China's New Leader Signals Signs of Economic Reform

[General Mung Beans]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/10/world ... wanted=all

CHANGING OF THE GUARD
Signals in China of a More Open Economy

Carlos Barria/Reuters
In November, Xi Jinping made his official debut as party chief at the 18th party congress, which military officers attended.
By EDWARD WONG
Published: December 9, 2012


BEIJING — In a strong signal of support for greater market-oriented economic policies, Xi Jinping, the new head of the Communist Party, made a visit over the weekend to the special economic zone of Shenzhen in south China, which has stood as a symbol of the nation’s embrace of a state-led form of capitalism since its growth over the last three decades from a fishing enclave to an industrial metropolis.

A portrait of Deng Xiaoping, the former leader who designated Shenzhen as a special economic zone, looms over the city.
The trip was Mr. Xi’s first outside Beijing since becoming party chief on Nov. 15. Mr. Xi visited a private Internet company on Friday and went to Lotus Hill Park on Saturday to lay a wreath at a bronze statue of Deng Xiaoping, the leader who opened the era of economic reforms in 1979, when Shenzhen was designated a special economic zone. Mr. Deng famously later visited the city in 1992 to encourage reviving those economic policies after they had stalled following the violent crackdown on pro-democracy protests in 1989.

“Reform and opening up is a guiding policy that the Communist Party must stick to,” Mr. Xi said, according to Phoenix Television, one of several Hong Kong news organizations that covered the trip. “We must keep to this correct path. We must stay unwavering on the road to a prosperous country and people, and there must be new pioneering.”

In the months before the transition, there were widespread calls, including from people close to Mr. Xi, to adopt more liberal economic policies and even to experiment with greater political openness as a way for the party to maintain its rule. Without much success so far, reformers have long been encouraging the leadership to move toward a more sustainable growth model for China, one that relies more on domestic consumption rather than infrastructure investment and exports, and where state enterprises play less of a role.

Mr. Xi, known as a skillful consensus builder, has kept his ideas carefully veiled throughout his career, but his trip to Shenzhen is the strongest sign yet that he may favor more open policies. In a speech in Beijing on Nov. 29, Mr. Xi spoke of the “Chinese dream” of realizing the nation’s “revival,” which, besides being a call for renewal, also signaled strong nationalist leanings.

Mr. Xi’s father, Xi Zhongxun, was a revered senior official handpicked by Mr. Deng to help shape the new economic policies and oversee the creation of the Shenzhen zone. Mr. Xi’s mother lives in Shenzhen, and he visited her on his trip, according to Hong Kong news reports.

“If he indeed went to Shenzhen, that means he intends to make reform a subject of priority,” said Li Weidong, a liberal political analyst. “That would really be a phenomenon.”

Mr. Li cautioned, though, that the so-called reform policies that followed Mr. Deng’s 1992 southern tour, in his view, “ended up being fake” because China’s boom resulted in widespread corruption and the expansion of state enterprises at the expense of private entrepreneurship.

When Mr. Xi’s predecessor, Hu Jintao, became party chief in 2002, he was seen by many as a potential reformer, but his tenure was marked by conservative policies. For his first trip outside Beijing as party chief, Mr. Hu went in December 2002 to Xibaipo, a hallowed site for the revolution, where he reiterated a speech given by Mao Zedong.

Over the weekend, video footage from Phoenix Television showed a line of minibuses and police cars winding its way through Shenzhen. Mr. Xi and other officials walked outdoors in dark suits. The party’s official news organizations did not immediately report on the trip, but some prominent mainland Chinese news Web sites cited the Hong Kong reports.

Mr. Xi’s early moves as party leader seem aimed at emphasizing national “revival,” a theme he highlighted when he appeared on Nov. 29 with the party’s new seven-man Politburo Standing Committee in a history museum at Tiananmen Square. According to People’s Daily, the party mouthpiece, Mr. Xi stood in front of an exhibition called “The Road to Rejuvenation” and said, “After the 170 or more years of constant struggle since the Opium Wars, the great revival of the Chinese nation enjoys glorious prospects.”

He added: “Now everyone is discussing the Chinese dream, and I believe that realizing the great revival of the Chinese nation is the greatest dream of the Chinese nation in modern times.”

The emphasis on a “Chinese dream” is particular to Mr. Xi, and could prove to be a recurring motif throughout his tenure. The notion of a grand revival — “fu xing” in Mandarin — has been popular with Chinese leaders for at least a century, but Mr. Xi appears to be tapping more deeply into that nationalist vein than his recent predecessors, perhaps recognizing that traditional Communist ideology no longer has popular appeal.

Given China’s many recent accomplishments, it is somewhat surprising that “this narrative, which counterpoises China against Japan and the West, should be becoming more rather than less prominent,” said Orville Schell, a veteran China observer who is writing a book on the country’s modern quest for wealth and power with John Delury, a historian. “And now, as the new Chinese leadership begins to write the script for the next act of their country’s reform, it appears as if Xi Jinping is finding nationalism an irresistible ingredient in his effort to galvanize his people.”

Mr. Xi’s brand of nationalism, analysts say, could mix bolder economic policies with anticorruption campaigns, a vigorous military buildup and a muscular foreign policy. The combination is somewhat reminiscent of the Self-Strengthening Movement in the late 19th century, when some Chinese leaders and intellectuals tried to push institutional reforms to revive a weakening Qing dynasty harassed by Western powers and Japan.

