The Chinese Century
maff
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/04/magazine/04CHINA.html?ei=5062&en=05b9dc4385cd874b&ex=1089518400&partner=GOOGLE&pagewanted=all&position=
By TED C. FISHMAN
Thanks to Mao — and to good old American know-how and help — China is
getting ready to supplant the U.S. as the capitalist engine of the
world. A lesson in economic development and global interconnectedness.
China Chinese Sino Han
http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+China+OR+Chinese+OR+Sino+OR+Han&sa=N&tab=gn
Is the wakening giant a monster?
http://tinyurl.com/iws6
A Blueprint for the Future
http://tinyurl.com/9vga
Tom Goodman
>By TED C. FISHMAN
>Thanks to Mao — and to good old American know-how and help — China is
>getting ready to supplant the U.S. as the capitalist engine of the
>world. A lesson in economic development and global interconnectedness.
Americans are really terrible with history. The fact is China had been
for a long time a capitalist powerhouse of the ancient world until
corrupted Manchurian Qing dynasty destroyed it, eventually the poor
Chinese people got their act together and formed a communist
government - the very first time a real people's government in China
!!
After the opium war and near the end of Qing dynasty, China was in
extremely poor condition, while foreign countries sent in more
military and split China into turfs. Mao was one of the many Chinese
saved China from the hands of foreign kapitalist and imperialist
dominations. Overseas Chinese in Canada and USA also helped save China
by financially contributed to Chinese Communist Party.
Mao, Chinese Communist Party and the Red Army kicked out foreign
kapitalists and their worshippers like the ones ran away to Taiwan
island. And because previous bad life experience under capitalism, and
their desire to form an utopia where communism takes place. Even
though China was still a "poor" country after communization, it was
far better than the period before under feudal and foreign control.
Majority of Chinese started enjoy a better life which otherwise could
not as in India.
Under growing threat of U$ of Amerika global militarism, communist
China had changed their strategy, and determined to play and beat
Amerikan capitalists at their own game. At the same time strengthening
China's defense against nuclear threats from U$A.
Now carefully and cautiously, China strengthens itself materistically
so its people can the resources and prepare to fight Amerikkkan
military attack. However, some people don't understand the actual goal
of China changes to capitalism, they fall into the black hole of
capitalism.
While China is becoming richer materialistically, its crime and
unemployment rates soar, this is expected of capitalism.
It was Chinese who taught capitalism to the world. Don't forget that
it was China invented money and banking system. China's capitalism era
started earlier than any other civilization. In fact, a whole dynasty
was named after capitalism !!!
Capitalism will eventually ruin the world, it has done in the past,
and has done to China at numerous times, but only this time will be
the final one because right now is the biggest gobal capitalist era
never seen before in history and never will be seen again. Just
pollution itself from capitalist industries is enough to destroy the
whole earth.
Bible properly sums it up for capitalism under American khristianty:
For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some
coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves
through with many sorrows. - 1 Timothy 6:10
Tom Goodman
Revelation 18:24
And in her(USA) was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of
all that were slain upon the earth.
Yang, AthD (h.c)
<commenta...@revelation.cci> wrote:
>On 4 Jul 2004 03:16:58 -0700, maf...@yahoo.com (maff) wrote:
>
>>By TED C. FISHMAN
>>Thanks to Mao — and to good old American know-how and help — China is
>>getting ready to supplant the U.S. as the capitalist engine of the
>>world. A lesson in economic development and global interconnectedness.
>
>
>Americans are really terrible with history. The fact is China had been
>for a long time a capitalist powerhouse of the ancient world until
>corrupted Manchurian Qing dynasty destroyed it,
Every Chinese dynasty declined at the end.
>eventually the poor
>Chinese people got their act together and formed a communist
>government - the very first time a real people's government in China
>!!
CCP floundered around for 40 years before they got their acts
together. Mao's "Great Leap Forward" lead to the death of 20 million
Chinese peasants. The "first" people's government in Chinese history
happened not in China, but Taiwan, and that only in 1987 when the
militray dictatorship KMT decided to lift martial law and allowed
opposition parties.
While the Chinese "Commuinist" Party has adopted some fairly decent
economic policies for the past 20 years, it is as of now a one-party
rule.
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -3 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -879 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush fuck up my country: Worthless
Jim Walsh
wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 12:55:22 -0400, Tom Goodman
> <commenta...@revelation.cci> wrote:
>>eventually the poor Chinese people got their act together and formed a
>>communist government - the very first time a real people's government in
>>China!!
> CCP floundered around for 40 years before they got their acts together.
> Mao's "Great Leap Forward" lead to the death of 20 million Chinese
> peasants.
> The "first" people's government in Chinese history happened not in
> China, but Taiwan, and that only in 1987 when the military dictatorship
> KMT decided to lift martial law and allowed opposition parties.
Excellent. Well said.
> While the Chinese "Commuinist" Party has adopted some fairly decent
> economic policies for the past 20 years, it is as of now a one-party
> rule.
Exactly right.
> -----
>
> Yang
> a.a. #28
> AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL a.a. pastor #-273.15,
> the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin EAC Econometric Forecast
> and Socerey Division Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
>
> The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening The Bush
> 'economic' policy: -3 million jobs and counting The Bush Iraq lie: -879
> GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
>
> Having Bush fuck up my country: Worthless
Wonderful. I usually trim signatures, but yours is priceless.
--
Love, Jim
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Chen
"Jim Walsh" <jimw...@ms74.hinet.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2004.07.11....@ms74.hinet.net...
maff
> On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 12:55:22 -0400, Tom Goodman
> <commenta...@revelation.cci> wrote:
>
> >On 4 Jul 2004 03:16:58 -0700, maf...@yahoo.com (maff) wrote:
> >
> >>By TED C. FISHMAN
> >>getting ready to supplant the U.S. as the capitalist engine of the
> >>world. A lesson in economic development and global interconnectedness.
> >
> >
> >Americans are really terrible with history. The fact is China had been
> >for a long time a capitalist powerhouse of the ancient world until
> >corrupted Manchurian Qing dynasty destroyed it,
>
> Every Chinese dynasty declined at the end.
>
> >eventually the poor
> >Chinese people got their act together and formed a communist
> >government - the very first time a real people's government in China
> >!!
