Seeing China Whole

[BWV 1080]

While the CCP is largely a bunch of corrupt thugs, they do deserve credit for opening the economy and preserving stability. Despite the stereotypes of unity and tranquility, China's history is market by devastating civil wars and the country has dozens of potentially rebellious non-Han ethnic groups. More important than elections, China is developing institutions and public discourse - essential components of a stable liberal society. The mistake we in the US make is to confuse the existence of elections (i.e democracy) with a civil society when nothing could be further from the truth. Witness Iraq or any number of African or Latin American countries where elections are merely a continuation of civil war by other means. In most developing democracies politics is a zero-sum game between rival ethnic / religous groups for control of public resources (particularly if some valuable export commodity like oil is involved).

Seeing China Whole
Don't underestimate its capacity for positive change
Steve Chapman | August 11, 2008

If you look closely at a spot in a meadow, you will see some things you may not enjoy looking at—weeds, bugs, funguses, bare spots of dirt, bits of trash, animal bones, and so on. If you view it from a distance, however, you may see a vista that is far more appealing.

With the opening of the Beijing Olympics, outsiders are putting modern China under a microscope and finding much that is ugly. That perception is accurate but not complete. A full appreciation requires taking in the panorama of Chinese life and history, which may be hard to do in the preoccupation with the host country's flaws.

There are plenty to choose from. The government is repressive, undemocratic, and often brutal. It censors news coverage, imprisons dissidents, restricts religion, and maintains a monopoly on political power.

So far, the Olympics have not served the goal of fostering liberalization. "The year-long prelude to the Beijing Games has seen a major crackdown on free speech and dissent; a massive sweep of 'undesirables' from the host city; and increasing abuses of ethnic minority Tibetans and Uighurs," says Minky Worden, an official of Human Rights Watch, in an e-mail. In the next two weeks, the Chinese leadership is going to get a lot of unflattering coverage, all richly deserved.

But it would be a shame to focus on its sins to the exclusion of everything else. Westerners can easily forget that this authoritarian country used to be a totalitarian country, with perhaps the most grotesque human rights record of the 20th century

During the three decades after the Communist Party took over in 1949, it was responsible for more than 70 million deaths. Some of them were due to political persecution and terror, and some to catastrophic economic mismanagement. The party deliberately fomented savage social upheavals that not only punished its alleged enemies but devastated China's cultural heritage. It also kept the country poor.

All that is in the past. Since Deng Xiaoping gained power in the late 1970s and liberalized the economy, China has been transformed almost beyond belief. Its economy has expanded tenfold. No country in history has ever lifted so many people out of poverty so rapidly.

What was once a vast prison camp has conceded a great deal of personal freedom to ordinary people. They can work and live where they choose. They can travel and study abroad. They have access to the Internet. There is a growing sense among the Chinese that they are entitled to certain basic human rights—a startling development in a country where, for centuries, individual rights have been an alien concept.

As repressive regimes go, this one could be worse. Robert Ross, a China scholar at Harvard and Boston College, says, "I would put China in the top 10 percent of all the authoritarian states in the world"—comparing it favorably with many East Asian countries (notably North Korea and Burma), most Middle Eastern countries, including Saudi Arabia, and most African nations.

He thinks the recent pre-Olympics security crackdown won't last long. And there is good reason to expect that in the coming years and decades, China will continue to progress in human rights.

Hoover Institution fellow Henry Rowen, an East Asia specialist, notes that development and democracy almost universally move in tandem. A market economy can't function without substantial freedom from state control. As countries become richer and more educated, they unleash forces that are incompatible with authoritarian rule.

You can usually anticipate political advances by gauging the rise of gross domestic product per capita. "In 2005," writes Rowen, "every country in the world (oil states excepted) with GDPpc topping $8,000 was at least Partly Free [as categorized by the human rights group Freedom House]; indeed, all ranked as Free except the tiny island city-state of Singapore." Given China's growth trajectory, he predicts it will move from Not Free to Partly Free by 2015—and by 2025, it will be "classed as belonging to the Free nations of the earth."

Anyone contemplating the thuggish repression still prevalent under the Beijing government may find that hard to imagine. But if the last 30 years have taught us anything, it is not to underestimate China's capacity for positive change.