Leaders here know that anti-foreign nationalism, shaped by the state education system and mass media, is a powerful undercurrent in Chinese society. Just weeks before Mr. Xi took power, anti-Japan protests erupted in Chinese cities over a territorial dispute. Under Mr. Xi, China has been assertive with Southeast Asian nations over disputed territory in the South China Sea.

On Wednesday, Mr. Xi met with representatives of the Second Artillery Corps, which oversees China’s nuclear arsenal. That prompted The People’s Liberation Army Daily to say the next day: “In realizing the great dream of the great revival of the Chinese nation, the Second Artillery Corps is duty-bound to take up the task of forging the saber of a great power.”

For many Chinese, calls for revival refer to resurrecting a China strong enough to dictate foreign policy on its own terms, before Western nations humiliated the Qing rulers during the two Opium Wars in the 19th century. The last golden age of China as a great power is often considered to be the late 18th century, after the Qing empire’s ethnic Manchu rulers had expanded China’s geographic reach. Perhaps most telling, the Qianlong Emperor tried forcing George Macartney, the British envoy, to kowtow in the imperial court in 1793.

After the Opium Wars, nationalist intellectuals, including Sun Yat-sen, pushed for rejuvenation. Sun founded the Revive China Society, whose motto was to “expel the Manchus, revive China and establish a unified government.”

In Mr. Schell’s view, “if there is any one sentiment that has tied all the thinkers and leaders of China’s 20th century together, it is certainly nationalism.”

Mr. Delury, the historian, said there was a millennia-old concept of rejuvenation in dynastic China that the party might find relevant now. It was called a “middle revival,” or zhong xing, and was used to describe a period midway through a dynastic cycle when an empire had to revive itself to move past the failings of weak leadership.

“To rally the troops, there’s a call for zhong xing,” Mr. Delury said. “The archetype is you have these strong founding emperors, and then you have an inexorable weakening, and then there’s a crisis, and a strong leader emerges in the middle who pushes the zhong xing. It gives the dynasty a second life.”


Patrick Zuo contributed research.

The signals of an economic reform are heartening...the potential for a more aggressive foreign policy less so. Also I find it ironic that a nominally Communist regime is using essentially fascist rhetoric and are far more successful than Mussolini or Hitler ever was.

[LaCroix]

You mean American rhetoric, don't you? That kind of speech is just what we see of just about every American politician when he addresses his voters. They just swapped America with China, and "free market" with "revival".

And I would welcome a China able to tell America "This far, and not one step further!" It would do the world good if the US would have to occasionally stop and think about their actions.

[K. A. Pital]

Without much success so far, reformers have long been encouraging the leadership to move toward a more sustainable growth model for China, one that relies more on domestic consumption rather than infrastructure investment and exports

I would say with quite a bit of success:

Just look at net exports which have a negative contribution to growth.

Given China’s many recent accomplishments, it is somewhat surprising that “this narrative, which counterpoises China against Japan and the West, should be becoming more rather than less prominent,” said Orville Schell

So let's see, the West ransacked pillaged and colonized China and filled it with opium with the direst consequences for China's development. Japan slaugthered dozens of millions of Chinese, colonized pillaged and raped China so hard it still hurts and never apologized. Now China is no longer the weak pathetic monarchy of the Qin neither a warlord torn-apart territory. If I were a Chinese, I'd say it's high time to say "Fuck you all ruthless cruel hypocrite bastards on the other side of the sea, we can safely ignore you now and safely say "FUCK YOU" loud and clear at any time of the day we want". Just to make sure they understand that they're dealing with an equal now, not with a puppet, not with a Third World shithole with no self-respect, any treaty with which can be used for asswipes.

[mr friendly guy]

You mean American rhetoric, don't you? That kind of speech is just what we see of just about every American politician when he addresses his voters. They just swapped America with China, and "free market" with "revival".

And I would welcome a China able to tell America "This far, and not one step further!" It would do the world good if the US would have to occasionally stop and think about their actions.

Ah, but when America does it, its called patriotism. When China does it, its Nationalism. Got to love the word play here.

Western commentators have been accusing China of playing the nationalism card for ages, its starting to lose its sting.

Back to topic, its the usual talk about China needing to increase consumption and decreasing investment in infrastructure. Keep in mind that people have been saying that China will slow down if they don't make these awesome reforms, the same ones Russia did and look where it got them, oh never mind. They have been saying this at least a decade ago, and during this time China experienced its fastest growth. My personal take is that consumption will increase (it has anyway), but investment will still continue to be high because while arguably they might not need a taller skyscrapper in Shanghai or a freaking Stargate in Fushan, Western and rural China still needs a lot. Saying that those other Asian countries didn't invest so highly in infrastructure for so long kind of misses the point. China has a larger population so it will need more infrastructure to be built.

[mr friendly guy]

So let's see, the West ransacked pillaged and colonized China and filled it with opium with the direst consequences for China's development. Japan slaugthered dozens of millions of Chinese, colonized pillaged and raped China so hard it still hurts and never apologized. Now China is no longer the weak pathetic monarchy of the Qin neither a warlord torn-apart territory. If I were a Chinese, I'd say it's high time to say "Fuck you all ruthless cruel hypocrite bastards on the other side of the sea, we can safely ignore you now and safely say "FUCK YOU" loud and clear at any time of the day we want". Just to make sure they understand that they're dealing with an equal now, not with a puppet, not with a Third World shithole with no self-respect, any treaty with which can be used for asswipes.

