vesicles
Colonel
Re: US media claimed: Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao critized the US
The key is NOT about industrial revolution, per se. It's about what nations have done to gather wealth and develop their economy. I thought this has been what we are arguing. And the slavery in America was a HUGE reason that the US is what it is today. I don't think any American should deny the contribution of slaves to the economic development of America. As matter of fact, it was the slavery that drove the American cotton industry and British textile industry. The low cost of American cotton increased the competitiveness of English textiles and drove the industrialization of many English cities.
No matter how many organizations there had been in any of these countries, the terrible cost of human lives during the developing stage of major Western nations had been a FACT. You can read about it in any history book you can find in any library on this planet. I don't understand why you are defending it.
Also, the labor unions in the US was not effective until the 1920's. Many of the social welfare we now take granted was not in place until 1930's. That was almost 150 years after the continuous economic development of the country started. Slavery was officially legal in America from the start of the nation in 1776 to the end of the Civil War in 1865. That's almost 100 years. And even after that, slavery persisted for a long time in the South. As you can see, it takes time to correct mistakes. How many years has China been in economic development? A mere 20 years (let's not talk about the time before that since all workers had been well "protected" by the social safety net under the communistic model). Again, it takes time. You haven't given China enough time to make any corrections.
I don't know how many times I have to say this. I'm not saying it's OK for China to do this. what I'm saying is that this is a natural course of economic development. When you want to develop a weak economy, you have to first gather wealth into the hands of a few since you have only limited amount of wealth to begin with. So it would be very painful at first to move the limited wealth from the majority to the few. This is how capitalistic economy works. If one wants to adopt this kind of economic model, then he has to go through this stage. I'm merely using history of Western nations as examples of this painful process. It's painful and it's wrong, but I don't see any other way. If you have a better economic model that can bypass this stage, by all means, share it with us. You might be the next Nobel price winner in Economics.
If I remember a little of American history, slave labour was well gone, before the true part of the industrial revolution took place in America.
The key is NOT about industrial revolution, per se. It's about what nations have done to gather wealth and develop their economy. I thought this has been what we are arguing. And the slavery in America was a HUGE reason that the US is what it is today. I don't think any American should deny the contribution of slaves to the economic development of America. As matter of fact, it was the slavery that drove the American cotton industry and British textile industry. The low cost of American cotton increased the competitiveness of English textiles and drove the industrialization of many English cities.
When the industrial revolution took place in England, there were organisations, and individuals who campaigned against the injustices and work conditions, and these aims were eventually achieved.
In China similar organisations and people, attract unwelcome attention of the authorities and..............ahem?????
No matter how many organizations there had been in any of these countries, the terrible cost of human lives during the developing stage of major Western nations had been a FACT. You can read about it in any history book you can find in any library on this planet. I don't understand why you are defending it.
Also, the labor unions in the US was not effective until the 1920's. Many of the social welfare we now take granted was not in place until 1930's. That was almost 150 years after the continuous economic development of the country started. Slavery was officially legal in America from the start of the nation in 1776 to the end of the Civil War in 1865. That's almost 100 years. And even after that, slavery persisted for a long time in the South. As you can see, it takes time to correct mistakes. How many years has China been in economic development? A mere 20 years (let's not talk about the time before that since all workers had been well "protected" by the social safety net under the communistic model). Again, it takes time. You haven't given China enough time to make any corrections.
Once again I dont think just because the West did it, its alright for China to follow suit.
I don't know how many times I have to say this. I'm not saying it's OK for China to do this. what I'm saying is that this is a natural course of economic development. When you want to develop a weak economy, you have to first gather wealth into the hands of a few since you have only limited amount of wealth to begin with. So it would be very painful at first to move the limited wealth from the majority to the few. This is how capitalistic economy works. If one wants to adopt this kind of economic model, then he has to go through this stage. I'm merely using history of Western nations as examples of this painful process. It's painful and it's wrong, but I don't see any other way. If you have a better economic model that can bypass this stage, by all means, share it with us. You might be the next Nobel price winner in Economics.
Last edited: