China's Problem ?

If the government needs to categorise some idelogyes or political movments as 'dangerous' or threathening, it has chosen the path of tyranny and opression and by the own standards of communist ideology, sosiety where opression takes place means that there is unjust in its horizontal elements, aka the class struggle continues...and that is not how it is mented to be in sosialistic sosiety.
So I repeat my orginal claim, Chinese communist ideology and its aplications are pervert and distruped and had nothing to do with orginal scientific sosialism and its orginal Marxist theory, and that had lead to political mistakes that could be held as the sole combining element if one wants to answer to the orginal guestion of this thread.
Governments are not dutied by any authority to 'preserve' themselves or hold some sort of obligations of greatestness. Those are chauvinist day-dreams that the ruling elite wants to hear to make their consiences calm, nothing all liveble communities doesent need to use force against people who demand changes...

But that isent actually relevant to the topic itself and as I recall there migth have been rule banning the issue of Tiananmere square incident so If you want to continue over that spesific topic, I suggest to do it in PM level if feel it nessery....I wouldn't

The problems discussed in the previous posts are very complicated and intricate but I am going to limit my own post on two main factors/questions: 1. Was PRC paramount leader Deng Xiaoping right in his ultimately interwoven decisions in 1989 and 1992? 2. How did CPC ideology develop in the last 17 years?

1. Overall the rootcause of the escalation of ´tiananmen´was a raging struggle for absolute power in the CPC between a faction led by Zhao Ziyang and a faction led by Li Peng (Qiao Shi was playing his own shrewd game simultaneously) in the standing committee of the politbureau of the CPC. Consequently the entire bureaucratic apparatus of state and party centralized in Beijing was paralyzed and a good number of civil servants and party members decided to side with one of the factions and go out to the streets. This development gave the most radical elements of the ´students´ like the fanatic Chai Ling and Wuer Kaixi a chance their protesting predecessors in 1980 and 1986 never had: they could escalate the protests and challenge (provocations like the ´Goddess of freedom` were very effective in ridiculing and destroying the image and authority of the party) the party and eventually Deng without being reigned in by the police/military immediately. After the embarrassing visit of Michail Gorbachev and the fruitless insertion of unarmed soldiers (Beijing garrison) into the city, Deng and the other eight party elders had no alternative to an immediate crackdown with the troops of the 40th GA since any hesitation would likely have had devastating consequences for CPC and PRC. The simple fact that China exists as a united and progressing major power today is the direct effect of this belated but necessary decision, otherwise the PRC would have suffered the same fate of implosion, chaos and suffering for millions of hapless citizens as the Sovietunion.

The whole gigantic effort for economic reform decisively accelerated after Deng´s southern journey in 1992 and the lifting of hundreds of millions chinese people out of abject poverty would have remained a pipedream if Deng had allowed the CPC and the PRC to collapse.

Certainly it is no coincidence that the city of Shenzen arguably the most wealthy and reform minded in mainland China has erected a beautiful golden memorial statue for the man who laid the foundation for their awesome journey from a little backward village of fishermen to a metropolis of 12 million inhabitants in a mere quarter of a century.

2.CPC ideology would be called degenerate indeed if it had stayed the same in the last twenty years but chinese communists have discovered that the calcified dogmas of the CPSU were a driving force behind the collapse of the regime in Moscow. Jiang Zemin has introduced with his ´theory of the three representatives´ a major modification of the CPC program which enables the party to include all social classes into her fold. From a western point of view the CPC renounces thereby marxism and the dogma of the struggle of the classes and followes the lead of the socialdemocratic parties of western europe also jettisoning the ´class struggle dogma` in the 60´s.

Of course the CPC is much more authoritarian and nationalistic than well evolved european socialdemocrats but most chinese people would not tolerate an individualistic soft-soft approach let alone compromising interests and honour of the nation. After all there is considerable change in the program and also the ways the party leads the country in the last 15 years but unfourtunately most western people have deep rooted prejudices about the CPC which will only gradually change if at all.

@dear Gollevainen: Multiple perspectives have to be assessed if you want to analyse a complicated situation properly. You should not talk in a condescending way about people who simply had to do what they were convinced had to be done in a pivotal historical situation since history is the harsh but ultimate judge and in some fifty or even hundred years other generations will come to their very own perhaps totally contradicting conclusions.