>
> CCP floundered around for 40 years before they got their acts
> together. Mao's "Great Leap Forward" lead to the death of 20 million
But millions also died during famines in India at the same time. It
was due to many factors. Simplistic versions of history are always
dangerous.
> Chinese peasants. The "first" people's government in Chinese history
> happened not in China, but Taiwan, and that only in 1987 when the
> militray dictatorship KMT decided to lift martial law and allowed
> opposition parties.
But then again, Taiwan was made a showcase for 'Democracy' and given
access to the US market. You better listen to your bankers whoever
they are.
>
> While the Chinese "Commuinist" Party has adopted some fairly decent
> economic policies for the past 20 years, it is as of now a one-party
> rule.
But the Chinese developed their system without much help from the
West. Their economy couldn't have taken off without their educataional
and health policies.
They also weren't indebted to IMF during that time.
Tom Goodman
<eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 12:55:22 -0400, Tom Goodman
><commenta...@revelation.cci> wrote:
>
>>On 4 Jul 2004 03:16:58 -0700, maf...@yahoo.com (maff) wrote:
>>
>>>By TED C. FISHMAN
>>>Thanks to Mao — and to good old American know-how and help — China is
>>>getting ready to supplant the U.S. as the capitalist engine of the
>>>world. A lesson in economic development and global interconnectedness.
>>
>>
>>Americans are really terrible with history. The fact is China had been
>>for a long time a capitalist powerhouse of the ancient world until
>>corrupted Manchurian Qing dynasty destroyed it,
>
>Every Chinese dynasty declined at the end.
Every civilization that had existed for more than a thousand years
declined at the end, except one, only China is going stronger and
stronger. Chinese Communist Party and PLA saved Chinese civilization
from being stepped on by foreign imperialists.
>
>>eventually the poor
>>Chinese people got their act together and formed a communist
>>government - the very first time a real people's government in China
>>!!
>
>CCP floundered around for 40 years before they got their acts
>together.
Sorry, communism is not about getting rich or becoming imperialist
power, however, communist China has been better after communists took
control. Gross Nation Products and living standard greatly improved
as soon as communists took over. Most people outside of China don't
know the extreme poor condition China was in before Chinese people
kicked out foreign powers and KMT.
>Mao's "Great Leap Forward" lead to the death of 20 million
>Chinese peasants.
Lie, another big lie by US govt propaganda dept. So you also believe
in Santa Claus rides in UFO?
Actually less Chinese people died since PRC established; rapid
multiplying numbers speak for themselves. At the time, people died in
China due to famine caused by poor weather, and that was not anything
new. Edgar Snow(the most well known and highly respected American
journalist in China at the time) reported large number of deaths
caused by famine was a common sight before communists took over.
Famine still happened after PRC established, but less people died
because of free food distribution under communism.
> The "first" people's government in Chinese history
>happened not in China, but Taiwan, and that only in 1987 when the
>militray dictatorship KMT decided to lift martial law and allowed
>opposition parties.
An Amerikaner puppet regime regardless Chiang Ka-Shek or Chen. For
more than half a century, true Taiwanese. the aboriginal people wanted
"Taiwan govt" out of Taiwan. Guninness world record: at least 2000
true Taiwanese massacred by "Taiwan govt" that was placed there by
USA.
>
>While the Chinese "Commuinist" Party has adopted some fairly decent
>economic policies for the past 20 years, it is as of now a one-party
>rule.
>
Reason #1: Needs money to build nuclear bombs drop on USA in near
future.
Yang, AthD (h.c)
Thanks
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -3 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -886 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Yang, AthD (h.c)
<commentator....@revelation.cci> wrote:
>On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 01:54:29 -0700, "Yang, AthD (h.c)"
><eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 12:55:22 -0400, Tom Goodman
>><commenta...@revelation.cci> wrote:
>>
>>>On 4 Jul 2004 03:16:58 -0700, maf...@yahoo.com (maff) wrote:
>>>
>>>>By TED C. FISHMAN
>>>>Thanks to Mao — and to good old American know-how and help — China is
>>>>getting ready to supplant the U.S. as the capitalist engine of the
>>>>world. A lesson in economic development and global interconnectedness.
>>>
>>>
>>>Americans are really terrible with history. The fact is China had been
>>>for a long time a capitalist powerhouse of the ancient world until
>>>corrupted Manchurian Qing dynasty destroyed it,
>>
>>Every Chinese dynasty declined at the end.
>
>Every civilization that had existed for more than a thousand years
>declined at the end, except one, only China is going stronger and
>stronger.
As opposed to India?
>>>eventually the poor
>>>Chinese people got their act together and formed a communist
>>>government - the very first time a real people's government in China
>>>!!
>>
>>CCP floundered around for 40 years before they got their acts
>>together.
>
>Sorry, communism is not about getting rich or becoming imperialist
>power, however, communist China has been better after communists took
>control. Gross Nation Products and living standard greatly improved
>as soon as communists took over. Most people outside of China don't
>know the extreme poor condition China was in before Chinese people
>kicked out foreign powers and KMT.
Taiwanese were just as dirt poor as the Mainlander Chinese after WWII.
Somehow in the 40 years per capita GDP grew faster in Taiwan than
China. Hmm, I wonder why?
>>Mao's "Great Leap Forward" lead to the death of 20 million
>>Chinese peasants.
>
>Lie, another big lie by US govt propaganda dept. So you also believe
>in Santa Claus rides in UFO?
>
>Actually less Chinese people died since PRC established; rapid
>multiplying numbers speak for themselves. At the time, people died in
>China due to famine caused by poor weather, and that was not anything
>new. Edgar Snow(the most well known and highly respected American
>journalist in China at the time) reported large number of deaths
>caused by famine was a common sight before communists took over.
>Famine still happened after PRC established, but less people died
>because of free food distribution under communism.
So let me get this straight. People died from famine during Great Leap
Forward, but it wasn't Mao's fault. There have been no massive famine
since the liberalization of Chinese economy, and that's entirely due
to communistic redistribution of food stuff. In fact, the Great Leap
Forward worked SO well that the CCP cadre choosed to abandon the
communist system altogether and adopt a capitalistic approach to the
economy.
Whatever you say, dude.
>> The "first" people's government in Chinese history
>>happened not in China, but Taiwan, and that only in 1987 when the
>>militray dictatorship KMT decided to lift martial law and allowed
>>opposition parties.
