US empire increasingly desperate against Baba Beijing. Intimidation will backfire. (China Rising Radio Sinoland 181211)

Pictured above: it is not a question of which side has good or bad leaders. It’s all about the difference in civilizational systems of governance.


Downloadable SoundCloud podcast (also at the bottom of this page), YouTube video, as well as being syndicated on iTunes, Stitcher Radio, RUvid and Ivoox (links below).


[dropcap]A[/dropcap]t least US President Donald Trump is honest and his administration is reflecting that reality, when he said, 

People say you don’t like China. No, I love them… But their leaders are much smarter than our leaders… It’s like taking the New England Patriots and Tom Brady and have them play your high school football team. That’s the difference between China’s leaders and our leaders (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0GhBmz3zmE). 

And it’s true. But, it not a question of better or worse leaders. It’s that China’s communist-socialist democracy works for the people, and has been since liberation in 1949, while the West’s capitalist, non-representative version serves the 1%, something I’ve written about in Sino-detail (http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2017/10/25/how-can-western-capitalism-beat-this-thats-the-rub-it-cant-china-rising-radio-sinoland-171022/ and http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2017/11/19/china-versus-the-west-another-shocking-comparative-vignette-china-rising-radio-sinoland-171119/ and http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2017/11/17/i-can-see-for-miles-in-china-what-do-you-see-from-your-vantage-point-china-rising-radio-sinoland-171117/ and http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2018/01/11/chinas-public-social-credit-system-versus-the-wests-secret-panopticon-china-rising-radio-sinoland-180111/). For Westerners, read it and weep, because it is a hard reality to wrap one’s head around, but necessary to truly understand how the world works – East and Occident. As I wrote about extensively in The China Trilogy (https://chinarising.puntopress.com/2018/06/18/praise-for-the-china-trilogy-the-votes-are-in-it-r-o-c-k-s-what-are-you-waiting-for/ and http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2017/05/19/the-china-trilogy/), Chinese civilization has been communist-socialist going back 5,000 years. They’ve had a lot of practice making it work well for themselves and Baba Beijing definitely offers an alternative system of governance versus the West. 

America’s owners gave away the manufacturing store to China, starting in the 1980s, gutting the United States’ middle class and turning its already Potemkin labor unions into eunuchs. This was all for the capitalist sake of quarterly profits, multimillion-dollar executive payouts and golden parachutes. There is even a word for it, corporate financialization, where the company is managed by the CEO to maximize the stock price, in order to reap the biggest salary possible. GM is a good example, but it’s true of much of Wall Street, for the last 40 years (https://www.salon.com/2018/12/05/general-motors-is-proof-to-the-world-that-slashing-wages-is-not-the-ticket-to-profitability_partner/).  

In spite of all the well-orchestrated mainstream propaganda about “keeping all the high paying white collar jobs”, history has shown that manufacturing always draws research and development (R&D), technology, innovation and financing into its orbit. The US, and now more and more Europe, Japan and South Korea depend on China as the world’s manufacturing powerhouse. Thus, all of Trump’s invectives about trying to bring jobs back home, the MAGA movement (Make America Great Again) make sense. However, it will never happen, because he doesn’t run the country. Wall Street, the oil bankers and the military-spy deep state do, and they own the US Congresspeople and Senators like wall trophies, all well-bribed, extorted and blackmailed. 

Since capitalism cannot compete against communism-socialism on a level playing field, the former’s only options are to commit sabotage, war, sanctions and subterfuge to weaken the latter. Chas Freeman calls “positive” Western diplomatic relations, alliance, entente, protectorate, client state and cooperative transactional relations and none of them are good for the West’s other half (https://chasfreeman.net/a-new-era-in-us-china-relations/), as they all mean subordination of the country’s needs to those of the United States. On the negative side there are, enmity, adversarial antagonism, rivalry, and competitive transactionalism. Again, none of them are good for countries that want to be independent of the West, and with Donald Trump’s policies, the US has rapidly moved its relations with China from adversarial antagonism/rivalry back to enmity, which means trying to destroy China, along with a long list of other perceived enemies. 

