Comments on: Chinese authoritarianism does not guarantee prosperity http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/ Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:34:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Janeallen http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/#comment-350 Fri, 29 Oct 2010 22:10:38 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=373#comment-350 There’s an additional element to the German success story in manufacturing— its cultural component.
The stoic, almost mechanical and austere component of their culture, paves the way for its reputation in heavy machinery manufacturing.
America has a workoholic bent to part of its culture, but by and large, the generations Xs and Ys promoted a real disdain against hard work. Maybe not in the high schools we went to, but where many kids studied, there was a counter-culture against working hard, propelled largely by the media. Taking marijuana, partying interests, do not promote pristine, exacting high quality technical products day in day out. That’s culture, not public policy, but may arguably be more decisive in the product quality, which, impacts the competitiveness of the products on the open market.

]]>
By: jo5319 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/#comment-348 Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:46:36 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=373#comment-348 Let’s examine this argument:

Seinfeld and J Lo caused our economic collapse. How? What?!

Seinfeld made his followers believe that the “hip” way to live, is to take as much unfair advantage as possible that one can get away with. That was Madoff’s philosophy, wasn’t it? Both Madoff and the people Madoff scammed were Seinfeld lovers.

J Lo made her followers believe that they can quit school, follow her, and become rich, popular, beautiful.
Well, even Saturday Night Live once featured her followers telling her that they were all out of work and without an education. Plus they had nobody to follow when she was temporarily gone and having a baby!

Obvious. Isn’t it?!

]]>
By: Janeallen http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/#comment-335 Fri, 29 Oct 2010 05:09:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=373#comment-335 Some dozen of years ago, Times magazine featured “emotional intelligence” on its cover.

American scientists talk about the intelligence of kids being able to wait minutes before getting candies.

Chinese emotional intelligence allow them to wait for generations before achieving their dreams.
That’s ultimately the smartest emotional makeup, beyond emulation by other cultures. THat’s what allowed them to survive much worse hardships than the famine and persecution than during the Cultural Revolution and other government adminstrative mistakes. I don’t think the west can emulate it, as long as their culture is the still in the mindset of Generation X, which is outdated.

]]>
By: CommonSensLogic http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/#comment-334 Fri, 29 Oct 2010 05:00:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=373#comment-334 WHY?
The author is EXTREMELY IGNORANT of Chinese history.
IT’s because the BRitish pushed an new item, completely unknown to the Chinese leaders, grown in India.
That item is called Opium

The Chinese resisted when they found out it’s a very dangerous substance.
THe CHinese banned opium, and burnt all the opium the British merchants were selling in China.

HOwever, Queen Victoria and her government supported the British druglords.
They fought a war, called the Opium War.

The druglords won, and took Hong Kong as a result of the Opium War.

It’s among the most shameful chapter of imperialism and racism.

Yet, the people in Hong KOng managed to become prosperous even under the authoritarian colonial system under the British.
Likewise, Chinese Americans suffered no less lynching than Afro-americans, and unfair discrimination under the CHinese Exclusion Act and many other shameful discriminatory racist scorning, but they rose above and overcame it all. They became the most educated, prosperous under American democracy.

My conclusion is: That’s a culture of success, not a government of success. That’s the key difference.

]]>
By: LeslieCheung001 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/#comment-317 Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:53:31 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=373#comment-317 I would think China is looking at what has been a relatively successful Singapore model, with autocratic rule by one party and comparatively viable testing ground for a multicultural society with a main stream Chinese population.

]]>
By: saucymugwump http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/#comment-314 Mon, 25 Oct 2010 13:52:24 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=373#comment-314 Here we go again with Freeland, like all dedicated capitalists, living in the past and defending her system against all comers. I, however, live in the present. China relaxed control of its citizens just a hair and now it is the world’s largest exporter. Germany is second on the exporter list. The USA is third and falling fast because it actively allows multinational corporations to outsource jobs to China and India.

How did China do it? Some people would say that China is the reincarnation of the USA in the 1800s — with all of the robber baron implications of oligarchs and serfs — and there is some justification for that. China’s problem with melamine tainted milk is just their version of the USA’s snake oil. However, there are two additional factors. First, China does not respect intellectual property: China has stolen trade secrets and other IP. Second, in its contracts with major industrial companies, China insists on a clause for the company to share its trade secrets. The company naively assumes that China will continue to buy products from them; they are always wrong, as China intends all along to use those newly acquired trade secrets to start its own industry.

Germany has a different model. It understands that a nation can successfully consist of two grades of skilled labor, university and trade school. So it has large numbers of technicians, with Germany manufacturing the highest quality products in the world. Contrast that to the USA, which has virtually no manufacturing left. The USA will soon have three classes of people: a tiny ruling class, a small middle class where university graduates reside, and an enormous poor class where 90%+ of the population resides.

Both China and Germany’s models are economically successful, while the USA’s sole reliance on Wall Street is proving to be an albatross around the necks of the vanishing middle class.

Freeland talked about how when one European country “went off the rails,” another took its place. Today we have a different model, the lemming model, where many countries play “follow the leader.” The USA has outsourced its way to oblivion and many other countries are following its example on their way into the abyss.

http://saucymugwump.blogspot.com/

]]>
By: chinawatcher http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/#comment-313 Mon, 25 Oct 2010 12:35:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=373#comment-313 I can give you an example of an authoritarian regime having achieved modernisation and economic transformation — Singapore. The city state, which is China’s model of state capitalism, remains undemocratic while achieving per capita GDP higher than that of the US and most European countries.

Having lived in both worlds, I used to admire western democratic system. But now, I see western democracy as a receipie of populism, inefficiency, overspending, high tax, huge debts…. and you name it.

The fact that China has effective control over its banks, and that the government dares to cool off the overheating economy, shows that state capitalism can achieve things that a free market economy/democracy can never achieve.

I don’t know much about India, but if its economy goes down the road of the USA, it will eventually groom an echelon of uncontrollable bankers who will eventually ruin the national economy.

]]>
By: adamt78 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/#comment-312 Mon, 25 Oct 2010 09:29:43 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=373#comment-312 the headline sure is true though…even if the stuff underneath doesn’t really do the work…

]]>
By: Tellthetruth http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/#comment-310 Sun, 24 Oct 2010 17:55:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=373#comment-310 You need to compare apples with apples. India, a democracy, has .a similar history of foreign occupation and population to China. There are more poor people in India than in China. In fact today most Chinese people are happy and proud of their government today.

]]>
By: GPD http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2010/10/21/chinese-authoritarianism-does-not-guarantee-prosperity/#comment-309 Sun, 24 Oct 2010 08:12:31 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=373#comment-309 The author would’ve been entirely right if:
– the regime was totalitarian – but it’s authoritarian. Isn’t the regime in the USA also authoritarian???
– system of state capitalism – the state/government sets the rules in China, but in which country doesn’t it? On the other hand, if the state doesn’t control the means of production (i.e. the businesses), why name it ‘state’ capitalism? In China, I have noticed, the state plays a very wise role by investing, next privatising, thereby speeding up development. Besides, didn’t Ms Thatcher do rather the same thing with troubled companies???
– democracy – this word means ‘rule by the people’. Shortly, the Chinese are neither Americans, nor Europeans, in order to adopt their model of democracy. Considerring the progress they’ve made in thirty years – maybe we should consider adopting some of their values? e.g. publicly executing corrupt officials/politicians.
– prosperity – one must have a completely biased attitude to even hint the Chinese people haven’t become much, much richer, surpasing even ‘developed’ in many aspects (e.g. benefits of public infrastructure, etc.)

]]>