[Corlyss_D]

More important than elections, China is developing institutions and public discourse - essential components of a stable liberal society.

Delusional. The Chinese thugocracy will permit as much freedom as will make the members of the CCP party bosses (the Gang in Beijing) and the PLA military bosses (the Gang in Shanghai) rich. Most of the other indicia of a democratic or liberal society are not on even the far horizon for the Chinese people. There's no rule of law or due process in China; there's no protection for minorities; there's no civil rights; there are no constitutional limits on government; there are no concept of "consent of the governed" or free elections (the Chinese government would collapse before they would permit free elections at a level higher than small towns); there is no social pluralism; there's limited economic pluralism but absolutely no political pluralism; there is no value of tolerance, free exchange of ideas, or freedom of the press.

The mistake we in the US make is to confuse the existence of elections (i.e democracy) with a civil society when nothing could be further from the truth.

This may be CW among the American public, but I assure you it is not the case with the US state department or any given American administration. Here are the indicia of a democracy right off State's website.

THE PILLARS OF DEMOCRACY

* Sovereignty of the people.
* Government based upon consent of the governed.
* Majority rule.
* Minority rights.
* Guarantee of basic human rights.
* Free and fair elections.
* Equality before the law.
* Due process of law.
* Constitutional limits on government.
* Social, economic, and political pluralism.
* Values of tolerance, pragmatism, cooperation, and compromise.

http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/w ... hatdm2.htm

[Gary]

While the CCP is largely a bunch of corrupt thugs, they do deserve credit for opening the economy and preserving stability.

Preserving stability is China's specialty. Five thousand years of experience has taught them not to discriminate against the people they want to lord it over, whatever their ethnicity--a lesson that many Western colonizers failed to learn. All that the current regime has been doing was continuing the practice, though it hasn't always been effective. So, no credit for them.



Corlyss, looking at your post reminded me of a couple of years ago when I maintained that what appeared to be progress in China belied the regime's true image. At the time you came to its defense and even posted a lengthy article from the Economists that was favorable to China. Wow, you sure sound like you had a change of heart since then!

...there's no protection for minorities

Now let's be fair. The mainland regime is an equal-opportunity oppressor. Generally, it accords no less protection to minorities than to the Han majority. Thus it is not equal rights that the Tibetans and the Uyghurs seek; instead, it's independence.

[BWV 1080]

Yeah its weird to be in a position of defending the CCP, the point is that the regime has moved from totalitarianism to an authoritiarianism comparable to Taiwan or South Korea was in the 1950s. The hope being that China follows the same path as those two countries.

[Barry]

Yeah its weird to be in a position of defending the CCP, the point is that the regime has moved from totalitarianism to an authoritiarianism comparable to Taiwan or South Korea was in the 1950s. The hope being that China follows the same path as those two countries.

I'm not saying it can't happen, but an obvious difference between the two (or three) situations is that Taiwan and South Korea were dependent on and allied with the world's leading democracy, while China isn't. There may be less "rub-off" under these circumstances.

[Corlyss_D]

Corlyss, looking at your post reminded me of a couple of years ago when I maintained that what appeared to be progress in China belied the regime's true image. At the time you came to its defense and even posted a lengthy article from the Economists that was favorable to China. Wow, you sure sound like you had a change of heart since then!

I don't recall, Gary. I don't deny it; I just don't recall. I'd be a lot happier if the rest of the world were more skeptical of what the regime in China is doing. China is the source of much of our trouble in the middle east; they are drilling in our waters because the crazy Democrats would rather see the Chinese get our oil than the US have it; they have moved stealthily into South America; and they have bought up our debt, allowing us to play grasshoppers, and they wait . . . and wait . . . until they can use that paper to force us to do things against our interests under the threat of disabling our economy. A democratic China couldn't afford to plan so far in advance as the Chinese habitually do.

Yeah its weird to be in a position of defending the CCP, the point is that the regime has moved from totalitarianism to an authoritiarianism comparable to Taiwan or South Korea was in the 1950s. The hope being that China follows the same path as those two countries.