Thus, after Trump slapped high tariffs on China’s exports, US Vice-President Pence gave a speech to announce to the world that the United States was ready for all-out Cold War, unless China submits to all of Uncle Sam’s demands, like a good poodle (https://www.rt.com/usa/443911-pence-cold-war-china/ and https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/VP-Mike-Pence-US-Will-Increase-Tariffs-Until-China-Conforms-20181117-0005.html). This hostility and extortion were declared at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Papua New Guinea. This, while China’s President Xi Jinping was living up the summit’s name, economic cooperation (https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2018/11/17/580265/China-President-Xi-Jinping-US-vice-president-Mike-Pence-APEC-summit-trade-policy–Belt-and-Road-Initiative-BRI). The US should be disinvited to future APEC summits, as it only goes there to divide and conquer, not build bridges and mutually beneficial cooperation, like the other 20 participants. 

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]o add desperate fuel to the imperial fires, the US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo gave a policy speech in Brussels, home of Yankee prostitutes NATO and EU. Give Trump and his administration credit: they openly tell all the world what used to be conducted behind diplomatic doors, including extortion. Pompeo said that the entire Planet must submit to Uncle Sam’s imperial order, and not side with China or Russia (https://www.rt.com/news/445731-new-pax-americana-pompeo/). 

The writing is on the wall. Since 1949, Communist-socialist China has been rising and offering the whole world a cooperative, win-win, multipolar vision of global governance, with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as its backbone (http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2018/02/13/us-sending-1000s-of-marines-to-asia-to-stop-chinas-belt-and-road-system-china-rising-radio-sinoland-180213/). The imperial-capitalist West, with Uncle Sam calling the shots, has no viable answer to Baba Beijing’s century-spanning vision, so it can only do what it does best: invasions, war, occupation, color revolutions, sanctions, boycotts, extortion, bribery, blackmail and assassinations. It has worked most of the time for the last 3,000 years, starting with the Greeks and Romans, then onto the Crusades and global colonialism, which is still ongoing.  

However, after a mere blip of 110 years of being able to rape and plunder China, starting with the Opium Wars in 1839, until Communist liberation in 1949, China has resumed its rightful place on the world’s geopolitical and economic map. Remember, until Britain ransacked and destroyed the economies of China and India in the 19th century, those two countries each had 25% of the Planet’s GDP, with the UK having 2%. English colonialism reversed those numbers in just one generation for India and two generations for China. 

It is historical normalcy that China be the biggest global economy, as it was that way for millennia, excepting imperial-colonial conquest during the 19th and 20th centuries. All the West’s anti-Chinese sanctions, tariffs, blockades and extortion may slow Baba Beijing down a tad, but in all honesty, it’s already game over and there is not a damn thing Washington, London and Paris can do to stop it from only getting back to the “new” same old same old. 

I repeat, it’s not a question of leaders, it’s all about civilizational systems of governance, going back thousands of years. 

If you find China Rising Radio Sinoland‘s work useful and appreciate its quality, please consider making a donation. Money is spent to pay for Internet costs, maintenance, the upgrade of our computer network, and development of the site.

Lizard

Screen Shot 2015-08-05 at 6.19.17 PM

Jeff can be reached at China Rising, jeff@brownlanglois.com, Facebook, Twitter and Wechat/Whatsapp: +86-13823544196.


 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.


CHINA RISING BOOKS & OUTLETS CLICK HERE

BOOKS
• China Is Communist, Dammit! Dawn of the Red Dynasty

• "China Rising, Capitalist Roads, Socialist Destinations" by Jeff J. Brown on Ganxy!function(d,s,i){var j,e=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(i)){j=d.createElement(s);j.id=i;j.async=true;j.src="https://ganxy.com/b.js";e.parentNode.insertBefore(j,e);}}(document,"script","ganxy-js-2");

• "44 Days Backpacking in China- The Middle Kingdom in the 21st Century, with the United States, Europe and the Fate of the World in Its Looking Glass" by Jeff J. Brown @ www.44days.net on Ganxy!function(d,s,i){var j,e=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(i)){j=d.createElement(s);j.id=i;j.async=true;j.src="https://ganxy.com/b.js";e.parentNode.insertBefore(j,e);}}(document,"script","ganxy-js-2");

