ckaihatsu
19th May 2009, 08:48
http://chicago.indymedia.org/newswire/display/86635/index.php
> Zhibin Gu: China's deadly troubles vs global financial crisis: challenges, wars
This article is very objective and informative in its description of China's economy, but then it goes screwy when it comes to providing a suitable direction forward, contained in the three paragraphs reproduced below. My comments are interspersed.
> The most fundamental issue related to sustained economic development inside China is to move decisively toward a law-based market economy, free from the deadly meddling of an unlimited bureaucratic power.
Gu obviously prefers a wide-open market, as opposed to China's very controlled and economic protectionist stance that it's had since neoliberalism was adopted after the end of Maoism. Ironic that this very same approach to national development was used successfully by the United States when it was emerging out of colony-hood.
> The most basic requirement for this end is to have a firm separation of government from the business sphere. In such a way, the government can truly function like a government and the business entities can truly develop to become modern business organizations with a right set of owners, legal protection and governance. All said, turning the political body into a true modern service body must be carried out, the sooner the better. Unfortunately, these basic issues have yet to be resolved, along with the deepening of reform.
We all know of the translation process that's needed if we're unable to read a text in its original language. I *don't know* if *this* article was translated into English, or if it was originally written in English, but one thing I *can* see right away is that it sorely needs a *political* translation.
Gu is critical of China's economic protectionism because it allows the hyper-exploitation of China's millions of workers to create a build-up of *national* wealth. Today's established imperialist powers -- just like Britain and France in the 18th century -- get pissy if they can't pry open the wealth-box of the colonies underneath them. Here, today, we're hearing the same kind of *****ing coming from the business mouthpieces of the U.S., regarding China.
> What is more unfortunate, this ongoing global financial crisis has meant a continuing delay in true and basic economic reform. But without fundamental economic reform, sustained and rational development will be filled with crisis, which is built into the old economic and political systems.
So here China's economic sphere is neatly detached from the rest of worldwide capitalism and is said to be a hindrance to itself, with the global economic crisis only adding to its burden. And the answer? If China would just *open up* and *share the wealth* with the larger powers then it would somehow enjoy "sustained and rational development". This really sounds more like a creepy sales pitch than anything else....
> This aspect of the basic issues is little understood by the outside world, but it is fundamental for the healthy economic development of China in the long run.
Translation: "Don't think that you know what's going on with China. It's a closed-off, mysterious economy. Trust me when I tell you that it needs to be more exposed to the world market, even though the whole world market itself is slipping faster than a guy with untied shoelaces on a frozen lake. It'll all turn out just fine if you follow my advice. Trust me."
> Simply put, all the positive economic development in the past three decades must be installed in a law-based modern institutional and legal system. That is something China has no way of avoiding if its sustained development is to be maintained.
While China, like any national culture, has its own particular issues with being held back by outmoded traditional practices, simply invoking a Western-style terminology of "law-based" and "modern...legal system" isn't really going to change anything. Does anyone here think that there *aren't* laws in China? And doesn't China have to deal with modern legal issues, like those relating to technology, like anywhere else in the world?
Again our hopes for a virile future for China are held over our heads if we don't agree to the vague advice being offered. Is Gu calling for China to be colonized under the IMF or something? Sure sounds that way...!
Chris
--
--
___
RevLeft.com -- Home of the Revolutionary Left
www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=16162
Photoillustrations, Political Diagrams by Chris Kaihatsu
community.webshots.com/user/ckaihatsu/
3D Design Communications - Let Your Design Do Your Footwork
ckaihatsu.elance.com
MySpace:
myspace.com/ckaihatsu
CouchSurfing:
tinyurl.com/yoh74u
-- Of all the Marxists in a roomful of people, I'm the Wilde-ist. --
> Zhibin Gu: China's deadly troubles vs global financial crisis: challenges, wars
This article is very objective and informative in its description of China's economy, but then it goes screwy when it comes to providing a suitable direction forward, contained in the three paragraphs reproduced below. My comments are interspersed.
> The most fundamental issue related to sustained economic development inside China is to move decisively toward a law-based market economy, free from the deadly meddling of an unlimited bureaucratic power.
Gu obviously prefers a wide-open market, as opposed to China's very controlled and economic protectionist stance that it's had since neoliberalism was adopted after the end of Maoism. Ironic that this very same approach to national development was used successfully by the United States when it was emerging out of colony-hood.
> The most basic requirement for this end is to have a firm separation of government from the business sphere. In such a way, the government can truly function like a government and the business entities can truly develop to become modern business organizations with a right set of owners, legal protection and governance. All said, turning the political body into a true modern service body must be carried out, the sooner the better. Unfortunately, these basic issues have yet to be resolved, along with the deepening of reform.
We all know of the translation process that's needed if we're unable to read a text in its original language. I *don't know* if *this* article was translated into English, or if it was originally written in English, but one thing I *can* see right away is that it sorely needs a *political* translation.
Gu is critical of China's economic protectionism because it allows the hyper-exploitation of China's millions of workers to create a build-up of *national* wealth. Today's established imperialist powers -- just like Britain and France in the 18th century -- get pissy if they can't pry open the wealth-box of the colonies underneath them. Here, today, we're hearing the same kind of *****ing coming from the business mouthpieces of the U.S., regarding China.
> What is more unfortunate, this ongoing global financial crisis has meant a continuing delay in true and basic economic reform. But without fundamental economic reform, sustained and rational development will be filled with crisis, which is built into the old economic and political systems.
So here China's economic sphere is neatly detached from the rest of worldwide capitalism and is said to be a hindrance to itself, with the global economic crisis only adding to its burden. And the answer? If China would just *open up* and *share the wealth* with the larger powers then it would somehow enjoy "sustained and rational development". This really sounds more like a creepy sales pitch than anything else....
> This aspect of the basic issues is little understood by the outside world, but it is fundamental for the healthy economic development of China in the long run.
Translation: "Don't think that you know what's going on with China. It's a closed-off, mysterious economy. Trust me when I tell you that it needs to be more exposed to the world market, even though the whole world market itself is slipping faster than a guy with untied shoelaces on a frozen lake. It'll all turn out just fine if you follow my advice. Trust me."
> Simply put, all the positive economic development in the past three decades must be installed in a law-based modern institutional and legal system. That is something China has no way of avoiding if its sustained development is to be maintained.
While China, like any national culture, has its own particular issues with being held back by outmoded traditional practices, simply invoking a Western-style terminology of "law-based" and "modern...legal system" isn't really going to change anything. Does anyone here think that there *aren't* laws in China? And doesn't China have to deal with modern legal issues, like those relating to technology, like anywhere else in the world?
Again our hopes for a virile future for China are held over our heads if we don't agree to the vague advice being offered. Is Gu calling for China to be colonized under the IMF or something? Sure sounds that way...!
Chris
--
--
___
RevLeft.com -- Home of the Revolutionary Left
www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=16162
Photoillustrations, Political Diagrams by Chris Kaihatsu
community.webshots.com/user/ckaihatsu/
3D Design Communications - Let Your Design Do Your Footwork
ckaihatsu.elance.com
MySpace:
myspace.com/ckaihatsu
CouchSurfing:
tinyurl.com/yoh74u
-- Of all the Marxists in a roomful of people, I'm the Wilde-ist. --