Well I thougth my last paragraph should have been understood as some sort of indicator to drop the subject. By rules and ou former policy, this whole thread should have been closed rigth from the start as it has nothing to do whit chinese military... But i was stubid enough to reply to it....and even bring the Tiananmen issue along...stubid me. Anyway seems that we have managed keep it civiliced, so I will only move it to the Members clubroom...

But This will not become precedent decission, only expection. I dont want to see this sort of threads swarm in this forum again....ff


But to the actual topic. Chinese communist party had pretty much throwed all Marxist-Leninist quidelines to the trash can when Mao's own hegemony needed something to force his stance when rest of the communist blog begun to remove personal cult and other non-marxist elements out of the systems. Generally what makes it similar to real communist and their ideas was that both looked Bourgerous as an enemy and both (at least in theory) tryed to raise their support from the poor...but pretty much there the similarityes ends, if not seeing the similarityes of the mistakes that Moscow and Bejing have made...
It was also pretty much nonsense ideology what CCP begun to practice in its peasants and indrustialation of China. Like I said before, all Marxs and Engels ideas rose from the presumption that the society which beguns the proletariatian revolution would be highly industrilized and the majority of the poors would be workers, not peasants or even sherds. If one wants to draw some concrete reason, why have all sosialist nations collapsed, one only needs to focus on the mass of missery what has begun when the communists have begun performing land-reform.

By the unrest of forced land-reform and the fact that Bolseviks in Russia were minority of all revolutionares (not including the counter-revolutionares) which lead into the defamed dogma of proletariate-dictatorship brougth the inbild idea of tyranny and opression into all communist movments that where ideologically feeded from Moscow. That brougth unbearable confict to the whole idea of classless society and scientific sosialism and by that no society of that nature cannot last.
Offcourse those will try to do what ever its possiple to keep the power in the hands of the small elite which have gained the power, but in the end, the idea of Class strugle has lurked back to the sosiety, but in really backward nature and when there will be revolution, it would be akwardly backwards revolution, back to the capitalist class sosiety whit 'real' class differences.

.....Comparing it to our european social democrats its rather clewer thing to say when we can take look how current 'labors' have even dare to raise issues like narrowing workers strike-rigths and cut down the sosial benefits in name of the economical competion capapility....

But what comes to the Tiananmere square and its consequences, I would advice that we dropt that subject. I dont want to discuss whit it, as it would violate all our principles and past decissions to make this forum free of Political depating and pure BS. I dont want to present myself as anyway anti-chinese nor I want to bring up issues that would greatly mock the current chinese policy. If would like to know what I would have to say for it....read it between the lines in the previous paragrafs...

One important thing I must say about current chinese policyes is that what the next step of modernisation should be. Workers rigth. If CCP has choosed the path of market economy and capitalism, it needs to allow its workers to figth against that by same manner as it is done in the west. Full freedom to create, join and operate in trade unions. Rigths to work-struggles and strikes. That way it would ease some of the pressure coming from the obscured horizontal level and the workers personal economy would rise and that will create purchasing power to the masses, which will offcourse benefit the economy


So lest end discussion of Tiananmere square incident as we all know its offlimit subject.

The heart of the problem is that China is catching up in a matter of decades the Industrial know how and experience gained by Western Industrial countries over the last nearly 200 years.

Just because a process is well established does not make it simple and you still need to able engineer or techniciam to abe able to operate them. Dont take my word for it ask any of the Student or Working Engineers on the forum. ie Gollevainen or Typhoon etc.

In order to Innovate you need to master the cutting edge and this is what China is currently doing, Innovation is next and really will start to show itself within the next decade.

Somebody said somewhere that China was 30 years behind the West? Well I am sorry, but unless they had a specific sector in mind, that is utter BS and simply means they have never visted a Premier Chinese Factory. Many Manufacturing Plants of specific sectors in China are cutting edge and this process is deepening and widening into ever more sectors. Indeed, as many areas of Manufacturing withdraw from developed countries, China is one of the few where the cutting edge can be found at all!