>
>An Amerikaner puppet regime regardless Chiang Ka-Shek or Chen. For
>more than half a century, true Taiwanese. the aboriginal people wanted
>"Taiwan govt" out of Taiwan. Guninness world record: at least 2000
>true Taiwanese massacred by "Taiwan govt" that was placed there by
>USA.
Ethnically, I'm one of those "true" Taiwanese that you so romanticize.
I can trace my lineage all the back to Cental Taiwanese aboriginal
tribes, so you can spare me your lecture on the KMT. It's no secret
that the KMT ran a death squad that killed thousands, but the
democracy in Taiwan since the end of martial law is the real deal.
Chen is a native Taiwanese: the DPP annoys both the US and China.
How much politcial democracy do you see China?
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -3 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -886 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Yang, AthD (h.c)
>> Chinese peasants. The "first" people's government in Chinese history
>> happened not in China, but Taiwan, and that only in 1987 when the
>> militray dictatorship KMT decided to lift martial law and allowed
>> opposition parties.
>
>But then again, Taiwan was made a showcase for 'Democracy' and given
>access to the US market. You better listen to your bankers whoever
>they are.
Actually, the Taiwanese KMT dictatorship made some lip service to
"democracy" and was given access to the US market circa 1950's. The
lifting of martial law in 1987 and the rise of true representative
democracy (complete with opposition parties) happened way after the
initial opening of western markets to Taiwan.
AND way after Taiwan was declared nation-non-grata by the US, AFTER it
got kicked out of the UN and all that stuff. AFTER PROC gained
diplomatic legitimacy at the expense of the ROC.
I don't see how the evolution of democracy in Taiwan was dictated by
the US in any way.
>> While the Chinese "Commuinist" Party has adopted some fairly decent
>> economic policies for the past 20 years, it is as of now a one-party
>> rule.
>
>But the Chinese developed their system without much help from the
>West. Their economy couldn't have taken off without their educataional
>and health policies.
>They also weren't indebted to IMF during that time.
Maybe. Japan seemed to have done okay with western help. They still
retain their educational health policies.
And do you think the Chinese economy would have taken off if they
actually stayed true to their core ideology of communism?
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Socerey Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -3 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -886 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Jim Walsh
wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 22:44:24 -0400, Tom Goodman
> <commentator....@revelation.cci> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 01:54:29 -0700, "Yang, AthD (h.c)"
>><eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote:
> So let me get this straight. People died from famine during Great Leap
> Forward, but it wasn't Mao's fault. There have been no massive famine
> since the liberalization of Chinese economy, and that's entirely due to
> communistic redistribution of food stuff. In fact, the Great Leap
> Forward worked SO well that the CCP cadre choosed to abandon the
> communist system altogether and adopt a capitalistic approach to the
> economy.
>
> Whatever you say, dude.
Brilliant. And, now, handing the microphone to Tom, we hear...?
>>> The "first" people's government in Chinese history
>>>happened not in China, but Taiwan, and that only in 1987 when the
>>>militray dictatorship KMT decided to lift martial law and allowed
>>>opposition parties.
>>
>>An Amerikaner puppet regime regardless Chiang Ka-Shek or Chen. For more
>>than half a century, true Taiwanese. the aboriginal people wanted
>>"Taiwan govt" out of Taiwan. Guninness world record: at least 2000 true
>>Taiwanese massacred by "Taiwan govt" that was placed there by USA.
>
> Ethnically, I'm one of those "true" Taiwanese that you so romanticize. I
> can trace my lineage all the back to Central Taiwanese aboriginal
> tribes, so you can spare me your lecture on the KMT. It's no secret that
> the KMT ran a death squad that killed thousands, but the democracy in
> Taiwan since the end of martial law is the real deal. Chen is a native
> Taiwanese: the DPP annoys both the US and China.
>
> How much political democracy do you see China?
Couldn't say it better myself. Thanks.
Jim Walsh
wrote:
> Actually, the Taiwanese KMT dictatorship made some lip service to
> "democracy" and was given access to the US market circa 1950's. The
> lifting of martial law in 1987 and the rise of true representative
> democracy (complete with opposition parties) happened way after the
> initial opening of western markets to Taiwan.
>
> AND way after Taiwan was declared nation-non-grata by the US, AFTER it
> got kicked out of the UN and all that stuff. AFTER PROC gained
> diplomatic legitimacy at the expense of the ROC.
>
> I don't see how the evolution of democracy in Taiwan was dictated by the
> US in any way.
I watched Taiwan's democracy evolve from shortly after the lifting of
martial law in 1987 (co-incidentally shortly before I arrived in Taiwan).
The evolution of democracy in Taiwan was totally the result of the courage
of the Taiwanese in demanding it, and the unwillingness of the KMT to use
the sort of brutal force that might have suppressed the people's will.
>>> While the Chinese "Commuinist" Party has adopted some fairly decent
>>> economic policies for the past 20 years, it is as of now a one-party
>>> rule.
> And do you think the Chinese economy would have taken off if they
> actually stayed true to their core ideology of communism?
There was a cynical deal done, just before ordering the PLA to disperse
the TAM demonstrators with bloody force. The "reform" wing of the CCP
agreed to accept no political reform if the "hardline" wing of the CCP
would accept capitalism and foreign investment.
Lord Calvert
>martial law in 1987 (co-incidentally shortly before I arrived in Taiwan).
>The evolution of democracy in Taiwan was totally the result of the courage
>of the Taiwanese in demanding it, and the unwillingness of the KMT to use
>the sort of brutal force that might have suppressed the people's will.
Anyone else notice that democracy in Taiwan only got rolling AFTER the US
withdrew recognition and starting backing the Communists?
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
Yaofeng
Wow, good to see you back to your old idiotic self again, Tom. Been
to China yet? The Communists you so whole heartedly supported have
turned Capitalists now. Only they still stick to the name. Maybe
they do it so you don't feel betrayed.
I have one question. How do you reconcile the Communism you believed
with Atheism?
maff
> On 11 Jul 2004 12:14:07 -0700, maf...@yahoo.com (maff) wrote:
>
>
> >> Chinese peasants. The "first" people's government in Chinese history
> >> happened not in China, but Taiwan, and that only in 1987 when the
> >> militray dictatorship KMT decided to lift martial law and allowed
> >> opposition parties.
