NationStates Jolt Archive

I think we are spreading freedom in China-economic freedom. A casual examination of history will show that a nation needs property rights and a strong tradition of free enterprise before it can take the next step and establish a represantative government. Free enterprise is exactly what's developing in China, and it will inevetably lead to a stable democracy fifty, or maybe twenty years down the line.

Therefore, I think it's more effective to maintain good trading relations with China than to engage in embargoes against them, simply because of their human rights record.

I think we are spreading freedom in China-economic freedom. A casual examination of history will show that a nation needs property rights and a strong tradition of free enterprise before it can take the next step and establish a represantative government. Free enterprise is exactly what's developing in China, and it will inevetably lead to a stable democracy fifty, or maybe twenty years down the line.

I can't vote on that. It depends on how the Chinese government handles the economic boom.

I can't vote on that. It depends on how the Chinese government handles the economic boom.
It doesn't matter how they handle it. Once the majority of Chinese get a taste of the power of having their own property, whether it's physical, or intellectual, or monetary, they will do away with the curious brand of a Marxist-one party state coupled with laissez-faire capitalism. It's a contradiction.

They appear to be going through the early stages of unregulated capitalism that the US went through. In the end things improved (somewhat). I can only hope the same is true for China.

After all, I may just be a naive schmo...

No. Because it's not like they didn't have free markets 1,000 years ago and they managed not to develop democracy back then too.

Anyway we are not doing anything to china. China is just reverting to what it was before the west started to screw with it: an authoritarian state with some free market charactersitics. To think that the west is going to have any say in shaping china's future because of free trade between nations is naive in the extreme. It's not even like the west had anything to do with their market reforms anyway. That was all Deng xiao ping.

No. Because it's not like they didn't have free markets 1,000 years ago and they managed not to develop democracy back then too.

Anyway we are not doing anything to china. China is just reverting to what it was before the west started to screw with it: an authoritarian state with some free market charactersitics. To think that the west is going to have any say in shaping china's future because of free trade between nations is naive in the extreme. It's not even like the west had anything to do with their market reforms anyway. That was all Deng xiao ping.
In china, merchants were historically always regarded as second-class citizens, and held in contempt. Perhaps this could have something to do with the fact that they never really developed a democracy? Also, we live in a globalized world. China will be influenced by democracy one way or another.

america doesn't spread freedom, it spreads america.

america doesn't spread freedom, it spreads america.

Manifest Destiny! Yay!

-_-

In china, merchants were historically always regarded as second-class citizens, and held in contempt. Perhaps this could have something to do with the fact that they never really developed a democracy? Also, we live in a globalized world. China will be influenced by democracy one way or another.

Not really. Or at least no more than in the west today. It's true that the sucessful merchant aspired for his sons to enter the civil service but is that any different to the modern west where the second generation of wealthy families use their inherited wealth to enter "public" service and legitimize the family holdings?

We're spreading freedom indirectly; by fueling China's boom, we work to undermine their authoritarian state through the introduction of free markets.

The rise of a strong middle class, the expansion of Internet access, and the growing ability of many Chinese to access news from around the world are all working to undermine the authoritarian rule of the Communist party. China's boom is giving its workers the skills and leverage to develop their economy in to a modern, functional one with dynamic trade and internal consumption. It's hardly coincidental that developed economies tend to have higher degrees of personal freedom than less developed ones, so the trend towards economic liberalization in China will produce more freedom in that country.

It doesn't matter how they handle it. Once the majority of Chinese get a taste of the power of having their own property, whether it's physical, or intellectual, or monetary, they will do away with the curious brand of a Marxist-one party state coupled with laissez-faire capitalism. It's a contradiction.
Not to mention that as they gain money, so grows power.

The rise of a strong middle class, the expansion of Internet access, and the growing ability of many Chinese to access news from around the world are all working to undermine the authoritarian rule of the Communist party. China's boom is giving its workers the skills and leverage to develop their economy in to a modern, functional one with dynamic trade and internal consumption. It's hardly coincidental that developed economies tend to have higher degrees of personal freedom than less developed ones, so the trend towards economic liberalization in China will produce more freedom in that country.