I believe you meant Qing, and not Qin. The Qin was one of the earlier dynasties while the Qing was the last one.

Its also quite amusing that China (even on this board a few years ago) got criticised when they responded to Japan glorifying war criminals and denying their crimes. Since then we have seen the US walk out of a speech by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad twice while he was addressing the UN. In 2010 and 2012, when he engaged in 9/11 conspiracy theories and holocaust denial. But when China does something similar, like pull out diplomats, why its sooo wrong. Especially considering more Chinese died from Japanese invasion than Americans and Jews in both those events.

[Simon_Jester]

On the economic issue-

I'm not sure what the limits are for China as a producer of cheap goods for the rest of the world, but right now that's driving their economy, and it can only drive things so far. There may be a lot of fatuous nonsense tied into it, but it's sensible to say "OK, you have the world's largest manufacturing economy and the world's largest population, time to start using the one to sell to the other." To a large extent they're already starting to do that; it's mostly a question of details.

Some people have this cartoonish idea of China taking every possible penny and pouring it into whatever they can throw together out of concrete right NOW whether it makes sense or not. This isn't accurate, but it fits the stereotypes of dictatorship economies in general (grandiose random construction). And it fits the prejudices of American commentators, America being a nation that's systematically underspent on infrastructure to the tune of several trillion dollars for a generation and still somehow manages to have enough roads and cities that everyone manages.

It is not hard for a careless American (or, really, citizen of any developed country) to think that infrastructure spending 'doesn't matter' or somehow 'just happens' as a side effect of economic growth, rather than being a huge thing that you have to plow resources into decade after decade to turn a primitive country into a rich one.

[K. A. Pital]

I just mistyped, of course I meant the Qing and not the Qin.

Its also quite amusing that China (even on this board a few years ago) got criticised when they responded to Japan glorifying war criminals and denying their crimes.

I remember that. Nevermind that Japan (1) glorifies war criminals (2) never issued a proper apology to China. And of course (3) - the US specifically pardoned the most horrendous war criminals alive to keep 'em working for their own bioweapons program. I think the Khabarovsk trials were about the only time when people responsible for the madness in China got some harsh punishment served.

I'm not sure what the limits are for China as a producer of cheap goods for the rest of the world, but right now that's driving their economy, and it can only drive things so far.

It's not exactly true if we take the last 5 years or so. Exports are a net negative growth contributor. Domestic consumption has been the primary driver of China's economy since 2007. In 2000-2007, the share of China's domestic consumption in GDP has been falling and the share of exports in GDP and GDP growth has been rising. In 2007-2012, the trend reversed.

Some people have this cartoonish idea of China taking every possible penny and pouring it into whatever they can throw together out of concrete right NOW whether it makes sense or not.

These people are morons. When you point out that after all the costs have been born, China's HSR is there to stay for any future government - be it more or less authoritarian, more right wing or more left wing - these folks throw a hissy fit "but how can they decide what's necessary if it's not the invisible hand of the free market lol"... Ugh.

[Ralin]

(2) never issued a proper apology to China.

That's not entirely accurate. Though the sincerity and completeness of those apologies can be questioned.

I'm as pro-China as anyone on these forums, but I don't think it can be denied that the PRC government uses the issue to distract attention from their own problems and shortcomings. And while I'll be the first to criticize Japanese politicians who do glorify war criminals the fact is that I don't think there's anything the Japanese government could do to satisfy the Chinese public.

I'm told the same is true in Korea and probably other parts of Asia.

[mr friendly guy]

The apology issue has been discussed before. Basically Japan can make a vague sorry, but leaves out details including their most heinous crimes. When Japanese PMs blatantly deny some of their worse atrocities or approve text books which ignore it, I look at it as Japan being sorry only for the lesser stuff. They still pretend the more serious atrocities haven't happen.

As to what is satisfactory for the Chinese public, I suspect an equivalent to what Germany has done will help. We don't see the average Jew still hating Germany after all this time do we? Its not like Israel doesn't milk the Holocaust, they just don't use it against Germany. IMO a similar thing will happen if Japan does the same thing Germany did. If the PRC government wants someone to blame, they will find someone else, just like Israel does.

[Ralin]

approve text books which ignore it

My understanding is that the textbook issue revolved around a textbook that was only used in private schools run by ultra-conservatives. Which the Japanese PM has about as much control over as Obama has over the curriculum at Liberty University. Most Japanese textbooks give at least as good of an overview of the war as American textbooks on the subject do.

As to what is satisfactory for the Chinese public, I suspect an equivalent to what Germany has done will help. We don't see the average Jew still hating Germany after all this time do we? Its not like Israel doesn't milk the Holocaust, they just don't use it against Germany. IMO a similar thing will happen if Japan does the same thing Germany did. If the PRC government wants someone to blame, they will find someone else, just like Israel does.

Really? Because I see plenty of people waving the Nazi flag whenever Germany takes a vaguely anti-Israeli position.