> >
> >But then again, Taiwan was made a showcase for 'Democracy' and given
> >access to the US market. You better listen to your bankers whoever
> >they are.
>
>
> Actually, the Taiwanese KMT dictatorship made some lip service to
> "democracy" and was given access to the US market circa 1950's. The
But access to the US market created a big middle class. It's the
middle class who created the conditions for democracy.
> lifting of martial law in 1987 and the rise of true representative
> democracy (complete with opposition parties) happened way after the
> initial opening of western markets to Taiwan.
>
> AND way after Taiwan was declared nation-non-grata by the US, AFTER it
> got kicked out of the UN and all that stuff. AFTER PROC gained
> diplomatic legitimacy at the expense of the ROC.
But China was the founding member of the UN. It was preposterous that
KMT was going to rule China.
>
> I don't see how the evolution of democracy in Taiwan was dictated by
> the US in any way.
It's economics.
>
>
> >> While the Chinese "Commuinist" Party has adopted some fairly decent
> >> economic policies for the past 20 years, it is as of now a one-party
> >> rule.
> >
> >But the Chinese developed their system without much help from the
> >West. Their economy couldn't have taken off without their educataional
> >and health policies.
> >They also weren't indebted to IMF during that time.
>
> Maybe. Japan seemed to have done okay with western help. They still
> retain their educational health policies.
>
> And do you think the Chinese economy would have taken off if they
> actually stayed true to their core ideology of communism?
But what do you mean by "Communism"? Communism doesn't say anything
about peasants. Whatever their political ideology was, they didn't
practice voodoo economics.
ircirc
>>Every civilization that had existed for more than a thousand years
>>declined at the end, except one, only China is going stronger and
>>stronger.
>
>As opposed to India?
>
The great Indian civilization, which never bothered to record what
they did, left a historic blackhole in their civilization. So can
anyone tell of any significant period of Indian civilization?
And today, the great Indian civilization produced commentator such as
this, suggesting India will soon replace US as the superpower to be...
http://us.rediff.com/news/2004/jul/12rajeev.htm
Pax Indica and a multipolar world
July 12, 2004
The images of an America struggling to assert its will in Iraq have
startled many observers. Here is a country devastated by a decade-long
embargo; its paramount ruler has been hunted down in a humiliating
manner; and yet the mightiest power ever known to man has been unable
to impose Pax Americana thereon. Vietnam and the specter of imperial
hubris are on everyone's mind.
Conventional wisdom suggests that the United States, by far the most
powerful nation in the world today, will continue to remain so far
into the foreseeable future. This prospect worries many non-American
historians and analysts, who believe that an impregnable, unstoppable
hegemon will surely ride rough-shod over everyone else. They have good
reason to believe this: historically, imperial powers have never been
known to be gentle.
But this begs the question of whether America will in fact continue to
be the absolutely untouchable power that it is today. Militarily, with
its thirteen aircraft carrier groups, a plethora of high-technology
weapons and its nuclear stockpile, the US is impregnable.
Economically, its component parts are huge powers in their own right:
for instance, the state of California on its own is the world's sixth
or seventh largest economy.
In the realm of soft power (see Joseph Nye's recent book Soft Power,
the means to success in world politics), America remains supreme. Its
culture, literature, music, films and even fast-food are the benchmark
for millions all over the world; its newspapers, magazines and
television channels dominate the media. Foreign students flock to its
universities; foreign researchers love to work in their labs.
Yet, there is a malaise in America. Columbia's Jeffrey Sachs in the
Economic Times of April 7th ('The Illusion of Permanence') and the
Hoover Institution's Niall Ferguson in the Wall Street Journal of June
21st ('The End of Power') discuss several reasons for America's
possible fall from grace. I agree with much of their analysis, and add
a couple of my own thoughts:
Budget crisis: despite the good times in the last few years, there is
a huge budget deficit of $500 billion; furthermore the trade deficit
is some $200 billion and rising. It is hard to sustain deficit
financing and a huge public debt, as economists keep telling India in
regards to its combined state and central deficits.
Massive borrowings from abroad: some $2 trillion in US Treasury Bills
are held by Asians, including $750 billion by the Japanese. There is a
deep and growing debt burden; and no power in history has been able to
sustain itself for long as a net debtor. Successful great powers
extract capital from others, as evidenced by Britain's $10 trillion
loot of India.
Demographics: the US is a net importer of people; its small volunteer
army is already spread thin fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The
demographics of the US is also changing: there will be more and more
non-white Hispanics, Asians and Blacks in the US. The current
militaristic approach of the Bush administration is supported
primarily by white Christian fundamentalist men. They have a 'backward
looking agenda' and a 'Manichean world view' both of which may be
unsustainable when Hispanics will reach 24%, blacks 14% and Asian 8%:
together 50% of the US population, according to Sachs. 'The dream of
global empire most likely will fade,' claims he.
Competitiveness: The rest of the world is catching up. The narrowing
of the economic gap will naturally reduce America's geo-political
advantage. The furore over the outsourcing of white-collar jobs is
evidence of this erosion of competitiveness. Globalization, oddly
enough, seems to work both ways, which was not anticipated by the
powers-that-be. In the last twenty-five years, the gap between the
lives of middle-class people in India and the US has shrunk
noticeably.
The destruction of the Soviet Union may turn out to be a Pyrrhic
victory. It is true that the US dared the Soviets into an arms race
the latter couldn't afford. But it remains to be seen if the US could
really afford it either. Besides, the strategic forces including the
thirteen aircraft carrier groups and nuclear stockpiles were meant to
fight the last war, projecting US power massively. These are of no use
against an Al Qaeda with its suicide bombers and 'sleepers' deep in US
territory.
Ideological challenges. Many thought that the end of Communism marked
the beginning of a new era in which American-style capitalism would be
the unchallenged victor. But new ideas from China and India, both with
peculiar local economic philosophies, may well prove that there are
alternatives.
Now if all this means America's pre-eminence will come to an end, who
are the other potential super-powers? Here are some candidates:
Old Europe: The continent has become soft, in many ways; maybe it is
the centuries of internecine warfare; maybe its civilization is
exhausted, in senescence. That aging is reflected in its demographics
as well: they are increasingly old societies. Europe may well like
become one of those gated senior citizen communities in California,
fortified against outsiders. Or else they may have to allow
large-scale immigration, mostly of Muslims from North Africa. And they
will bring their own cultural baggage.