This is where I can't join the dots for china. I think it is more likely that the communist party (which isn't really communist anymore), is likely to continue in its drive to accept more and more of the neo-confucion values which work perfectly well with a large middle class, free markets etc.

This is where I can't join the dots for china. I think it is more likely that the communist party (which isn't really communist anymore), is likely to continue in its drive to accept more and more of the neo-confucion values which work perfectly well with a large middle class, free markets etc.

It'll be hard to tell because there is an intellectual generation gap in China that stems from the destruction of the educational system during and after the Cultural Revolution. It's important to note that the next generation of Chinese leaders consists of a much larger pool of bureaucrats educated in the West in various business fields; they also possess a much stronger support for entrepreneurship and free market economics which will affect their policies.

Whether that means a move towards a pre-Communist system or a transition towards democratic institutions is still up in the air. I think it really hinges on the performance of the Chinese economy and its level of globalization at the time of the fifth generation's ascendance to power.

Free enterprise is exactly what's developing in China,

Not quite.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/HF30Cb02.html

28 years after starting reforms, China finally got 4 privately owned Chinese firms in the top 200 exporters list. 148 out of top 200 are the foreigners.

What is going on is organized slave labor by foreign investors and Chinese state.

In a word, no. The United States of America has none of the the influence, power, ability nor will to productively 'spread freedom' in People's Republic of China.

The populance of China, and the 'Party That Pretends To Be Communists' are coming together towards an equilibrium between freedom and control.

Did you know most local body (at the county or regional) level positions is allowed to elect via one-person-one-vote?

Eventually China will have a system of government which will ultimately serve the current and future needs of the Chinese populance - the liberalising forces are at work within the CCP at every possible level. With the death of the Old Guard authoritrians the pace of the process will quicken.

An overnight revolution (*snigger*) would never achieve a stable "democracy" in China. Worse, the country would tear itself apart. Thats something Chinese don't want no matter how much they love or hate the CCP.

It'll be hard to tell because there is an intellectual generation gap in China that stems from the destruction of the educational system during and after the Cultural Revolution. It's important to note that the next generation of Chinese leaders consists of a much larger pool of bureaucrats educated in the West in various business fields; they also possess a much stronger support for entrepreneurship and free market economics which will affect their policies.

Whether that means a move towards a pre-Communist system or a transition towards democratic institutions is still up in the air. I think it really hinges on the performance of the Chinese economy and its level of globalization at the time of the fifth generation's ascendance to power.

That's a good point. I suppose it will ultimately come down to how deeply rooted in the culture pre-communist values are. My feeling is that despite the cultural revolution, the last fifty years will have less effect on the outcome than the preceeding 2,000. And even if democratic reform comes about it will most likely end up with a procedural democracy like singapore. After all democratic government is not absolutely necessary for a free market society as long as the government respects fundamental economic freedoms. You could even argue that a stable authoritarian regime with guaranteed economic freedoms is a better climate for business because of the certainity it creates. (Assuming it is not corrupt and the rest). A bit like hong kong.

Does economic freedom eventually lead to political freedom?
Well, not directly, but there certainly seems to be a sort of correlation.

Is China becoming freer economically?
Well, sorta. Many of the richer Chinese certainly enjoy greater economic freedom - but the poor people in the country, I don't think so. It doesn't make much difference whether the company you have to work for is government-owned or owned by some government-sanctioned group of rich guys from Shanghai.

Is America spreading this freedom?
No. Are you kidding me? It was Deng Xiaoping (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Modernizations) who created these reforms, and he was looking at the Soviet Union and its issues rather than at America. The US is a useful trading partner, but hardly the reason for China's economic policy.

That's a good point. I suppose it will ultimately come down to how deeply rooted in the culture pre-communist values are. My feeling is that despite the cultural revolution, the last fifty years will have less effect on the outcome than the preceeding 2,000. And even if democratic reform comes about it will most likely end up with a procedural democracy like singapore. After all democratic government is not absolutely necessary for a free market society as long as the government respects fundamental economic freedoms. You could even argue that a stable authoritarian regime with guaranteed economic freedoms is a better climate for business because of the certainity it creates. (Assuming it is not corrupt and the rest). A bit like hong kong.