I'm damned if I can tell the difference between a totalitarian regime and an authoritarian one. Those nations you mention were and are under the protection of the US which can and does and did bring pressure for democratizing reforms. The Chinese aren't. The Chinese weren't thrilled with democracy before Mao. They have no natural instinct for it. What's another world power that has no instinct for democracy? Russia. And when they couldn't make it work, for whatever reason, they have been reverting to their bad old instincts. The Chinese are not under any pressure to democratize. They dismiss the whole idea. Look what happened in the run up to the Olympics. Did they back down and at least try to present a facade of cooperation? No. They redoubled their efforts to surpress the Tibetans; they lock up dissidents to keep them out of the media eye; they move on the Uygurs using agents provocateur. I mean these people even ordered the Beijing citizens not to go out in the street in their pajamas under threat of arrest. Maybe you can explain to me how things improve materially under an authoritarian regime from a totalitarian just because the CCP and PLA have seen that they can get richer by behaving like entrepreneurs.

[BWV 1080]

The Chinese weren't thrilled with democracy before Mao. They have no natural instinct for it. What's another world power that has no instinct for democracy? Russia. And when they couldn't make it work, for whatever reason, they have been reverting to their bad old instincts.

given that the Chinese have run Taiwan since the early days of the Qing Dynasty, I do not see how that argument is valid.

The Chinese are not under any pressure to democratize. They dismiss the whole idea. Look what happened in the run up to the Olympics. Did they back down and at least try to present a facade of cooperation? No. They redoubled their efforts to surpress the Tibetans; they lock up dissidents to keep them out of the media eye; they move on the Uygurs using agents provocateur. I mean these people even ordered the Beijing citizens not to go out in the street in their pajamas under threat of arrest. Maybe you can explain to me how things improve materially under an authoritarian regime from a totalitarian just because the CCP and PLA have seen that they can get richer by behaving like entrepreneurs.

The analogy again is Taiwan under Chiang Kai-shek. The Han in Taiwan persecuted and excluded aboriginal Chinese, had a strongly authoritarian but capitalist government that over time reformed itself.

[Gary]

I don't recall, Gary. I don't deny it; I just don't recall.

Corlyss, I found it. It's the sixth post from the bottom. http://classicalmusicguide.com/viewtopi ... =7&t=10143

The Han in Taiwan persecuted and excluded aboriginal Chinese...

Does that mean I have to retract my assertion about the absence of discrimination?

[Corlyss_D]

I don't recall, Gary. I don't deny it; I just don't recall.

Corlyss, I found it. It's the sixth post from the bottom. http://classicalmusicguide.com/viewtopi ... =7&t=10143

Thanks, Gary. Maybe it's late but I don't see what I said then as being substantially different from what I said above:

And I take your point about the past arrangements.

But that was then. This is now. And there are some significant differences between the two, chiefest among them are the highly capital friendly policies (0% tax on capital gains) that draw massive foreign investment (hinting at some basic security for private property); purposeful cultivation of a rising middle class; the opening of China to competition and globalization; and, as a result of these policies, the growing centrality of China to the world economy.

It's true that the gangs of thieves and thugs in Shanghai (the PLA) and in Beijing (the Mandarins), continue to be thieves and thugs, but what they are doing to stay alive themselves is benefiting the people as it never has in the past by allowing the creation of wealth and the introduction of institutions that support the middle class. And, something I'm sure the gangs are very conscious of: these forces they have set in motion are not ultimately controlable from Beijing or Shanghai. There is no commissar of bread distribution in a capitalist economy. Chaos theory will get them in the end. We can only hope that by the time chaos theory does get them, they are sufficiently invested in the new order that they cease to fear loss of individual power.

I see that as more gloating about the thugs unleashing forces they can't control. I don't see that you and I disagree essentially on the character of the thugs.

[Gary]

Corlyss, I thought you showed more optimism in that earlier post; maybe that was it. Oh, well...doesn't matter, really.