China: The house of cards in the Chinese economy is likely to come
crashing down soon, based as it is on a deeply flawed banking system.
Says Ferguson. 'An economic crisis in China could plunge the Communist
system into crisis, unleashing the centrifugal forces that have
undermined previous Chinese empires.' The Communist empire could
unravel the way of the Qing and the Ming.
Islam: Many people have started talking about 'Eurabia,' a Europe
overrun by Arabs/Muslims. And the fervent faith of Muslims is in stark
contrast to the jaded post-Christian modernism of Europeans. Yet,
Muslims remain deeply divided: even among Arabs there is no unity of
purpose. Furthermore, the oil that fueled Islamic revivalism may
become superfluous if alternate energy mechanisms are popularized.
Also, Muslim military might is diffuse and has not proven itself
competitive in modern warfare.
India: Despite many of the ingredients for super-powerdom, including a
rapidly growing economy, skills in intellectual property, and a
particularly positive demographic bulge, India has been too unwilling
to assert itself. Besides, it has many problems of its own making, and
those imposed by outsiders containing it.
Many, especially Indians, would be surprised at my including India in
this list. Certainly, westerners like Ferguson do not accept India's
candidacy. But, to paraphrase Marlon Brando, India 'could'a been a
contender', and in fact it is. Westerners consider India too weak and
too pliant. But in a way that is one of its strengths, because if you
look at the above list, plus America, all these are cultures based on
authoritarian ideologies, with the exception of India. India is the
only potential superpower that has always championed free-thinking,
which has tolerated and even nurtured heresies.
And every new great power rises out of the ashes of the previous ones,
based on its ability to innovate. Can you see China innovating?
Frankly, I cannot, for they have never in their long history created a
single earth-shaking idea. Practical innovations like gunpowder,
paper, the compass, yes, but never great ideas. Europe innovated after
their so-called Enlightenment, for instance by inventing colonialism
and racism. Americans created the idea of capitalism as religious
dogma: 'the business of America is business.'
What might India's innovation be? I wish I knew. But India has a
tremendous, under-appreciated, advantage in the realm of ideas.
Unbeknownst to most Indians, many of the greatest ideas of all time
came from this land. To take one magnificent example, Panini's
grammar, dating back 2500 years, and encapsulating the complete
structure of Sanskrit in four thousand context-free rules, is arguably
the greatest achievement of a single human mind in all of history.
The sheer audacity to imagine capturing the infinity of language in
the finitude of a set of rules is simply breathtaking: it could only
have come from ancient India which invented the ideas of the infinite
and the infinitesimal, and the correspondence between the two. The
concept of context-free languages was re-invented only in the 1950s by
computer scientists, since ambiguity is unacceptable to computers.
To take mathematics and astronomy, Madhava, Nilakantha and Parameswara
of the Kerala school invented the ideas of the calculus and infinite
series (including the so-called Taylor series) circa 1500 CE, and
these were most probably transmitted to Europe by Jesuit missionaries.
The so-called Pythagoras theorem was discussed by Baudhayana about 500
years before Pythagoras. Aryabhata calculated pi to six decimal places
in 499 CE. Saayana appears to have accurately calculated the speed of
light around 1370 CE.
All this bespeaks a tradition that revered knowledge and science and
encouraged discoveries and innovation. If India is able to rekindle
its ancient, questioning spirit, its intellectual brilliance will go a
long way towards making it a great power. It may be noted that, not
coincidentally, the great powers of the day have also had the most
prestigious universities: from Nalanda-Takshasila in India, to the
great German universities to Oxford/Cambridge in the UK to
Berkeley-Stanford-Harvard-Yale-Columbia-Chicago today.
Having said this, what India has lacked is political will, because its
rulers have been dazzled by the aforementioned authoritarian systems:
they have neglected the diamonds in their own backyard. One of these
days, India will finally outgrow that inferiority complex: the first
step to that is the creation of textbooks that teach history
truthfully, instead of negating it as the powers-that-be have been
wont to do.
But going back to the multipolar world, Niall Ferguson's warning is
salutary. He suspects that instead of a multipolar world, it might be
an apolar world. This is of course a little self-serving, coming from
someone who whose perspective, one assumes from his name, is molded by
immediate-past hegemon (the UK) and current hegemon (the US).
Nevertheless, he makes the point that the last time there was an
apolar world was during the so-called Dark Ages when Europe was a
mess: around 800 to 1000 CE, when the older empires were gone, and
enterprising barbarians ran rampant. He talks about waning empires,
religious revivals, incipient anarchy, a retreat into fortified and
defendable cities, deglobalization, and a vacuum of power.
It is true that a Pax Romana or something similar does impose a
certain discipline. India therefore should bid to be one of the new
poles of power: Pax Indica, certainly, in the Indian Ocean and its
littorals. However, this can only happen if India becomes a military
and economic power, one that it confident of its own strengths. The
good news is that this dream is within our grasp. The bad news is that
there are many Indians who so actively work against this goal that
they are in effect fifth columnists of other powers. They must be
deprogrammed, and pronto.
Jim Walsh
>... Communism doesn't say anything about peasants.
A new candidate for the most obviously mistaken claim. Leaves Charles
Liu's "China is free enough" in the dust.
maff
Didn't you know most Chinese religions are atheistic?
Atheism in Taoism
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=18510aff.0406241323.50b283e5%40posting.google.com
Atheism in Buddhism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the Buddha
Believe nothing, o monks,
merely because you have been told it ...
or because it is traditional,
or because you yourselves have imagined it.
Do not believe what your teacher tells you
merely out of respect for the teacher.
But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis,
you find to be conducive to the good,
the benefit, the welfare of all beings ł
that doctrine believe and cling to,
and take it as your guide.
- Gautama Buddha
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Bear always in mind what it is that I have not elucidated, and what
it is that I have elucidated. And what have I not elucidated? I have
not elucidated that the world is eternal; I have not elucidated that
the world is not eternal; ... I have not elucidated that the soul and
the body are identical; I have not elucidated that the monk who has
attained (the arahat) exists after death; I have not elucidated that
the arahat does not exist after death; ... I have not elucidated that
the arahat neither exists nor does not exist after death. And why have
I not elucidated this? Because this profits not, nor has to do with
the fundamentals of religion; therefore I have not elucidated this.