That seems like the most likely path; even within the Communist Party of China there are a lot of pre-Revolutionary values that serve as underlying moral and social principles for many members of the leadership. There has been a resurgence of debate on the merits of Confucian philosophy as a part of the CPC's governing principles (they're pretty evident in Hu Jintao's Eight Do's and Don'ts) as well as the reemergence of traditional religious and cultural practices despite the lingering aftermath of the Cultural Revolution.

China is going to change; I agree that it will most likely remain in its current authoritarian form for a while with a gradual transition to a system similar to that in Singapore or Hong Kong. It won't be fully liberalized or fully authoritarian.

No. Are you kidding me? It was Deng Xiaoping (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Modernizations) who created these reforms, and he was looking at the Soviet Union and its issues rather than at America. The US is a useful trading partner, but hardly the reason for China's economic policy.

And Deng Xiaoping was no freedom-loving guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989).

The Chinese government is currently using economic development to their advantage; if it looks like it's going to topple their regime, they'll stop it or restrain it.

And Deng Xiaoping was no freedom-loving guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989).

The Chinese government is currently using economic development to their advantage; if it looks like it's going to topple their regime, they'll stop it or restrain it.
Exactly (although I don't think they still could if they tried).

Deng's favourite saying was "It doesn't matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice!" Used to drive Mao insane. :p

Exactly (although I don't think they still could if they tried).

I don't know. I doubt they'd go North Korea, that would be stupid and very difficult to pull off, but I could see them cutting down on economic ties to the rest of the world if their regime were in severe danger.

Today, though, most of the threats to the Chinese regime aren't coming from the middle class that's profiting from the economic development. If any serious opposition develops, it will come from those displaced by the economic development, not from those who are reaping its gains. Such opposition would be crushed ruthlessly, and that would be that.

Whether that will change in a few decades is anyone's guess.

Deng's favourite saying was "It doesn't matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice!" Used to drive Mao insane. :p

That's what they've been saying to the Communist parties around the world. "Yeah, we aren't really serious about this free-market capitalism stuff, we're just... um... using alternative methods to develop the means of production in preparation for Communist utopia!"

Contact with modern Western models of government and, to a lesser extent, economics is bound to positively effect any developing nation.

Not really. China did the economic thing by themselves but any other political freedom would come from them looking at the US. By the way yuo do know everyone here isn't American right? Although 50 other people have probably already said that but reading seems like a lot of effort.

I dont know if America is Spreading the freedom. I think the freedom is being spread from within. The people here especially the youth want to be more western especially in places like Beijing and Shanghai. And the Government is loosening its control here as well. The economy is moving more and more free and its not like a police state I though it might have been.The people here are free to do and go where they like for most part. to mention I can get western newsites here like cnn and bbc. So the idea that this place is like Stalinist Russia is just wrong.

I think we are spreading freedom in China-economic freedom. A casual examination of history will show that a nation needs property rights and a strong tradition of free enterprise before it can take the next step and establish a represantative government. Free enterprise is exactly what's developing in China, and it will inevetably lead to a stable democracy fifty, or maybe twenty years down the line.

Therefore, I think it's more effective to maintain good trading relations with China than to engage in embargoes against them, simply because of their human rights record.

You need to stop casual examinations of history. Every time there was a move for democracy in the western world, it was property owners who opposed it. The feudal property owners were the oppossition during the French Revolution. Powerful capitalists and landowners fough against bringing real representive government in both America and Europe. Property rights are anti-democratic because they amount to the right to abuse others through wage slavery among other abuses.

In fact, the first real democracies were formed among American Indian tribes long before any democracy was created in the Western world. For instance, the Iroquois. They lived a communal existence, entirely absent of the concept of private property. Each individual had their own possessions, but no one owned the land or the means of survival. Iroqois chieftins were elected by the people of the tribe, and they governed only with the consent of the rest of the tribe.

america doesn't spread freedom, it spreads america.
Man I hope that's true. Much of the world could really benefit from being more American.