And leaving aside how likely it is that Japan will ever go to the extent Germany did in making reparations and educating their population about their history without someone literally occupying them and forcing them to do it, I'd question how justified it is to ask them to do so at this point. If this was 1945, sure, by all means, make ordinary Japanese people do the equivalent of walking through the death camps so they can't pretend it didn't happen. But this is two generations later. The people who make up Japan today are not the people who fought and supported those wars, and they are not responsible for what their grandparents did.

EDIT:

And even then I don't think it would stop the Chinese government from using it as a way to whip people up at something other than them. It's not like this is a country with a free news media and all.

[K. A. Pital]

Though the sincerity and completeness of those apologies can be questioned.

As best can be determined, Japan's compensation payments both to war victims and their heirs have totaled a mere $1 billion. This contrasts remarkably with Germany's record. Already by the early-1990s Germany's payments to victims and their heirs had exceeded $70 billion. The contrast is all the more remarkable for the fact that Imperial Japan's victims outnumbered those of the Nazis by at least three to one. The truth is that most of Japan's victims, including millions in China, have not received a penny. And in the small minority of cases in which compensation has been paid, the sums have been laughable.

By ye actions shall one judge.

And while I'll be the first to criticize Japanese politicians who do glorify war criminals the fact is that I don't think there's anything the Japanese government could do to satisfy the Chinese public.

Maybe (1) stop pretending the declaration on "no reparation demands from the Chinese government" also applies to any private individual in China (2) pay some more reparations - at least as much as Germany, since they slaughtered and wounded and otherwise abused quite the same number of people as the Nazi invaders.

[Kane Starkiller]

I'd say it's high time to say "Fuck you all ruthless cruel hypocrite bastards on the other side of the sea, we can safely ignore you now and safely say "FUCK YOU" loud and clear at any time of the day we want". Just to make sure they understand that they're dealing with an equal now, not with a puppet, not with a Third World shithole with no self-respect, any treaty with which can be used for asswipes.

Weren't the assholes from the other side of the sea the ones that quite literaly saved China from Japan? Wasn't there another other group of assholes coming from the area north of China that annexed nearly million km2 of Chinese territory while it was weakened by European powers during the 19th century?

[mr friendly guy]

approve text books which ignore it

My understanding is that the textbook issue revolved around a textbook that was only used in private schools run by ultra-conservatives. Which the Japanese PM has about as much control over as Obama has over the curriculum at Liberty University. Most Japanese textbooks give at least as good of an overview of the war as American textbooks on the subject do.

You are in error. In fact searching through archives from BBC in 2005 nets this gem where its stated the government approved it, then followed up with their get out of jail free card and said, "well it doesn't really represent the view of the government." This is just a way of metaphorically having your cake and eating it as well.

Really? Because I see plenty of people waving the Nazi flag whenever Germany takes a vaguely anti-Israeli position.

Any pictures? Because frankly I don't remember even seeing this on RT even as they talk about Israel milking the holocaust. They just accuse Israel (not unreasonably I might add) of milking it against Iran.

And leaving aside how likely it is that Japan will ever go to the extent Germany did in making reparations and educating their population about their history without someone literally occupying them and forcing them to do it, I'd question how justified it is to ask them to do so at this point. If this was 1945, sure, by all means, make ordinary Japanese people do the equivalent of walking through the death camps so they can't pretend it didn't happen. But this is two generations later. The people who make up Japan today are not the people who fought and supported those wars, and they are not responsible for what their grandparents did.

The US lent money to Britain in 1946 to help them recover from WWII. When did Britain finally pay all of it back? Ten years, twenty years maybe. Try 29 th December 2006. But surely, tax payers in 2005 aren't the same people who took out the loan from America, and are not responsible for taking out the loan which their grandparents did. Why should they pay?

I bet you no one will even apply this logic even twice to government debts, but strangely when it comes to compensation (which is a debt) it suddenly no longer a matter of asking the nation's government to pay (an entity which I might add outlasts people even if they do change administration), its suddenly unfair because we are asking grandchildren. Well you live in the country, you have to help pay its debts via taxes. Don't like it, find another country who will take you in. I might also add Japan does compensate for newly discovered left over WWII land mines in China which injure civilians. If we took the logic to its conclusion, they should not even have to compensate for that, because you know, modern day Japanese tax payers aren't the same ones who put the land mines there. I think Japan is willing to compensate for land mine injuries because they don't deny they left land mines in China. They won't compensate for stuff like the Rape of Nanking because they deny that happened.

[mr friendly guy]

I'd say it's high time to say "Fuck you all ruthless cruel hypocrite bastards on the other side of the sea, we can safely ignore you now and safely say "FUCK YOU" loud and clear at any time of the day we want". Just to make sure they understand that they're dealing with an equal now, not with a puppet, not with a Third World shithole with no self-respect, any treaty with which can be used for asswipes.

Weren't the assholes from the other side of the sea the ones that quite literaly saved China from Japan? Wasn't there another other group of assholes coming from the area north of China that annexed nearly million km2 of Chinese territory while it was weakened by European powers during the 19th century?

