babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
You show little interest in what is happening in China or in its actions elsewhere, Fidel. Nobody here is defending U.S. actions around the world, but someday you may notice that Washington is not alone in its depradations. But then again, you may not. :)
When I think of fragmentation of China, I don't think of Xinjiang, which has too much conflict for Beijing to loosen control. I think of, as you said, "Guangdong, Fujian, Shandong, and Zhejiang. Given their huge populations and FDI, and their tradition of overseas trade, the financial rewards of independent policy-making and tax collection are immense. Resistance of central control from these provinces has been significant for a long time too."
Is language a factor? I find some Mandarin-speakers and Wu-speakers make fun of Yue (Cantonese) speakers for their language as well as for their less healthy communities. (Do you know that travel doctors in Canada recommend certain immunizations for travel to China, and additional shots for travel to the South?) Guangdong does not need Beijing, nor does Shanghai. Don't they pretty much go their own way already? If they became autonomous regions, how could you tell?
I hope that Ryan and Sean are still on board. The last post by Wilf is interesting indeed, and I wonder if L J can respond to it, particularly the question about the apparent independence of Guangdong and Shanghai.
It also raises the problem, however, of the ever-greater incursion of China into other countries - particulaly those in East Africa, and now Canada - in the pursuit of resources of all kinds needed to sustain 1.3 billion people who have achieved a per-person GDP of $4,000 and aiming to match the U.S.'s $48,000.
I am not so sure about that Wilf.
These are not the easiest to sort out-- where does the labour and the capital come from?
I understood that some regions are jealous that the state invests so much in to Shanghai feeling that it is actually getting extra resources that come from other places. We know that migrant labour is a big influence-- if they could not go to work there would the booms exist?
I don't know how these places would do on their own and don't know if any studies exist to tell us-- possibly not.
Shanghai etc. is very rich and would eventually do well I do not dispute but is it doing better or worse attached to the rest of China-- I think likely better. In that sense the relationship between the wealthy parts of China and the less wealthy parts may in fact be exploitive to some degree...
It's for sure a fluid situation, today, Sean, as people struggle to gain a financial footing...there were more than 350,000 millionaires in China in 2009, after the crash. But I wonder, again, at your perspective on the "freedom" facing those wishing to escape all that. quote:"I would argue that the most effective way would be to provide minority groups a reason to want to remain in China and of course I think China has some distance to go in that regard. Ultimately the most effective way to keep people in a particular country is to make them want to be there."
Sean, whatever gives you the idea that there is some sort of "choice" available?
What made you think I thought there was a choice at present?
I am saying over the long term if China was to allow democracy it would also need to allow self determination and to do that it need the peopel to want to stay. That is entirely different from a declaration that there is presently a choice.
Somehow the country will need to keep providing hope for further economic improvement but this is difficult with policies promoting the concentration of income in the hands of a small class of people.
From #22 (and repeated in #26):
@Sean (quote):
"I would argue that the most effective way would be to provide minority groups a reason to want to remain in China and of course I think China has some distance to go in that regard. Ultimately the most effective way to keep people in a particular country is to make them want to be there."
That, of course, won't happen. The Han minority in the west and Tibet will soon be a majority there.
Beijing is home to one bloody-minded, nationalistic, vengeful and dictatorial government. Did I miss "corrupt?"
The people of Guangdong proudly speak Cantonese. There were demonstrations in Guangzhou a few weeks ago to protest CCTV's decision to broadcast the Asian games in Mandarin even though the events are being held in Guangzhou. So, yeah, I'd say language is a factor. In defence of Guangdong from those comedians, its image throughout the rest of China is a outdated since it has become one of the richest and most productive provinces in the country. Let's also remember the historic significance of Guangzhou in modern Chinese history, having produced some of China's most influential reformers and revolutionaries, and for being the staging point for two revolutions.
Those provinces are still very much a part of the PRC. Their reluctance to comply with central planning is really similar to a Canadian province voicing its concerns or outright disagreement with Ottawa. If there was a real threat of separation, you'd likely hear of the arrest and execution of the provincial party leaders and there'd be a reshuffling, to use a Canadian term, of the provincial party. There'd be a military presence in Guangzhou. The province's finances and geography are too critical to the survival of the PRC, as well as to the legitimacy of the CCP, for Beijing to let it manoeuvre too loosely.
Doug SAunder's Arrival City is proving to be an incredibly detailed explanation of what is happening as people move from village to city in China and a dozen other countries where the "arrival cities" are known as "slums, favelas, bustees, bidonvilles, ashwaiyyat, thantytowns, kampongs, urban villages, gecekondular and barrios of the developing world...also as the immigrant neighbourhoods, ethnic districts, banlieues difficiles, Plattenbau developments, Chinatowns, Little Indias, Hispanic quarters, urban slums and migrant suburbs of wealthy countries..."