[Barry]

Newsweek
August 20, 2008
The Real China Threat
By Robert Samuelson

WASHINGTON -- Obsessed with rankings, Americans are bound to see the Beijing Olympics as a metaphor for a larger and more troubling question. Will China overtake the United States as the world's biggest economy? Well, stop worrying. It almost certainly will. China's economy is now only a fourth the size of the $14 trillion U.S. economy, but given plausible growth rates in both countries, China's output will exceed America's in the 2020s, projects Goldman Sachs. But this is the wrong worry. By itself, a richer China does not make America poorer. Indeed, because there are so many more Chinese than Americans, average Chinese living standards may lag behind ours indefinitely. By Goldman's projections, average American incomes will still be twice Chinese incomes in 2050.

The real threat from China lies elsewhere. It is that China will destabilize the world economy. It will distort trade, foster huge financial imbalances and trigger a contentious competition for scarce raw materials. Symptoms of instability have already surfaced, and if they grow worse, everyone -- including the Chinese -- may suffer. China is now "challenging some of the fundamental tenets of the existing (global) economic system," says economist C. Fred Bergsten of the Peterson Institute.

This is no small matter. Growing trade and the cross-border transfers of technology and management skills contributed to history's greatest surge of prosperity. Living standards, as measured by per capita incomes, have skyrocketed since 1950: up 10 times in Japan, 16 times in South Korea, four times in France and three times in the United States. Significantly, these gains occurred without serious political conflict. With the exception of oil, world commerce expanded quietly. The chief sources of global strife have been ideology, nationalism, religion and ethnic conflict.

Economics could now join this list, because the balance of power is shifting. The United States was the old order's main architect, and China is a rising power of the new. Their approaches contrast dramatically.

Economically dominant after World War II, the United States defined its interests as promoting the prosperity of its allies. The aims were to combat communism and prevent another Great Depression. Countries would make mutual trade concessions. They would not manipulate their currencies to gain advantage. Raw materials would be available at non-discriminatory prices. These norms were mostly honored, though some countries flouted them (Japan manipulated its currency for years).

China's political goals differ. High economic growth and job creation aim to raise living standards and absorb the huge rural migration to expanding cities. Economist Donald Straszheim of Roth Capital Partners estimates the urban inflow at about 17 million people annually. As he says, China sees export-led economic growth as a magnet for foreign investment that brings modern technology and management skills. Prosperity is considered essential to maintaining public order and the Communist Party's political monopoly.

At first, China pursued its ambitions within the existing global framework. Indeed, the United States supported China's membership in the World Trade Organization in 2001. But as it grows richer, China increasingly ignores old norms, Bergsten argues. It runs a predatory trade policy by keeping its currency, the renminbi, at artificially low levels. That stimulates export-led growth. From 2000 to 2007, China's current account surplus -- a broad measure of trade flows -- ballooned from 1.7 percent of gross domestic product to 11.1 percent. The biggest losers are not U.S. manufacturers but developing countries whose labor-intensive exports are most disadvantaged.

Next, China strives to lock up supplies of essential raw materials: oil, natural gas, copper. If other countries suffer, so what? Both the United States and China are self-interested. But the United States has seen a prosperous global economy as a means to expanding its power, while China sees the global economy -- guaranteed markets for its exports and raw materials -- as the means to promoting domestic stability.

The policies are increasingly on a collision course. China's undervalued currency and massive trade surpluses have produced $1.8 trillion in foreign exchange reserves (China in effect stockpiles the currencies it earns in trade). Along with its artificial export advantage, China has the cash to buy big stakes in American and other foreign firms. Predictably, that's stirred a political backlash in the United States and elsewhere. The rigid renminbi has contributed to the euro's rise against the dollar, threatening Europe with recession. China has undermined world trade negotiations, and its appetite for raw materials leads it to support renegade regimes (Iran, Sudan).

The world economy faces other threats: catastrophic oil interruptions; disruptive money flows. But the Chinese-American schism poses a dilemma for the next president. If we do nothing, China's economic nationalism may weaken the world economy -- but if we retaliate by becoming more nationalistic ourselves, we may do the same. Globalization means interdependence; major nations ignore that at their peril.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... hreat.html

[living_stradivarius]

More important than elections, China is developing institutions and public discourse - essential components of a stable liberal society.