It was mainly American aid which helped the Chinese, although Chinese troops of course did most of the fighting in their territory and most of IJA was based in China. Other aid came from Germany before Hitler allied with Japan - it was German military advisers who suggested China adopt a strategy of trading space for time (although if you think about it, what else could they do), and the Guomindang's elite troops were German trained. As far as arseholes go, IIRC the US were less of one (and actually supported the Chinese getting back Shandong from the defeated Germany after WWI, but the British jinxed that idea and awarded it to Japan). While we are on that matter, Germany after WWI became a major trading partner of China, and the initial alliance was easier since Germany didn't have any more ambitions in Asia, so they weren't treating China so badly at that point.

As for your jibe against the Bear, last time I check Russia doesn't have that many disputes with China these days. Kind of seems pointless for Stas to take joy in China's new found ability to ignore hypocritical bastards, if this particular bastard doesn't want to bother China so much. That may change in the future, but as they say "not today."

[Simon_Jester]

It's not exactly true if we take the last 5 years or so. Exports are a net negative growth contributor. Domestic consumption has been the primary driver of China's economy since 2007. In 2000-2007, the share of China's domestic consumption in GDP has been falling and the share of exports in GDP and GDP growth has been rising. In 2007-2012, the trend reversed.

Well then, good news for China!

Some people have this cartoonish idea of China taking every possible penny and pouring it into whatever they can throw together out of concrete right NOW whether it makes sense or not.

These people are morons...

Tell me about it.

When you point out that after all the costs have been born, China's HSR is there to stay for any future government - be it more or less authoritarian, more right wing or more left wing - these folks throw a hissy fit "but how can they decide what's necessary if it's not the invisible hand of the free market lol"... Ugh.

Yes. I am ruled by such fools and madmen. And that's the story of how our bridges have suspicious flakes of concrete falling off the bottoms!

[K. A. Pital]

I'd say it's high time to say "Fuck you all ruthless cruel hypocrite bastards on the other side of the sea, we can safely ignore you now and safely say "FUCK YOU" loud and clear at any time of the day we want". Just to make sure they understand that they're dealing with an equal now, not with a puppet, not with a Third World shithole with no self-respect, any treaty with which can be used for asswipes.

Weren't the assholes from the other side of the sea the ones that quite literaly saved China from Japan? Wasn't there another other group of assholes coming from the area north of China that annexed nearly million km2 of Chinese territory while it was weakened by European powers during the 19th century?

In case of Russia, the assholes who grabbed Chinese land were promtply annihilated by the revolution in 17. And... another set of now-revolutionary Northern assholes who came from the North liberated China's mainland from the Kwantung Army and gave this land to the PRC post-liberation- instead of annexing it as a Manchurian Soviet Republic, heh. American soldiers weren't fighting the Japanese in Manchuria, it was the Soviets. Besides, in case of Japan and Britain there's a clear continuity of government and no revolution - and a lack of remorse over their actions.

But China can also now speak to Russia as an equal and even, I'd say, as a hegemon of the East. Which is good. China is practical and materialistic; Russia is devolving to a crazy banana-republic like theocracy. China knows how to reverse engineer and copy a bazillion of different things; Russia fails to build a separate High-Speed Rail line and cannot produce HSR trains domestically. China's space program is ambitious; Russia's is in a state of permanent malaise and endless delays with far less ambitious projects than the ones in the 1980s.

In fact, China could run the Far East and Siberia a lot better than Russia, but China doesn't need it.

Also, I work for one of the Chinese Ministry of Interior departments, volunteered in 09 to spread Chinese propaganda for the coming Red Dawn.

The culprits whom I mentioned - France, Britain and Japan - never saved China from anybody and didn't do shit for China's development.

US were less of one (and actually supported the Chinese getting back Shandong from the defeated Germany after WWI, but the British jinxed that idea and awarded it to Japan)

Exactly. I don't understand how Britain's brutal colonialism in China and the Opium Wars and Japan's murderous rampage of blood and rape have anything to do with the USA. I guess in Kaneworld any attack on such stellar pillars of human rights as Britain and Japan is automatically an attack on the US.

[Kane Starkiller]

As for your jibe against the Bear, last time I check Russia doesn't have that many disputes with China these days. Kind of seems pointless for Stas to take joy in China's new found ability to ignore hypocritical bastards, if this particular bastard doesn't want to bother China so much. That may change in the future, but as they say "not today."

Sure but my point is if China starts making lists of people who wronged it all the way up to opium wars the people who stole million km2 of their territory would be pretty high on that list so he should really be careful of what he wishes for.

In case of Russia, the assholes who grabbed Chinese land were promtply annihilated by the revolution in 17. And... another set of now-revolutionary Northern assholes who came from the North liberated China's mainland from the Kwantung Army and gave this land to the PRC post-liberation- instead of annexing it as a Manchurian Soviet Republic, heh. American soldiers weren't fighting the Japanese in Manchuria, it was the Soviets. Besides, in case of Japan and Britain there's a clear continuity of government and no revolution - and a lack of remorse over their actions.

Only after the Japan was already devastated by US and the first atom bomb dropped did USSR invade Japan held Manchuira. And I'm not seeing the part where USSR returned the lands to China.
I'm kind of baffled as to why you think a change of government in any way shape or form absolves them of guilt for stealing land.

But China can also now speak to Russia as an equal and even, I'd say, as a hegemon of the East. Which is good. China is practical and materialistic; Russia is devolving to a crazy banana-republic like theocracy. China knows how to reverse engineer and copy a bazillion of different things; Russia fails to build a separate High-Speed Rail line and cannot produce HSR trains domestically. China's space program is ambitious; Russia's is in a state of permanent malaise and endless delays with far less ambitious projects than the ones in the 1980s.

