special interests, and working solely for their political constituents / funders. Gee, that's a lot of political diversity (hopefully the Tea Party can win some seats and become a viable 3rd party to truly make America a real democracy ^_^). Well, we can agree to disagree then. You say that India had a 30 year lag from China, I say that India never had a lag from China at all, they just had inferior economic managers and their "democracy" failed to bring up any capable leadership to the country (even their current leader, Manmohan Singh, gives out mixed results at best). China, through its leadership system (which is essentially, at its core, a meritocracy), was able to bring about competent leadership (especially in the last 15 years) that has served the country well.
I think the Chinese fully encourage a free exchange of ideas in science and technology. Heck, they give science and technology companies the greatest incentives and freedoms in China! I know, because my fiancee works in a major international law firm in Shanghai, and the Chinese are nuts in their incentive giving.... some of the best incentives we have seen in the world. And it is giving results.... many of the world's biggest companies have already established or are already establishing multi million / multi billion dollar research facilities in China (Shanghai is a major pharmaceutical research center). The amount of patents that China is filing is increasing rapidly (it has overtaken Japan as the second biggest patent filer in the world...). Also, I would like to encourage the ladies and gentlemen here to read this article from the China Post, which describes a facet of China's Twelfth Five Year National Plan (to run from 2011 to 2016): http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/the-china-post/special-to-the-china-post/2010/09/27/274080/Chinese-Economist.htm Note especially this paragraph: High innovation does not only need freedom. It needs encouragement of all forms, including government and policy encouragement and commitment (which the Chinese government is fully committed to - they have been pumping billions of dollars into research), a solid education system (everyone already knows how many engineers China produces a year), and the right environment for it (well, they are getting there :grin: ).
I have been to China, and I think it's a wonderful place with wonderful people although really really polluted. It was a long time ago but I don't think that trip told me anything about the political nature of China. Frankly, I really didn't wish to discuss politics with anyone.
http://business.rediff.com/slide-sh...-quality-of-life-india-beats-china-russia.htm Cost of living, health, environment, and yes freedom is what I think gets India ahead.
Fair enough. I missed your point that you were discussing internal versus external political leadership. Regarding the rest of your post I have to admit again I am very impressed by and I think your views in regard to the direction of political development of the PRC aren't that much different than my own even though we tangle on the particulars. I am far from an expert on the PRC Constitution and their constitutional law but it does seem like this is an area that is not fully developed primarily due to the lack of an independent judiciary. Other than some off the cuff statements that Liu admitted weren't well thought out it doesn't seem like there is much there to accuse Liu of being some sort of Fifth Columnist out to subvert the PRC for foreign interests. Given his history it seems like he is genuinely interested in reform for the good of the country. I think this is the biggest problems with these sorts of debates is that everyone is prone to falling into their own nationalistic / idealistic biases when it comes to this. I don't think you have to be Chinese to appreciate the nuances of where the PRC is as a country and where its going. I agree and as Yall Mean stated this does seem to be a catch all law to silence internal criticism. My own experience with the PRC this appears to be one of the biggest problems that could hamper development. A few years ago I was in Shenzhen meeting with an engineer who told me that due to the lack of enforcement of contracts and consistent enforcement of codes it is the norm to lose 25% of the contracted fee. At the moment the massive market size of the PRC still makes it worth doing business there but without faith in contracts and law this could eventually become a problem. I recognize that the CCP is the legitimate government of the PRC but at the same time I don't see the CCP as being the same as China anymore than the Democrats or Republicans are the US. You make a great point about where the CCP's duty should lie but I think this is the problem of an authoritarian state. Bringing it back to the previous discussion regarding what is good for the country. While the leaders of the CCP may certainly believe that they have the best interests of the people they also have the best interests of the party and see the party and the people as one and the same. In their minds any criticism of the party becomes subverting the country as they cannot discriminate between the two even when the Constitution says they should. I understand in principle Legalism as a fundamental in Chinese thought but from what I know of Chinese history it hasn't always been that well applied, even in ancient times. I think if you are going to apply Legalism for the current time the PRC will need to construct institutions like an independent judiciary. I agree that a rapid implementation of Western style democracy will be disastrous for the PRC but I think in the long run the country will need to move away from authoritarian rule. As for shutting people up I wouldn't discount the importance of that. As I have said before if the PRC wants to have global stature they are going to have to deal with criticism both internal and external. I don't think Liu or the Nobel Committee represents much of a threat to the CCP's rule but the CCP's reaction makes them seem like more of a threat and also makes the PRC look a petty tin pot dictatorship. I think it would do far more for the CCP to tolerate people like Liu in terms of standing while really not losing anything really in terms of power.
Stability and freedom of speech though are not necessarily in conflict. I think this is a false dichotomy that has been presented by the CCP. As MFW noted even if the PRC were to suddenly have unfettered multiparty elections the CCP would still win in a landslide. While its true that many Chinese are just struggling to make ends meet that doesn't mean that this isn't an issue that is not a concern among many Chinese. In my opinion the PRC could still make substantial moves in the direction of more openness and transparency in government without harming development or stability. In the long run I believe this will be necessary to maintain development.
Except that that depends on how wise the leadership is. As Sweet Lou noted one reason while India's development is lacking is because for much of its history although a democracy on paper it was run as an authoritarian state that unfortunately for India didn't have very wise leadership. To the credit of the CCP since Deng it has been lead by pragmatic leaders, for example I was very impressed with the high speed rail network being built something that in the US is bogged down in politics, but as the history of the PRC shows that can always change. For example the authoritarian leadership also undertook the Cultural Revolution / Great Leap Forward that probably wouldn't happen under a more democratic system.
Funny thing I had been thinking about how you and some of the other Chinese have inferiority complexes leading you to get irrationally defensive about virtually any criticism of China. Relax. China has been dealt a tough hand by overpopulation, economic mistakes, Western imperialism etc., but is certainly doing a good job working a billion plus out of very severe poverty. However, this does not mean it should be immune from any criticism wrt to human rights, which I believe history does show is just not some sort of Western fetish. I also realize that "demcoracy" and even "human rights" can be misused to keep any developing nation down or at least obedient to major international corporations and the corporate elite, though China's own elite seems quite at home with the rest of the international elite. China and more importantly Chinese workers will eventually have to deal with these folks if the majority is going to have the type of life they deserve given China's new found riches. Capital accumulation tends to ber brutal whether under a dictatorship or under laissez faire as we saw in Dickens England or the the sweatshops of 19th century US. BTW I do feel that in many regards you have been unfairly attacked on this forum by conservatives or zenophobes.
Another thought is that modern China has suffered to big whammys to traditional thought and principles. The first was the Cultural Revolution that sought to wipe out history and tradition, while this did away with a lot of bad things it also did away with a lot of good things. The second is the current development that has emphasized material development over almost anything else. So Chinese thought was first force fed a cult of personality to replace tradition and then encouraged to embrace materialism and consumerism. I think the Chinese are gradually rediscovering traditional thought and is in the process of building a new philosophical infrastructure. In my own opinion free speech would actually help this along by allowing greater political, spiritual and philosophical discourse.
IF the rates of growth stay the same for 20 years, China will catch up then. But as economies develop, they grow slower. That's why the less developed India is expected by some to grow faster then than China, so I think that's unlikely. There is no chance China catches up in 5 years, even if we elect a socialist who raises taxes and spending. A lower US dollar will help the US economy, so by all means short it.
I'm still unsure how China will support its elderly once their "boomers" retire. India's younger population won't have to cope with that until 15-20 years alter.