And what have I elucidated? Misery have I elucidated; the origin of
misery have I elucidated; the cessation of misery have I elucidated;
and the path leading to the cessation of misery have I elucidated. And
why have I elucidated this? Because this does profit, has to do with
the fundamentals of religion, and tends to absence of passion, to
knowledge, supreme wisdom, and Nirvana." 23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buddha also rejected religious devotion (bhakti) as a way of
salvation. His position was the sort of atheism we have already noted
in Mahavira. He believed that the universe abounded in gods,
goddesses, demons, and other nonhuman powers and agencies; but all
were without exception finite, subject to death and rebirth. In the
absence, then, of some transcendent, eternal Being, older than the
Creation, and the Maker of heaven and earth, who could direct men's
destinies and hear and grant human wishes, prayer, to Buddha, was of
no avail; he at least did not resort to it. For similar reasons he did
not put any reliance on the Vedas, or on practice of their nature
worship, or on the performance of their rituals as a way of
redemption; now would he countenance going to the Brahmins as priests.
23 Henry Clarke Warren, Buddhism in translation (Harvard University
Press 1922) p 122 (Majjhima Nikaya 63)
- in John B. Noss, Man's religions (Macmillan: NY 1956) p 166
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Religion without God in Indian philosophy by Shlomo Biderman
Speaking of the religious activity of the believer, Wittgenstein
described him as "using a picture." If we adopt Wittgenstein's
metaphor we shall probably have no difficulty in identifying, in most
cases, the main subject of such pictures. By this I mean, of course,
the concept of God. The existence of God in monotheistic western
religions is regarded as inseparable from the very existence of those
religions. It should, therefore, be of no surprise that common
definitions of religion -- treading in the wake of the monotheistic
trend, emphasize right from the beginning the belief in the existence
of God as a necessary ingredient of religion.
There is no doubt that the monotheistic picture indeed represents a
large number of religions. But one should not jump to the conclusion
that the religious museum solely represents pictures of the
monotheistic trend. On the contrary, one can find in the museum a
great variety of religious pictures, in part of which God figures in
the center of the picture, in others He figures only in the margins,
and in some He does not figure at all.
The most prominent religious picture in which God does not figure at
all is, of course, the Buddhist religion. This religion can be
characterized not only as non-theistic but more so as atheistic; that
is to say, not only does the Buddhist religion discard the notion of
God as a religious term, but it vehemently rejects any use of this
notion as meaningless. Buddhism is, therefore, a religion without God.
Monotheistic religions very often describe God as revealing himself in
the world. God's revelation usually takes place in the succession of
historical events that began at the moment of the creation of the
world and continued throughout history. God's subsequent revelations
in history have sometimes been direct, and sometimes by means of
intermediaries, the prophets, sages and saints. In the context of
God's revelation Scriptures play an especially important role. In the
first place they give out invaluable information concerning God's
revelation in history. Furthermore, they describe the exact nature of
those revelations. The Scriptures are therefore conceived as directly
springing from God who bestows upon them authority as well as
infallibility.
It is thus plausible to assume that any atheistic religion which
denies the existence of God would therefore try to the best of its
ability to undermine the authority of Scriptures as well. And indeed
Buddhist and Jainist philosophies in India have both attacked the
intelligibility of the concept of God as well as the notion of s'abda
- the World of Scriptures through which God is revealed. It is,
therefore, strange to find out a religion which is totally in accord
with the Buddhist religion in its refutation of God's existence but
which,--at the same time, revers the Scriptures fullheartedly. This
religion is represented by--the Mimamsa school of Hinduism. In what
follows I shall dwell upon some interesting points of that religion.
First, a few words concerning the historical background of Mimamsa.
The Mimamsa school is considered to be one of the most ancient of
Hindu philosophical schools. The oldest text of it known to us today
is the mimamsa sutra which, according to Indian tradition, was written
by the somewhat mysterious Jaimini. It was in all probability composed
in the third or second centuries B.C. However, there is room to
suppose that the actual beginnings of the Mimamsa school can be dated
even earlier; the mimamsa sutra is thus a systematic summary of some
religious conceptions that existed in India up to the time of
Ja'imini. Several commentaries were written on the mimamsa sutra, and
the most important one known to us today is that of Sabara. According
to most scholars this commentary was written in the first or second
centuries A.D., that is, about five hundred years after Jaimini's
lifetime.
As its name, 'Inquiry,' indicates, Mimamsa considers the
interpretation of Scriptures to be its primary function. The
Scriptures are the only source for knowing religious duties (dharma).
They present religious duties within a set of laws, injunctions and
prohibitions, to which the believer must strictly adhere to. Thus, the
religious verses that can be found in the Scriptures have a single
objective: to instruct man in the permitted paths of action and to
block off those paths that are forbidden him. It follows that
religious duty is not dependent either on some abstract articles of
faith or on the existence of some mental state. In other words,
religion obliges the believer only as a set of commands, that is, only
insofar as religion impinges on his actions. Religion is not therefore
intended to provide man with historical, cosmological, psychological
or moral precepts; it certainly does not claim to preach a spiritual
method of release by which man can attain the absolute Being. The sole
legitimate aim of religion is to oblige man to perform certain
activities and to refrain from others.
Dharma, then is expressed by the set of laws and injunctions which are
presented to the believer in the Scriptures. Obviously, the
infallibility of these Scriptures, is a necessary condition for
accepting the religious imperatives as authoritative and binding. In
other words, in order that the religious commands would be regarded as
obligatory, the validity of Scriptures should be acknowledged beyond
any reasonable doubt. In fact, the validity of Scriptures is accepted
by the Mimamsa as axiomatic. Scriptures are authoritative, that is,
everlasting, unchangeable and infallible; they do not stem from any
external source, either divine or human.
- L. Wittgenstein, "Lectures on Religious Belief,"
in: Lecture and Conversations on Aesthetics, Psychology and Religious
Belief, (ed. by C. Barrett), Oxford, 1970.
2 For a summary of Buddhist attitude towards God, revelation and
Scriptures see K. N. Jayatilleke, Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge,
London, 1963, Chapter IV. See also K. N. Jayatilleke, The Message of
the Buddha, London, 1975, Chapter IV.