In fact, China could run the Far East and Siberia a lot better than Russia, but China doesn't need it.

I'm not quite sure what to make of this. Chinese economic superiority over Russia + building high speed rail makes it a good thing that Chinese be hegemon of the East? That doesn't remotely make sense.

Also, I work for one of the Chinese Ministry of Interior departments, volunteered in 09 to spread Chinese propaganda for the coming Red Dawn.

Well you certainly wouldn't be the first Russian I saw cheering China on as some kind of surrogate USSR hoping that it would succeed where Mother Russia failed: bringing the Amerikanski to their knees.

Exactly. I don't understand how Britain's brutal colonialism in China and the Opium Wars and Japan's murderous rampage of blood and rape have anything to do with the USA. I guess in Kaneworld any attack on such stellar pillars of human rights as Britain and Japan is automatically an attack on the US.

You accused the West of pillaging China not specifically Britain. Bit late to backtrack now. Also speaking from a purely practical, materialistic point of view human life can ultimately be replaced by the next generation. Land cannot. So while Chinese population more that doubled since WW2 the land stolen by Russian Empire can never be replaced. So in many ways China will actually feel the consequence of loosing that tract of land much longer than the killing of its people.

[thejester]

So let's see, the West ransacked pillaged and colonized China and filled it with opium with the direst consequences for China's development. Japan slaugthered dozens of millions of Chinese, colonized pillaged and raped China so hard it still hurts and never apologized. Now China is no longer the weak pathetic monarchy of the Qin neither a warlord torn-apart territory. If I were a Chinese, I'd say it's high time to say "Fuck you all ruthless cruel hypocrite bastards on the other side of the sea, we can safely ignore you now and safely say "FUCK YOU" loud and clear at any time of the day we want". Just to make sure they understand that they're dealing with an equal now, not with a puppet, not with a Third World shithole with no self-respect, any treaty with which can be used for asswipes.

Yep, because there's nothing like mindless posturing for past wrongs if you want to create a stable, prosperous Asia-Pacific.

TBH on the article itself I thought it interesting it didn't draw a clear connection between this message and the recent wave of scandals within the Party proper. Not that an emphasis over the long term on Chinese revival would have been caused by it, but the uptick in the message could be a clear result.

[Simon_Jester]

Sure but my point is if China starts making lists of people who wronged it all the way up to opium wars the people who stole million km2 of their territory would be pretty high on that list so he should really be careful of what he wishes for.

Since Stas no longer gives a shit about what misfortunes befall oligarchical Russia (note his comment that China could probably administer the Russian far east better than the Russians can)... I bet he's just going to shrug that one off.

I'm not quite sure what to make of this. Chinese economic superiority over Russia + building high speed rail makes it a good thing that Chinese be hegemon of the East? That doesn't remotely make sense.

What's confusing? Stas approves of nations that are future-minded in their policies and pursue some idea of economic development regardless of what the free-marketeers of the moment tell them. He doesn't much care if they're democratic, so far as I know, or if they're optimally efficient cogs in the global economic engine. So from his point of view China probably looks pretty cool, possibly more so than the USSR did because it's not so completely locked up and militarized and frozen economically that it eats its own long-term prospects.

[Spoonist]

Only after the Japan was already devastated by US and the first atom bomb dropped did USSR invade Japan held Manchuira. And I'm not seeing the part where USSR returned the lands to China.
I'm kind of baffled as to why you think a change of government in any way shape or form absolves them of guilt for stealing land.

That is some convoluted propaganda.

It's the agreement between the Allies and Soviet at Malta which picked the timing of the Soviet attack on Manchukuo. Since the Allies and US in particular didn't tell the Soviets any dates of their intention to nuke Japan, it played no role at all in the decision to attack nor its date. Instead the attack went on exactly on the date that had been agreed half a year earlier. That date depended on the fall of Germany which was priority 1 for both the Allies and Soviets.

So your implications that the Soviets would have waited until after US had devastated and nuked Japan is baseless.

Also it is mostly the Soviet invasion of Manchukuo that makes Japan accept the Potsdam declaration. Up until that point, and including nukes (which didn't do as much damage as conventional firebombings were continually making), the japanese had refused the Potsdam declaration and instead tried for a conditional peace.

Regarding why China doesn't have the same axe to grind regarding what you refer to as stealing land is because the Soviets were promised a lot more of historically Chinese lands by the Allies at Yalta and other. However what happened was that the Soviets supported Mao and continued to do so for years. Including handing over a lot of land and bases which they where "entitled" to by the post-war agreements.

Then stealing land by invasion is a time 'honored' way to gain new land. Care to explain how its worse when "they" do it rather than "us"?

[Kane Starkiller]

What's confusing? Stas approves of nations that are future-minded in their policies and pursue some idea of economic development regardless of what the free-marketeers of the moment tell them. He doesn't much care if they're democratic, so far as I know, or if they're optimally efficient cogs in the global economic engine. So from his point of view China probably looks pretty cool, possibly more so than the USSR did because it's not so completely locked up and militarized and frozen economically that it eats its own long-term prospects.