RADIO
Sound Cloud: https://soundcloud.com/44-days
Stitcher Radio: http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/44-days-publishing-jeff-j-brown/radio-sinoland?refid=stpr
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/cn/podcast/44-days-radio-sinoland/id1018764065?l=en
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS4h04KASXUQdMLQObRSCNA

SOCIAL MEDIA

Digg: http://digg.com/u/00bdf33170ad4160b4b1fdf2bb86d846/deeper
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/44DaysPublishing
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/113187076@N05/
Google+: https://plus.google.com/110361195277784155542
Linkedin: https://cn.linkedin.com/in/jeff-j-brown-0517477
Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/jeffjb/
Sinaweibo (for Jeff’s ongoing photos and comments on daily life in China, in both English and Chinese): http://weibo.com/u/5859194018
Stumbleupon: http://www.stumbleupon.com/stumbler/jjbzaibeijing
Tumblr: http://jjbzaibeijing.tumblr.com/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/44_Days
Website: http://www.chinarising.puntopress.com
Wechat group: search the phone number +8618618144837, friend request and ask Jeff to join the China Rising Radio Sinoland Wechat group. He will add you as a member, so you can join in the ongoing discussion.


[premium_newsticker id=”218306″]

The Russian Peace Threat examines Russophobia, American Exceptionalism and other urgent topics




Inequality in China: Population Counts and Spatial Price Differences

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. BREAKING THE EMPIRE'S DISINFORMATION MACHINE IS UP TO YOU.

China's modern cities have sprung up in less than a generation, announcing the arrival of a far more rational socioeconomic system.


Written by John Gibson
First posted on September 13, 2018

[dropcap]A[/dropcap] common perception is that economic inequality in China has risen during the reform era that began in 1978. This claim is made in studies that focus on individual income shares, such as in the World Inequality Report and is also seen in studies that focus on the trends in various types of inequality, such as inter-household inequality, urban-rural inequality and regional inequality. There has also been growing attention within China’s news media on issues of inequality, particularly in the last five years as more focus has been applied to apparent disparities in development between regions.

"...regional inequality in China is found to have declined at an average trend rate of 1.1 percent per year from 1978 to 2016."

There are at least two problems with these claims. First, studies of inequality in China are hampered by incomplete evidence on price differences across space. At the beginning of the reform period, major items that the population relied on, such as housing, health care, schooling, and even food, were not provided through the market. Therefore, price differences across space were much more muted than they were at the same time in market-based economies, and certainly were much more muted than they now are in China.

A widely found pattern within and between countries is that the items that are hard to trade internationally or inter-regionally (such as housing, and most services), cost more in areas with higher nominal incomes. In other words, the cost-of-living is higher in areas that are nominally richer, as anyone living in London rather than in Nottingham can affirm. Consequently, welfare indicators that adjust for cost-of-living differences between areas, as is done by indicators such as real income or real gross domestic product, will tend to show less inequality than is seen with indicators that are valued in nominal terms. The existing evidence from China is that even if just the cost-of-living differences coming from housing costs are ignored, the level of inequality is overstated by up to 35%.

For example, in all urban areas apart from Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen, nominal values for incomes or for gross domestic product need to be multiplied by at least 40% to put them on a comparable basis to Beijing. The reason is that the cost-of-living in Beijing is so much higher, and it is notable that this comparison only accounts for differences in housing prices. These price differences are primarily due to urban land prices and are not due to housing quality differences across China’s cities. If account is taken of the full range of goods and services whose price differ across areas, the downward adjustment in inequality would be even greater.

While this effect is present in all countries, it especially matters in China. The big differences in the cost-of-living within China are likely to have grown over time, as markets for private urban housing replaced the previous state provision of housing. Thus, it is not only the level of inequality, but also the trend in inequality, that is affected by ignoring cost-of-living differences. There is also a fundamental difference between urban and rural China, because the right to use rural residential land is available to all village collective members, who then are responsible for self-funding, self-building and self-renovating their dwellings. In contrast, urban housing has been market-oriented since reforms in 1998 and so urban residents face much higher costs of housing. It is therefore difficult to interpret claims of rising urban-rural income gaps, unless account is taken of the major differences in the cost-of-living in each sector.