Some technology is being recreated, but much is also being Imported Lock, Stock and Barrel. As more Chinese skilled and Professionals are being drawn into such facilites, an ever increasing proportion are becoming fluent in the skills which they require.

Some one mentioned money, and i think it is one of the most important factor. But there is also wider range of issue at work. For example, a talented chinese engineer or researcher would almost immediate jump to US if he was offered the opportunity,
why? even income isnt a issue, he or she would have to think about the kids. From what i understand, an average chinese child faces tough competetion from getting into a good pre-school all the way to getting a good job, something that amercian children will never have to deal with (not in the same instensity anyway). therefore, from that standpoint, talented chinese will definitely move abroad even if its only for the kids. Not to mention the better quality of living (not having to boil water before drinking, or saving water when flushing a toilet. these may sound like small things, but can be very annoy to get use to once you have been abroad long enough)

For those scientist that doesnt get foregin offers, their worked is hampered by the culture that exists in China. Remember back in the ancient time, why did people spend 'ten years under cold window" 十年寒窗, they spend their entire life devoted to studying so they can become officials. And this idea is still present today. This means that those scientist, unlike their western counter-part, are more likely to be involved in administrative work as much as possible. So the smartest would try to become officials and cadres and leave the grunt work of ACTUAL research to the lesser intellegents. The whole research commnunity essentially becomes a giant beaucracy.

These are two examples, and there are many more reasons that is dragging china's feet when it somes to R&D

Pity. really, a number of top Lockheed Martin researchers are of Chinese origion.

Another problem would be recongition and the fact that Chinese themselves prefer "Foreign Goods"

Remember the Y-10 Project? Chinese's own world class airliner? well they ended up buying MD-10's instead...

SampanViking said:

The heart of the problem is that China is catching up in a matter of decades the Industrial know how and experience gained by Western Industrial countries over the last nearly 200 years.

Just because a process is well established does not make it simple and you still need to able engineer or techniciam to abe able to operate them. Dont take my word for it ask any of the Student or Working Engineers on the forum. ie Gollevainen or Typhoon etc.

In order to Innovate you need to master the cutting edge and this is what China is currently doing, Innovation is next and really will start to show itself within the next decade.

Somebody said somewhere that China was 30 years behind the West? Well I am sorry, but unless they had a specific sector in mind, that is utter BS and simply means they have never visted a Premier Chinese Factory. Many Manufacturing Plants of specific sectors in China are cutting edge and this process is deepening and widening into ever more sectors. Indeed, as many areas of Manufacturing withdraw from developed countries, China is one of the few where the cutting edge can be found at all!

Some technology is being recreated, but much is also being Imported Lock, Stock and Barrel. As more Chinese skilled and Professionals are being drawn into such facilites, an ever increasing proportion are becoming fluent in the skills which they require.

Click to expand...

I agree.

China needs to look at how the Japanese caught up during the 1800's.

China has all the skills and base required for an Industrial economy however
it still needs to create a system of patent rights which would encourage
innovation and research. It should look at the UK as an example. We're
fantastic at innovating ideas...course they are then unfortunately sold to the
americans...

but lets not knock reverse engineering and copying..heck even we reverse
engineered and copied rockets captured from the 'Tiger of Mysore' - Tipu Sultan.

Hi FreeAsia

I must be brief. I think we can expect to see Research Institutions taking their Privatly raised research Budgets out of the West, with its high costs and Moral/Religeous objections and take them to China and other Developing Countries where, a good Technician/Researcher base, plus amoral viewpoints and much higher PPP's will make these countries far more attractive places to set up the Lab

Also, the "scientific method" is also a purely western concept that is used to create breakthroughs in the field of science and engineering.

Click to expand...

Come on now... don't tell me they dont use the scientific method in China. 6th graders know the scientific method.

Also, imo, China needs to catch up to the West first BEFORE starting to innovate and get ahead. China also needs to build up its infrastructure, financial system, and legal system first. You can't start building the 2nd floor before first building up the foundations and the 1st floor. Just my thoughts.

chinese already has the infrastructure, a very advanced one at that... Especially compared to one like... India...

regarding the financial and legal system... that would chanllenge the control of the governement.