In the opening chapter we learn about people like Xian Guand Quan in Liu Gong Li (near Chongqing): "He came from the village of Shi Long, more than 100 kilometres away, in 1992, shortly after China's economy liberalized and the government began tolerating some peasant mobility. It was a move of desperation, from a farm where sixz of them slept in a tiny dirt-floor straw hut." His wife cooked for constructiion crews and he worked at first for 50 to 75 cents a day, plus meals of rice,which contained pork every five days, and the right to sleep on the site. They spent their nights wrapped in sheets on the foundations of buildings, joining hundreds of thousands of other homeless workers in the city.
"They sent all of their income back to Shi Long, and went years without seeing their daughter. They joined China's 'floating population' of between 150 million and 200 million people...
It is going to be a marvelous read, about heroic efforts by the people taking part in this massive movement involving, eventually, billiions of people.....all other things being equal. I do mean to ask Doug about his opening lines: "What will be remembered about the twenty-first century, more than anything else except perhaps the effects of a changing climate, is the great, and final, shift of human populations out of rural, agricultural life and into cities." Perhaps the book will explain the degree of his optimism in this.
A Surprise Boost for Euro from China
http://www.voltairenet.org/article167171.html
"The embattled Euro has gotten a surprise boost from an unexpected quarter - China. The country with the world's largest foreign exchange currency reserves, China has pledged to support Greek debt as well as the Euro in what is clearly a geopolitical decision...
In doing so, China has signaled it seeks to prevent the US financial warfare attack on Europe and to play the EU off against USA in a geopolitical chess game of fascinating dimensions.."
Ah, nice to be able to use this thread again...
quote:
"In doing so, China has signaled it seeks to prevent the US financial warfare attack on Europe and to play the EU off against USA in a geopolitical chess game of fascinating dimensions.."
China, with a yuan estimated to be some 40 per cent below its real exchange rate value, is trying to save its ass ...while playing the power game. The U.S. "financial warfare attack" seems directed at China, not Europe...yet.
Pipelineistan's New Silk Road - by Pepe Escobar
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175306/tomgram%3A_pepe_escobar%2C_pipelineistan's_new_silk_road_/
"No wonder the Obama administration's Eurasian energy czar Richard Morningstar was forced to admit at a congressional hearing that the US simply cannot compete with China when it comes to Central Asia's energy wealth. If only he had delivered the same message to the Pentagon.."
Isn't it amazing. Hundreds of thousands of lives taken away by the U.S.oil lobby and the automobiles of China are going to be consuming the oil-men's (and Condy's) objective.
Must be a starless night in Texas.
Speculation has mounted that political reform in China could be a hot topic after Wen -- widely viewed as more liberal-minded than Hu, who is party chairman -- issued an unusually strong call for openness.
The Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee is elected by the plenary session of the CPC Central Committee.
Or more. For example, the election of the 204 members of the Central Committee also results in the election of 167 alternate members. The votes cast for each alternate member are public. The votes cast for each Central Committee member seem to have become public recently. I don't know if the votes cast for Political Bureau members are public or not. I don't know how many usually stand. Anyone know?
I assume all the recent jockeying is in fact campaigning for the 24 seats on the Political Bureau. The incumbents are:
For example, in 2007 it was reported:
Considering all the experts on China posting about Liu XiaoBo, I'm disappointed none of them have any answers to my questions in the previous post.
I have depended on word from Llian Jiajie and yourself, Wilf. Perhaps you could simply state whether you consider the supporters of Liu hereabouts are too impatient - given such "openness" evolving withint CPP structure - and so old Liu will, unfortunately, just have to cool his heels...or whether his "openness" is only a small piece of evidence that his call for , say, an end to one-party government is timely (if ill-chosen in terms of his own health and welfare).
You might even condescend to comment on the question put forward regarding the time we have left, Wilf, in which to fashion an international stage on which the newst superpower on the block could be asked to explain what it thinks about the sovereignty of countries on which it depends for the raw material of empire.
This from a reader of the first edition of The Scalpel, the Sword who applauded Trudeau for his clear thinking in visiting China in 1970.
The Geopolitical Agenda Behind the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize - by F William Engdahl
http://www.voltairenet.org/article167396.html
"With almost flawless political timing, the Nobel Peace Prize Committee of the Norweigan Parliament announced the giving of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize to Chinese critic, political activist Liu Xiabo.
"The Nobel Prize's world media theater is part of an escalating long-term pressure strategy of Washington against Chinese trying to make China 'lose face' in the eyes of the rest of the world. That is all part of an orchestrated, deeper game, using 'human rights' and a web of NGOs and organizations that Washington considers directly or indirectly as a weapon of Washington geopolitics.."
Of course, there is also Paul Krugman's position (he was the only voice in constant protest of the idiocy of the Bush regime) in the NYTimes of Oct. 17:
"Major economic powers, realizing that they have an important stake in the international system, are normally very hesitant about resorting to economic warfare, even in the face of severe provocation - witness the way U.S. policy makers have agonized and temporized over what to do about China's grossly protectionist exchange-rate policy. China, however, showed no hesitation at all about using its trade muscle to get its way in a political dispute, in clear - if denied - violation of international trade law.