- in Religious atheism? Apostel, Pinxten, et al.
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:GKbiUyWHAkgJ:www.atheisms.info/atheisms/buddhism.html++%22Atheism+in+Buddhism%22&hl=en
maff
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 12:15:44 -0700, maff thought carefully and wrote:
>
> >... Communism doesn't say anything about peasants.
>
> A new candidate for the most obviously mistaken claim. Leaves Charles
> Liu's "China is free enough" in the dust.
Are you say that the proletariat libertaed China just like Marx said?
Yang, AthD (h.c)
wrote:
>>I watched Taiwan's democracy evolve from shortly after the lifting of
>>martial law in 1987 (co-incidentally shortly before I arrived in Taiwan).
>>The evolution of democracy in Taiwan was totally the result of the courage
>>of the Taiwanese in demanding it, and the unwillingness of the KMT to use
>>the sort of brutal force that might have suppressed the people's will.
>
>Anyone else notice that democracy in Taiwan only got rolling AFTER the US
>withdrew recognition and starting backing the Communists?
I think it's the Third-World-Country curse of oil. as with "why care
for you people when you can just monopolize petroleum?", there's a
fair amount of "why care for your people when you can just be a
dictator and recieve subsidies from US/USSR?"
Yang, AthD (h.c)
>"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in message news:<adr6f0lc16hvcpkg0...@4ax.com>...
>> On 11 Jul 2004 12:14:07 -0700, maf...@yahoo.com (maff) wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> Chinese peasants. The "first" people's government in Chinese history
>> >> happened not in China, but Taiwan, and that only in 1987 when the
>> >> militray dictatorship KMT decided to lift martial law and allowed
>> >> opposition parties.
>> >
>> >But then again, Taiwan was made a showcase for 'Democracy' and given
>> >access to the US market. You better listen to your bankers whoever
>> >they are.
>>
>>
>> Actually, the Taiwanese KMT dictatorship made some lip service to
>> "democracy" and was given access to the US market circa 1950's. The
>
>But access to the US market created a big middle class. It's the
>middle class who created the conditions for democracy.
The Taiwanese middle class weren't that middle in 1979. The economy in
Taiwan did not take off until the mid 80's.
>> lifting of martial law in 1987 and the rise of true representative
>> democracy (complete with opposition parties) happened way after the
>> initial opening of western markets to Taiwan.
>>
>> AND way after Taiwan was declared nation-non-grata by the US, AFTER it
>> got kicked out of the UN and all that stuff. AFTER PROC gained
>> diplomatic legitimacy at the expense of the ROC.
>
>But China was the founding member of the UN. It was preposterous that
>KMT was going to rule China.
True. But I don;t think it's a coincidence that democratization in
Taiwan happened after having becoming a victim of real politiks.
>> I don't see how the evolution of democracy in Taiwan was dictated by
>> the US in any way.
>
>It's economics.
And political economics.
>> And do you think the Chinese economy would have taken off if they
>> actually stayed true to their core ideology of communism?
>
>But what do you mean by "Communism"? Communism doesn't say anything
>about peasants. Whatever their political ideology was, they didn't
>practice voodoo economics.
The Maosim Communism was specifically tailored for the peasants. That
was their core constituency. Just because voodoo economics was bad
does not make the economic policies of the CCP during the 1950's good
by default. The vision of the Great Leap Forward was that of the
self-sufficient farmer. How much economic power do you reckon China
would have has these farmers stayed farmers and not moved to the
factories?
Jim Walsh
wrote:
> On 13 Jul 2004 12:15:44 -0700, maf...@yahoo.com (maff) wrote:
>>But what do you mean by "Communism"? Communism doesn't say anything
>>about peasants. Whatever their political ideology was, they didn't
>>practice voodoo economics.
>
> The Maosim Communism was specifically tailored for the peasants. That
> was their core constituency. Just because voodoo economics was bad does
> not make the economic policies of the CCP during the 1950's good by
> default. The vision of the Great Leap Forward was that of the
> self-sufficient farmer. How much economic power do you reckon China
> would have has these farmers stayed farmers and not moved to the
> factories?
That's a bingo.
maff
> On 13 Jul 2004 12:15:44 -0700, maf...@yahoo.com (maff) wrote:
>
> >"Yang, AthD (h.c)" <eacmole@/*AWOLBUSH*/mail.com> wrote in message news:<adr6f0lc16hvcpkg0...@4ax.com>...
> >> On 11 Jul 2004 12:14:07 -0700, maf...@yahoo.com (maff) wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >> Chinese peasants. The "first" people's government in Chinese history
> >> >> happened not in China, but Taiwan, and that only in 1987 when the
> >> >> militray dictatorship KMT decided to lift martial law and allowed
> >> >> opposition parties.
> >> >
> >> >But then again, Taiwan was made a showcase for 'Democracy' and given
> >> >access to the US market. You better listen to your bankers whoever
> >> >they are.
> >>
> >>
> >> Actually, the Taiwanese KMT dictatorship made some lip service to
> >> "democracy" and was given access to the US market circa 1950's. The
> >
> >But access to the US market created a big middle class. It's the
> >middle class who created the conditions for democracy.
>
> The Taiwanese middle class weren't that middle in 1979. The economy in
> Taiwan did not take off until the mid 80's.
That's where Taiwanese expatriates came in.
>
>
> >> lifting of martial law in 1987 and the rise of true representative
> >> democracy (complete with opposition parties) happened way after the
> >> initial opening of western markets to Taiwan.
> >>
> >> AND way after Taiwan was declared nation-non-grata by the US, AFTER it
> >> got kicked out of the UN and all that stuff. AFTER PROC gained
> >> diplomatic legitimacy at the expense of the ROC.
> >
> >But China was the founding member of the UN. It was preposterous that
> >KMT was going to rule China.
>
> True. But I don;t think it's a coincidence that democratization in
> Taiwan happened after having becoming a victim of real politiks.
>
> >> I don't see how the evolution of democracy in Taiwan was dictated by
> >> the US in any way.
> >
> >It's economics.
>
> And political economics.
True.
>
> >> And do you think the Chinese economy would have taken off if they
> >> actually stayed true to their core ideology of communism?