He didn't say he approves of China. He said it is good that China is a hegemon in the east. What I am wondering if he (or you) are supporting Chinese hegemony of the east and in general that certain powerful countries have hegemonies over parts of the globe because, among other things, they can build high speed rail(!?). Is that the justification for hegemony?

That is some convoluted propaganda.

It's the agreement between the Allies and Soviet at Malta which picked the timing of the Soviet attack on Manchukuo. Since the Allies and US in particular didn't tell the Soviets any dates of their intention to nuke Japan, it played no role at all in the decision to attack nor its date. Instead the attack went on exactly on the date that had been agreed half a year earlier. That date depended on the fall of Germany which was priority 1 for both the Allies and Soviets.

So your implications that the Soviets would have waited until after US had devastated and nuked Japan is baseless.

Also it is mostly the Soviet invasion of Manchukuo that makes Japan accept the Potsdam declaration. Up until that point, and including nukes (which didn't do as much damage as conventional firebombings were continually making), the japanese had refused the Potsdam declaration and instead tried for a conditional peace.

Regarding why China doesn't have the same axe to grind regarding what you refer to as stealing land is because the Soviets were promised a lot more of historically Chinese lands by the Allies at Yalta and other. However what happened was that the Soviets supported Mao and continued to do so for years. Including handing over a lot of land and bases which they where "entitled" to by the post-war agreements.

Then stealing land by invasion is a time 'honored' way to gain new land. Care to explain how its worse when "they" do it rather than "us"?

I never said they intentionally waited. I said that they invaded only after US did most of the work in defeating Japan. Nor is this really relevant. The point was simply to point out that Stas's simplistic narrative of "pillaging" West is nothing but generalization since US as part of traditional West certainly has overall a more positive influence on Chinese than Russians did.

[K. A. Pital]

Sure but my point is if China starts making lists of people who wronged it all the way up to opium wars the people who stole million km2 of their territory would be pretty high on that list so he should really be careful of what he wishes for.

Mother Russia is too nuclear for China and has settled territorial disputes recently - can't be worried too much.

Only after the Japan was already devastated by US and the first atom bomb dropped did USSR invade Japan held Manchuira. And I'm not seeing the part where USSR returned the lands to China. I'm kind of baffled as to why you think a change of government in any way shape or form absolves them of guilt for stealing land.

Uh - yes, the Tsar-occupied Dalian was obviously returned to China along with the entirety of Manchuria which was a Japanese colonial puppet for quite a while. And of course a change of government doesn't absolve "them" of stealing land. If China wants to claim the Far East, it can always try. Can't be much worse than the devastation which the current govt dealt to the region - Chinese seem to be pretty keen on building lots of useful infrastructure, housing and stuff like that.

I'm not quite sure what to make of this. Chinese economic superiority over Russia + building high speed rail makes it a good thing that Chinese be hegemon of the East? That doesn't remotely make sense.

Of course it does. China is quite competently run by a government of smart engineers. Russia is run by a pack of thieves and religious freaks.

Well you certainly wouldn't be the first Russian I saw cheering China on as some kind of surrogate USSR hoping that it would succeed...

You can stop at "would succeed". There's no need to bring America to its knees (if only to humiliate it, perhaps). China succeding is enough. That would be the story of 1,5 billion men becoming a superpower from a bunch of warlord-controlled regions in a timespan of a century or so. The story of awesome. If there was a great divergence, this would be the great convergence. Of course, some payback might be delivered and some past wrongs remembered. "Inevitably, some upheavals of the social order might follow".

You accused the West of pillaging China not specifically Britain. Bit late to backtrack now. Also speaking from a purely practical, materialistic point of view human life can ultimately be replaced by the next generation. Land cannot. So while Chinese population more that doubled since WW2 the land stolen by Russian Empire can never be replaced. So in many ways China will actually feel the consequence of loosing that tract of land much longer than the killing of its people.

Uh, it was clear from context I was speaking about Britain: filled it with opium and ransacked can hardly relate to the US, right? And of course China's great northern lands should be returned or a reparation paid. The Russian Empire had no right to do what it did. Current Russia might have to pay for it as well.

Is that the justification for hegemony?

And will Bakunin accuse the Americans of a "war of conquest", which, although it deals with a severe blow to his theory based on "justice and humanity", was nevertheless waged wholly and solely in the interest of civilization? Or is it perhaps unfortunate that splendid California has been taken away from the lazy Mexicans, who could not do anything with it? That the energetic Yankees by rapid exploitation of the California gold mines will increase the means of circulation, in a few years will concentrate a dense population and extensive trade at the most suitable places on the coast of the Pacific Ocean, create large cities, open up communications by steamship, construct a railway from New York to San Francisco, for the first time really open the Pacific Ocean to civilization, and for the third time in history give the world trade a new direction? The "independence" of a few Spanish Californians and Texans may suffer because of it, in someplaces "justice" and other moral principles may be violated; but what does that matter to such facts of world-historic significance?

Stas's simplistic narrative of "pillaging" West is nothing but generalization

You obviously can't comprehend that "West" can refer solely to European colonial powers and ignore the US, right?

possibly more so than the USSR did because it's not so completely locked up and militarized and frozen economically that it eats its own long-term prospects

You are right. Basically, the USSR's locked up existence and aversion to trade and globalization (with the exception of a short but awesome period of "red globalization" in the 50s and 60s which came to an end with the Brezhnew era and the Sino-Soviet split) meant death. A system evolves when it contacts the outside world and responds to external stimuli. A cut-off autarky cannot evolve properly and of course cannot really achieve the best there is to achieve.