"Couple the rare earth story with China's behavior on other fronts - the state subsidies that help firms gain key contracts, the pressure on foreign companies to move production to China and, above all, that exchange-rate policy - and what you have is a portrait of a rogue economic superpower, unwilling to play by the rules. And the question is what the rest of us are going to do about it."
Clearly, the U.S. has not been above board in its international economic dealings - as any Canadian can attest - but Krugman is saying that the new imperial power on the block is no better, and invites retaliation.
China, 'Rare Earth' Metals And The Need For Industrial Restructuring In The West - by Dr Peter Custers
http://www.countercurrents.org/custers021110.htm
"Has China started challenging a form of dominance which the West for many centuries has sought to preserve, ie exclusive or privileged access to strategic raw materials? The present structure of the world's trade in rare earth metals appears to be both the outcome of a conscious Chinese strategy, and of a lack of foresight among China's main competitors.."
It certainly demonstrates that central planning fused with the rapacious spirit of capitalism wins the day!
It is important to recognize China's argument in favour of its aggressiveness.
China has often pointed out that as a country with a much lower per capita income, it has every right to go after its interest in closing the gap with wealthier countries and to use whatever mechanisms are available to do so. China is insulted by suggestions that its attempt to bring more wealth to its people ought to be compared to the actions of a country such as the US that already has high wealth and means to keep its near monopoly on world power intact.
In spite of whatever else you might say about this argument it is at once compelling from a historical justice perspective and an argument that you have every reason to believe Chinese leaders hold dear to their hearts.
Regardless of the state of China's development of political accountability, this factor must be considered.
Another geopolitical point speaks to Chinese attitudes and history. China has a big domestic market. It has had a tendency to disregard the importance of anything outside its borders and take an isolationist posture. Due to its size it can afford to do this provided it has everything it wants. The swing from engagement to isolation is something China has been involved in for centuries. I am not convinced that those upset at China's demand for a fair seat at the table would really prefer China to be isolationist. Certainly many have claimed that China's role as a counterweight to the US has been welcomed.
As for the political developments in China, I enjoy the speculation I hear from people I know but it really amounts to just that-- there is little infromation out there. This rather than a lack of interest may be behind the few responses to Wilf's questions. My guess is there is a significant number of people who want change but also want to manage it carefully. It will be itneresting to see how they do. I have been long afraid that China's changes could result in more and more areas where the government gives up an essential role in society and the economy. They are right to be careful-- rampant capitalism is not a solution either.
'US Fiat Dollars To Create Fresh Crisis
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/150665.html
"Hong Kong's Chief Executive Donald Tsang said Friday that America's latest stimulus plans to dispense hundreds of billions of dollars in the Unites States could cause a cash flood and entail inflation for the Asian markets. Hong Kong's leader further said this will affect the financial stability in the region and bring about 'unprecedented market turbulence' in currencies, bonds and stocks.."
Hong Kong, of course, is more concerned about the effects on finance capital internationally. It is the Asian equivalent to London, England, in that regard.
Perhaps Hong Kong should have tried harder to convince China that its fixed exchanged rate was beggaring the American worker?
Even while one understands how important it has been to increase the life chances of the Chinese peasantry.
But for finance capitalism, someone's always beggaring Peter to pay Paul...somewhere, eh?
US Military Chief: Pentagon to Focus on Asia - by Lalit Jha Press Trust of India
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22680
"In response to an aggressive North Korea and a more assertive China, our efforts to balance risk have increasingly focused on Asia.."
The US-China Summit
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/jan2011/pers-j20.shtml
"Since Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared 18 months ago that the US was 'back in East Asia', Washington has worked relentlessly to isolate China and contain its growing influence..."
Southeast Asia: US Completing Asian NATO to Confront China - by Rick Rozoff (STOP NATO)
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=27519
Obama's New War Doctrine Fuels Debate in China
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/jan2012/chin-j13.shtml
"An intense discussion is underway in Chinese ruling circles over how to respond to the confrontational US stance and threat of military conflict..Washington's aggressive stance against China has strengthened the position of those who advocate an end to appeasement..."
China Infuriated by US-Philipines Defense Plans (and vid)
http://rt.com/news/china-philippines-usa-military-127/
"The US decision to station forces in the Philipines could have dangerous repercussions. Beijing may enact economic sanctions after Manilla invited in US troops in response to an escalating territorial dispute over the South China Sea..."
America's Pacific Century: Containing China (and vid)
http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2012/06/americas-pacific-century-containing-...
"Nile Bowie interviews Dr Chandra Muzaffar, President of the International Movement for a Just World - analyses a wide variety of issues including the emerging BRICS nations, the crisis in Syria and the implications of Washington's policy shift to the Asia Pacific region.."