> >
> >But what do you mean by "Communism"? Communism doesn't say anything
> >about peasants. Whatever their political ideology was, they didn't
> >practice voodoo economics.
>
> The Maosim Communism was specifically tailored for the peasants. That
Communism doesn't say anything about peasants.
> was their core constituency. Just because voodoo economics was bad
> does not make the economic policies of the CCP during the 1950's good
So you don't think that their taming of Chiang Kaishek's hyper
inflation a good economic policy?
> by default. The vision of the Great Leap Forward was that of the
> self-sufficient farmer. How much economic power do you reckon China
> would have has these farmers stayed farmers and not moved to the
> factories?
But late Sixties, they had no internal or external debt. So you don't
think that's a good economic policy? You can only go further when your
economic base is secure. If Chiang Kaishek had remained in power,
China would have remained under US's economic and political control.
It would have remained a basket case.
Lord Calvert
>was their core constituency.
Just as neo-conservatism is specifically tailored for poor, white,
fundamentalist, poorly educated southerners. Maoist Communism was ruthlessly
provincial and anti-intellectual, just as neo-conservatism is.
maff
> >The Maosim Communism was specifically tailored for the peasants. That
> >was their core constituency.
>
> Just as neo-conservatism is specifically tailored for poor, white,
> fundamentalist, poorly educated southerners. Maoist Communism was ruthlessly
> provincial and anti-intellectual, just as neo-conservatism is.
You're mistaking Mao with Pol Pot.
China Shakes the World.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0853451591/
by Jack Belden
A book that explains why Mao (at the beginning) was good...., August
29, 2000
Reviewer: J. Michael Showalter (Nashville, TN United States)
This is a really powerful book..... It is an account of China under
the government of the Nationalist Chinese written by an American
journalist who, in the end, fell under the spell of Mao's PLA not for
ideological reasons-- but because of a personal affinity for the
Chinese people.... who were suffering....
I was advised to read this book in college by a professor who claimed
that "if you can read this book and not cry, then you don't have a
heart." Certainly, Belden's account of how through Communism the
Chinese people relieved themselves of some of the subjugation which a
feudalish society compounded by Western imperialism subjected them to,
graphically illustrates suffering.... murder, rape, and many other
human vices.... in ways that few other books do.... and hints at WHY
people (barring events of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural
Revolution) can still respect Mao as a leader and a liberator of a
nation....
maff
> >was their core constituency.
>
> Just as neo-conservatism is specifically tailored for poor, white,
> fundamentalist, poorly educated southerners. Maoist Communism was ruthlessly
> provincial and anti-intellectual, just as neo-conservatism is.
You're mistaking Mao with Pol Pot.
China Shakes the World.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0853451591/
by Jack Belden
A book that explains why Mao (at the beginning) was good...., August
29, 2000
Reviewer: J. Michael Showalter (Nashville, TN United States)
This is a really powerful book..... It is an account of China under
the government of the Nationalist Chinese written by an American
journalist who, in the end, fell under the spell of Mao's PLA not for
ideological reasons-- but because of a personal affinity for the
Chinese people.... who were suffering....
I was advised to read this book in college by a professor who claimed
that "if you can read this book and not cry, then you don't have a
heart." Certainly, Belden's account of how through Communism the
Chinese people relieved themselves of some of the subjugation which a
feudalish society compounded by Western imperialism subjected them to,
graphically illustrates suffering.... murder, rape, and many other
human vices.... in ways that few other books do.... and hints at WHY
people (barring events of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural
Revolution) can still respect Mao as a leader and a liberator of a
nation....
>
>
brian turner
> On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 22:44:24 -0400, Tom Goodman
> <commentator....@revelation.cci> wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 01:54:29 -0700, "Yang, AthD (h.c)"
> Taiwanese were just as dirt poor as the Mainlander Chinese after WWII.
No they were not, Taiwan was much more developed than the mainland ON
AVERAGE. Of course the best parts of the mainland were similar.
Here's a figure for you to ponder. Taiwan had majority literacy
(thanks to Japanese eduction investments), mainland had near total
illiteracy outside the rural aristocracy and the small urban middle
class.
> Somehow in the 40 years per capita GDP grew faster in Taiwan than
> China. Hmm, I wonder why?
You could ask the same question about the US. Taiwan grew at
astounding rates after WW2, faster than every country in history
(helped by communist-fear inspired land reform) and state ownership of
big industry for the first 2 decades. The PRC grew at about half
their rate until the reforms. The US only did slightly better in the
19th century.
brian turner
> <commentator....@revelation.cci> wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 01:54:29 -0700, "Yang, AthD (h.c)"
> Taiwanese were just as dirt poor as the Mainlander Chinese after WWII.
No they were not, Taiwan was much more developed than the mainland ON
AVERAGE. Of course the best parts of the mainland were similar.
Here's a figure for you to ponder. Taiwan had majority literacy
(thanks to Japanese eduction investments), mainland had near total
illiteracy outside the rural aristocracy and the small urban middle
class.
> Somehow in the 40 years per capita GDP grew faster in Taiwan than
> China. Hmm, I wonder why?
You could ask the same question about the US. Taiwan grew at
maff
> The Chinese Century
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/04/magazine/04CHINA.html?ei=5062&en=05b9dc4385cd874b&ex=1089518400&partner=GOOGLE&pagewanted=all&position=
>
> By TED C. FISHMAN
> Thanks to Mao ? and to good old American know-how and help ? China is
> getting ready to supplant the U.S. as the capitalist engine of the
> world. A lesson in economic development and global interconnectedness.
The Chinese Century
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_epq=The%20Chinese%20Century&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&lr=&num=100&hl=en
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22The+Chinese+Century%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&tab=nw&sa=N
>
> China Chinese Sino Han
> http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+China+OR+Chinese+OR+Sino+OR+Han&sa=N&tab=gn
>
> http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+China+OR+Chinese+OR+Sino+OR+Han&sa=N&tab=nw
>
> http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=+China+OR+Chinese+OR+Sino+OR+Han&sa=N&tab=wd&cat=gwd%2FTop
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?as_oq=China%20Chinese%20Sino%20Han&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_scoring=d&lr=&num=100&hl=en
>
> Is the wakening giant a monster?
> http://tinyurl.com/iws6
>
> A Blueprint for the Future
> http://tinyurl.com/9vga