The second problem that undermines the claims of rising inequality in China especially matters to regional and urban-rural inequality. In assessing how a nation’s income is divided amongst the various parts, it is important to know how many people live where. Until recently in China, the most widely-used data counted where people were registered to live (a de jure criteria) rather than where they actually lived. The gap between the two population measures grew as internal migrant numbers rose from just a few million in 1978 to almost 300 million by 2018. This massive growth in migration created apparent gaps in income between the origin areas and the destination areas that are much smaller once the appropriate local resident population is used in the comparisons.

In particular, China’s coastal provinces have millions more residents than their registered population and the reverse holds for migrant-sending inland provinces. Under the de jure counting approach used until recently, measures of inequality rose as each person moved from China’s interior to the coast because the migrant contributed to income in the coastal destination but was still counted as living in the origin, interior, area. Once this counting error is corrected, regional inequality in China is found to have declined at an average trend rate of 1.1 percent per year from 1978 to 2016. In fact, in the entire reform period, the only sustained episode of rising regional inequality was for just three years, in the early 1990s, and for most of the rest of the period different areas of China have been more equal.  


About the Author
John Gibson is professor of economics at the University of Waikato. His teaching and research interests are in microeconomics and in the micro econometric aspects of development, labour and the international economy.


[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.





Parting shot—a word from the editors

The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” -- acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump -- a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report 




China: A New Philosophy of Economics

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.


The poisoned fruit of capitalism, grounded at its core in near universal selfishness, permeates public and private policy in the West, a posture deeply embedded in US imperialism. Constant strife, distrust among nations, myopic planning, unquestioned and utter exploitation of the weak and the vulnerable, and war tend to normalise under this immoral regime, to the detriment of the human family and the planet they control. Peter Koenig shows in this important essay that there's a much different and enlightened approach, and China has become its vanguard.—PG


Impressive engineering accomplishments are marking the resurgence of China as a prominent civilization. The Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macau Bridge (HZMB), officially the Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macao Bridge, is a 55-kilometre (34 mi) bridge–tunnel system consisting of a series of three cable-stayed bridges, an undersea tunnel, and four artificial islands. It is both the longest sea crossing and the longest fixed link on earth. The HZMB spans the Lingding and Jiuzhou channels, connecting Hong Kong, Macau, and Zhuhai—three major cities on the Pearl River Delta. (Wikipedia)


China’s economic philosophy is a far cry from that of the west.

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he west consistently seeks to undermine the interests of their partners, be it for trade or political agreements; be it partners from the west, their smaller and weaker brothers; or from the east; or from the south – there is always an element of exploitation, of “one-upmanship”, of outdoing a partner, of domination. Equality and fairness are unknown by the west.

Or, when the concept was once known, at least by some countries and some people, it has been erased by indoctrinated neoliberal thinking – egocentricity, “me first”, and the sheer, all-permeating doctrine of “maximizing profits”; short-term thinking, instant gratification – or more extreme, making a killing today for a gamble or deal that takes place tomorrow. Futures trading – the epitome of manipulating economic values. Only in the capitalist world.

This has become a key feature of western commerce and trading. It’s manipulation and exploitation over ethics; it’s Profits Über Alles! – Doesn’t it sound like fascism? – Well it is. And if the partner doesn’t fall for the ruse, coercion becomes the name of the game – and if that doesn’t work the western military move in with bombs and tanks, seeking regime change – destroying the very country the west wants to dominate. That’s western brutal economics – full hegemony. No sharing.

China’s approach is quite different. It’s one of sharing, of participating, of mutual benefits. China invests trillions of dollars equivalent in developing countries – Asia, especially India and now also Pakistan, Africa, South America, largely for infrastructure projects, as well as mining of natural resources. Unlike the gains from western investments, the benefits of China’s investments are shared. China’s investment and mining concessions are not coerced, but fairly negotiated. China’s investment relationship with a partner country remains peaceful and is not ‘invasive’ and abusive, as are most of those of the west – which uses threats and guns to get what they want.


A new high-speed inter-city train that connects Shanghai and Hangzhou in Shanghai, China in 45 minutes, cutting the trip's prior duration by 2/3. The rail service was inaugurated in 2010. While China's infrastucture makes rapid advances in all areas, the West is witnessing growint stagnation and in some nations something approaching paralysis. The US infrastructure, once the envy of the world, is now amomg the most neglected.