Delusional. The Chinese thugocracy will permit as much freedom as will make the members of the CCP party bosses (the Gang in Beijing) and the PLA military bosses (the Gang in Shanghai) rich. Most of the other indicia of a democratic or liberal society are not on even the far horizon for the Chinese people. There's no rule of law or due process in China; there's no protection for minorities; there's no civil rights; there are no constitutional limits on government; there are no concept of "consent of the governed" or free elections (the Chinese government would collapse before they would permit free elections at a level higher than small towns); there is no social pluralism; there's limited economic pluralism but absolutely no political pluralism; there is no value of tolerance, free exchange of ideas, or freedom of the press.
/quote]

Quite true.

In the absence of rule of law, you do have a form of quasi-chaotic freedom, as illustrated by the village elections. Compound that with the enormous population and you get a number of social pockets that are essentially overlooked by the CCP. However, these areas tend to be economically uninteresting, meaning they remain stagnant (and if they do flourish then the government steps in). Foreigners simply have to open as many of these pockets as possible.

[flat6]

Quite true.

In the absence of rule of law, you do have a form of quasi-chaotic freedom, as illustrated by the village elections. Compound that with the enormous population and you get a number of social pockets that are essentially overlooked by the CCP. However, these areas tend to be economically uninteresting, meaning they remain stagnant (and if they do flourish then the government steps in). Foreigners simply have to open as many of these pockets as possible.

some good observations. the biggest problem the chinese govt faces, is a very large population that doesn't respect, understand &/or believe in the rule of law - unless it's forced upon them (even then, implementation remains patchy & only lasts as long as the agenda remains a priority). as a result, the local govts & population at large plays a constant cat & mouse game with the central govt. - ultimately resulting in a million rules & regulations that are absolutely devoid of logic &/or common sense.

as for the govt stepping in when an economically uninteresting area flourishes - i'm of the opinion that economically uninteresting areas remains uninteresting unless the govt or foreigners alter this fact.

[Chosen Barley]

And along with their travelling execution chambers, the Chinese are nice to animals, too. Pollution, dangerous products? No problem!

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=P ... geId=72879

WND Exclusive VIDEONETDAILY
China flaying animals alive
Investigation reveals images so graphic, nightmares rampant among probe team
Posted: August 19, 2008
9:48 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Editor's Note: The descriptions and video of China's fur industry in this story will be disturbing to some readers.


Animals rights activists have documented that China's fur industry skins animals alive for their fur (Photo courtesy of Swiss Animal Protection)

The newest controversy over exports from China has caused nightmares for researchers documenting the abuse inflicted on animals bred and raised in tiny cages and then skinned alive for their fur.

WND has reported multiple times on problems with exports from China, with poison found in pajamas, consumers warned against using ginger, an alert about the dangers from China's pickled vegetables and even the dangers from honey and fireworks.

Now comes word from an extended investigation into the fur trade that China is estimated to produce approximately 85 percent of the world's fur products – and it has virtually no regulations or rules for the treatment of the animals.

According to Mark Rissi, a spokesman for Swiss Animal Protection, which has documented abuse of animals raised for their fur as early as 1983, the China project has been going on for several years.

(Story continues below)

Click Here



The organization's report has been made available online, with dramatic images and descriptions that researchers found more than disturbing.

"As animals are considered objects in China, there is little or no awareness for the suffering of these sentient beings," Rissi told WND from his European base of operations via e-mail. "The cruelty found was beyond our expectations, and it was hard to document without interfering. It caused nightmares to the team, especially in the editing room, because the scenes had to be replayed and replayed to be edited from six hours down to 20 minutes."

Rissi said the actual onsite investigation was done by his organization's staff members as well as trusted Asian animal protection supporters, but as fur production was not a controversial subject, "people willingly showed their farms to the team."

He said he's glad other organizations, such as the U.S.-based People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, have joined in his group's campaign.


Dogs are picked up by workers using a metal tongs and their tails prior to being slammed to the ground and skinned. (Photo courtesy of Swiss Animal Protection)

"Our main goal was to get this distributed because we want consumers worldwide to be aware about the cruelty involved in the fur fashion," he said.

"People have a right to know that a huge percentage of fur is imported from China, which doesn't have any federal laws protecting animals on fur farms. People who might contribute to this atrocity by purchasing fur or fur-trimmed garments need to know about the horrible suffering of the animals who wore that skin first," PETA spokeswoman Melissa Karpel told WND.