China's strategy of openness excludes the autarky; the "small nuclear deterrent" and a volunteer military obviously reduces the military burden on the people. These are sensible policies which the USSR didn't follow (once again except for a short period in the 1950s-1960s).

Yep, because there's nothing like mindless posturing for past wrongs if you want to create a stable, prosperous Asia-Pacific.

Blah blah blah - "shut your mouth Third World nations, whatever wrong has been done to you, keep that mouth shut and don't remember! For the sake of prosperity and continuing stability..."

I said - saying "FUCK YOU" has a very clear purpose. It demonstrates that China is no longer some third-rate shithole which you can bomb into the stone age, invade or occupy or colonize, or station your boats at the harbour and play some gunboat diplomacy; or fly your aerial reconaissance assets over it without the fear of being shot down for a blatant violation of another nations' airspace.

If you think that Third World nations which have suffered centuries of dickery from great and not-so-great colonial empires should shut up for the sake of stability, you're a pitiful being.

[Simon_Jester]

What's confusing? Stas approves of nations that are future-minded in their policies and pursue some idea of economic development regardless of what the free-marketeers of the moment tell them. He doesn't much care if they're democratic, so far as I know, or if they're optimally efficient cogs in the global economic engine. So from his point of view China probably looks pretty cool, possibly more so than the USSR did because it's not so completely locked up and militarized and frozen economically that it eats its own long-term prospects.

He didn't say he approves of China. He said it is good that China is a hegemon in the east. What I am wondering if he (or you) are supporting Chinese hegemony of the east and in general that certain powerful countries have hegemonies over parts of the globe because, among other things, they can build high speed rail(!?). Is that the justification for hegemony?

Me, I consider the rise of China pretty shrugworthy. It was bound to happen once they got their act together and began to industrialize.

But I don't find it hard to comprehend Stas's thinking on the matter; I'm surprised you do since it's really quite simple. Stas is deeply frustrated with the capitalist world order, and sees it all as a huge exercise in wasting resources by failing to solve important problems (infrastructure decay, wealth disparity, climate change, whatever). China is the only major economic player that at least seems to be plowing some of its wealth into fixing these problems on a scale commensurate with what it has to work with. So he approves of that, and sees it as a sign that China has its act together and is acting wisely, which in turn he takes as a good sign for a future in which (realistically) China is going to end up being relatively strong.

Or so Stas seems to believe; I could be wrong of course.

[mr friendly guy]

So let's see, the West ransacked pillaged and colonized China and filled it with opium with the direst consequences for China's development. Japan slaugthered dozens of millions of Chinese, colonized pillaged and raped China so hard it still hurts and never apologized. Now China is no longer the weak pathetic monarchy of the Qin neither a warlord torn-apart territory. If I were a Chinese, I'd say it's high time to say "Fuck you all ruthless cruel hypocrite bastards on the other side of the sea, we can safely ignore you now and safely say "FUCK YOU" loud and clear at any time of the day we want". Just to make sure they understand that they're dealing with an equal now, not with a puppet, not with a Third World shithole with no self-respect, any treaty with which can be used for asswipes.

Yep, because there's nothing like mindless posturing for past wrongs if you want to create a stable, prosperous Asia-Pacific.

TBH on the article itself I thought it interesting it didn't draw a clear connection between this message and the recent wave of scandals within the Party proper. Not that an emphasis over the long term on Chinese revival would have been caused by it, but the uptick in the message could be a clear result.

So when can we expect the West to shut up about China's past wrongs, for the sake of a stable and prosperous Asia-Pacific that is. No double standards there.

[mr friendly guy]

Sure but my point is if China starts making lists of people who wronged it all the way up to opium wars the people who stole million km2 of their territory would be pretty high on that list so he should really be careful of what he wishes for.

I am pretty sure Stas is quite depressed over Russia's current state so he most probably doesn't care. In any event it seems like he was referring to those who still are antagonistic to China, or else why would China need to be strong enough to say "fuck you" to those other nations. Russia seems to be pretty low on the scale in terms of antagonism compared to some European nations to be honest.

Yep, because there's nothing like mindless posturing for past wrongs if you want to create a stable, prosperous Asia-Pacific.

Blah blah blah - "shut your mouth Third World nations, whatever wrong has been done to you, keep that mouth shut and don't remember! For the sake of prosperity and continuing stability..."

I said - saying "FUCK YOU" has a very clear purpose. It demonstrates that China is no longer some third-rate shithole which you can bomb into the stone age, invade or occupy or colonize, or station your boats at the harbour and play some gunboat diplomacy; or fly your aerial reconaissance assets over it without the fear of being shot down for a blatant violation of another nations' airspace.

If you think that Third World nations which have suffered centuries of dickery from great and not-so-great colonial empires should shut up for the sake of stability, you're a pitiful being.

Indeed. Jester has brought up China's actions even as far back as the Korean war. The West routinely brings up Tiananmen even though that was a generation ago. But I guess its only "mindless posturing" when the other side does it. Brilliant double speak there.