[dropcap]O[/dropcap]f course, the west complains about Chinese investments, lying how abusive they are, when in reality the west is upset about Chinese competition in Africa and South America – Continents that are still considered part of the western domain, as they were colonized for about a thousand years by western powers and empires – and as of today, African and Latin-American countries are neo-colonized, no longer (for now) with brute military force, but with even more ferocious financial strangulation, through sanctions, boycotts and embargos; all highly illegal by any international standards. But there aren’t any international laws that are upheld. International courts and judges are coerced to obey Washington’s dictates, or else… literally “or else”; and these are serious threats.

Take the case of West and Central Africa, former French colonies. The French West African zone includes eight countries: Benin, Burkina Faso, Guinea Bissau, Ivory Coast, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Togo; and the French Central African area comprises six countries – Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea and Gabon. All 14 countries have a common currency, the CFA franc (CFA = Communauté financière africaine – African Financial Community). 

The west consistently seeks to undermine the interests of their partners, be it for trade or political agreements; be it partners from the west, their smaller and weaker brothers; or from the east; or from the south – there is always an element of exploitation, of “one-upmanship”, of outdoing a partner, of domination. Equality and fairness are unknown by the west.
They are two separate currencies, though always at parity and therefore interchangeable. The Western and Central African monetary union have separate central banks, the Banque Centrale des États de l’Afrique de l’Ouest, BCEAO, headquartered in Dakar, Senegal; and the Banque des États de l’Afrique Centrale, BEAC, in Yaoundé, Cameroun. Both currencies are guaranteed by the French treasury. This means in fact, that the economy of these 14 countries not only depends on France, but setting the value of the currency (at present one € = 655 CFA francs) is entirely the prerogative of the Banque de France (French Central Bank). This ultra-complicated setup between the two groups of former and new French colonies is not only a matter of French accounting, but foremost a means to confuse and distract the mostly innocent observer from a flagrant abusive reality.


Map eloquently illustrates how the Europeans literally took over the whole African continent, distributing according to relative power and precedence their zones of influence.


With the French control over the West- and Central African currencies, the foreign trading capacity of these countries is reduced to what France will allow. France has a de facto monopoly on these countries’ production. Should France stop buying their “former-new” colonies goods, the countries go broke, as they have been unable to develop alternative markets under the French yoke. Thus, they are always at the mercy of France, the IMF, World Bank and the African Development Bank. – From labor slaves up to the early 1960s, they have become debt slaves of the neoliberal age.

In addition, to back this French Treasury guarantee, 85% of the countries’ foreign exchange reserves are blocked by the French Central Bank and may only be used by the respective countries against specific permission – and – as a loan. – Imagine! – The “former” French colonies have to borrow their own money from the French Central Bank. Similar debt enslaving is going on in former British and Portuguese colonies, though, none of them is as abjectly abusive as are the French.

Big wonder that Chinese investors are highly welcome in Africa. And knowing western manipulating and deranged mindsets, no wonder that China is demonized by the west as exploiting Africa to the bones, when exactly the contrary is the case. But the almighty western lie-propaganda media has the brainwashed western populace believing China is stealing African natural resources. Chinese fairness is indeed tough competition against the usual western trickery and deceit.


In Africa, China is not only focusing on buying and trading natural resources, but on training and using local African brainpower to convert Africa from a western slave into an equal partner. For example, to boost African autonomy, China is using an approach Ghadaffi intended to apply – entering the wireless phone system, conquering some of the market with efficient batteries, and providing cheaper and more efficient services than the west, hence directly competing with the western exploited African telephone market. Chinese phones also come with their own browsers, so that the internet may eventually be accessed in the remotest places of Africa, providing a top tool for education. Challenging the EU and US dominated multi-billion-dollar market, is just one of the reasons Ghadaffi was miserably murdered by French-led NATO forces. Of course, China’s presence is a bit more difficult to kick than was Ghadaffi’s.