"We want them to see how fur farmers slam terrified animals — including raccoon pups — on the ground and skin them while they're still conscious. People need to know what they're really buying when they buy fur or fur trim," she said.

"Conditions on Chinese fur farms make a mockery of the most elementary animal welfare standards," the Swiss report said. "This report shows that China's colossal fur industry routinely subjects animals to housing, husbandry, transport and slaughter practices that are unacceptable from a veterinary, animal welfare and moral point of view."

PETA has posted a Swiss Animal Protection video on its U.S. site, documenting the bloody violence prevalent in the Chinese fur industry.

The report contained the testimony from witnesses to a dog slaughter:

Once pulled out from its cage, the raccoon dog curls up into a ball in mid-air. … One woman in a headscarf is first to grab hold of the raccoon dog's tail and the others drift away peevishly. The woman in the headscarf swings the animal upwards. It forms an arc in the air and is then slammed heavily to the ground, throwing up a cloud of dust. The raccoon dog tries to stand up, its paws scrabbling in the grit. The wooden club in the woman's hand swings down onto its forehead. The woman picks up the animal and walks toward the other side of the road, throwing it onto a pile of other raccoon dogs. A stream of blood trickles from its muzzle, but its eyes are open and it continues to repeatedly blink, move its paws, raise its head and collapse to the ground. Beside it lies another raccoon dog. Its four limbs have been hacked off but still it continues to yelp.

The report then graphically describes how the dogs are skinned, sometimes while they are living.

Rissi noted that the Humane Society of the United States also has worked on the investigation, citing well-known U.S. companies, including J.C. Penney, Burlington Coat Factory, Bloomingdale's, Sak's Fifth Avenue and Macy's, for selling Chinese-produced fur products, sometimes labeling them as "faux fur" or raccoon when the actual product is from a raccoon dog.

The Swiss Animal Protection report said slaughter methods range from beatings with a metal or wooden stick or swinging the animal until it slams to the ground.

Then they are skinned.

"They struggle and try to fight back to the very end. Even after their skin has been stripped off breathing, heart beat, directional body and eyelid movements were evident for five to 10 minutes," the report said.

The process is repeated millions of times, as China processes up to 100,000 pelts in a day at times.

The Swiss organization said China should pass a national animal welfare law, prohibit skinning live animals, prohibit inhumane treatment and slaughter methods, and the rest of the world should shun the use of fur.

Swiss Animal Protection is the umbrella organization of 58 regional animal protection associations in Switzerland and the Principality of Liechtenstein. Founded in 1861, it is the oldest and biggest animal protection organization operating throughout Switzerland.

WND's earlier reporting showed Chinese products recalled in 2007 alone included:

* Portable baby swings that entrap youngsters, resulting in 60 reports of cuts, bruises and abrasions;
* Swimming pool ladders that break, resulting in 127 reports of injuries, including leg lacerations requiring up to 21 stitches, five reports of bone fractures, two back injuries, two reports of torn ligaments and eight sprained ankles;
* Faulty baby carriers that result in babies falling out and getting bruised, getting skulls cracked and hospitalizations;
* Easy-Bake Ovens that trap children's fingers in openings, resulting in burns;
* Oscillating tower fans whose faulty wiring results in fires, burns and smoke inhalation injuries;
* Exploding air pumps that have resulted in 13 lacerations including six facial injuries and one to the eye;
* Bargain-priced oil-filled electric heaters, selling for less than $50, that burn down homes;
* Notebook computer batteries that burn up computers, cause other property damage and burn users;
* Circular saws with faulty blade guards that result in cutting users, not wood.

WND also has reported on Chinese imports that poisoned America's pets, risked America's human food supply and reintroduced lead poisoning to America's children.

Other problems have occurred with power strips and extension cords, holiday lights and batteries.

China also consistently has topped the list of countries whose products were refused by the FDA The list includes many countries, including Mexico and Canada, that export far more food products to the U.S. than China.

The Chinese government, in fact, actually has blamed WND's reports for fanning the flames of hysteria about the safety of Chinese products.