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]his is just one more signal that China is in Africa – and Asia and Latin America – not just for the legendary American Quick Buck, but for genuine investments in long-term economic development which involves developing transportation networks, efficient and independent financial systems which may escape the western SWIFT and FED / Wall Street banking system through which US sanctions are imposed. This may involve the creation of government controlled blockchain currencies – see also Venezuela’s hydrocarbon-backed Petro – and linking African currencies to the Yuan and the eastern SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) monetary system – freeing Africa from the dollar hegemony. With the help of China and Russia, Africa may, in fact, become the forerunner of crypto-currencies – and, in the case of west-and central Africa, the 14 countries would be able to gain financial autonomy, and to the chagrin of the French Central Bank, manage their own financial resources, breaking loose from under the little-talked about French yoke. It is quite conceivable that with Chinese development assistance Africa will become an important trading partner for the east, leaving western exploiting and abusing business and banking magnates behind in the dust.

The Overseas Private Investment Cooperation (OPIC), a US private lending as well as investment guarantee agency – is upset about US investors losing out to Chinese and wants US corporations to compete more aggressively – which is precisely what Africa rejects, America’s violent bombing approach to impose her trade and concession rules with the coercing help of the IMF and the World Bank. Africa is seeking – finally – sovereignty, deciding over her own financial and political destiny. This includes choosing investors and trading partners of their liking.

Many African and South American countries prefer China’s yuan-investments, rather than Washington’s US-dollar investments. It's ‘softer’ money coming from the Chinese. For China it’s also a way of diverting the world from the US-dollar, providing incentives for countries to divest their dollar reserves into yuan reserves. That is already happening at accelerating speed.

China’s outlook at home and abroad is nothing less than spectacular. On the home front, they are building cutting-edge technology transport infrastructure, such as high-speed railways, for example, connecting Shanghai and Hangzhou, cutting travel time from one and a half hour in half. China’s high-speed bullet train connects for the first time Hong Kong with the mainland, cutting travel time Hong Kong to Beijing from 24 hours to 9 hours.


China's modern cities have sprung up in less than a generation, announcing the arrival of a far more rational socioeconomic system.

[dropcap]I[/dropcap]n October 2018, after nine years construction, President Xi Jinping opened the world’s longest sea crossing bridge, linking Hong Kong to Macau and the mainland Chinese city of Zhuhai. The bridge is 55 km long – about 20 times the length of San Francisco’s Golden Gate bridge. In urban development, existing and new multi-million people cities are planned, expanded and stamped out of the ground in less than a generation.

China has just built a US$ 2.1 billion AI (Artificial Intelligence) industrial park, and is not sleeping either on the environmental protection and development front, investing billions in research and development of alternative clean energies, especially solar power and its storage potential, next generation beyond lithium batteries, ranging from lithium solid state to electrolyte materials to graphene batteries and eventually to copper foam substrate. And that’s not the end of the line. Each battery technology offers increased capacity, safety and charging and discharging speed.

On the domestic and international front, the Belt and Road (B and R) Initiative – the New Silk Road – is China’s President Xi’s phenomenal geo-economic initiative to connect the world from China with several transport routes and develop in a first step Western China, Eastern Russia, Central Asia and Eastern Europe – all the way to the frontiers of western Europe. This massive economic development program includes industrial parks, trade and cultural interchanges, research and development through existing universities and new science and learning centers. Maritime routes are also foreseen entering Africa through Kenya and Southern Europe and the Middle East via the Greek port of Piraeus and Iran – a southern route is also planned to enter the southern cone of Latin America.


China's president Xi Jinping: A formidable statesman worthy of the challenges confronting his nation and the world.

The endeavor is so huge, it has recently been inscribed into the Chinese Constitution. It will mobilize in the coming decades and possibly century trillions of yuan and dollar-equivalent of investments, mostly from China, Russia, the other SCO countries, as well as European partners  – and foremost the Beijing-based AIIB (Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank) which has already 70 member countries, among them Australia, Canada, Western European nations and close to 20 prospective new countries; but not the United States of America.

This giant project, is of course, not without challenges. While the need for proof of “credit worthiness” by being tied to the IMF and World Bank of the eighties and nineties has since long faded into oblivion, China is still bound to the IMF and WB. – Why? – In my opinion it proves two things, The People’s Bank of China – the Chinese Central Bank – is still controlled by the FED and BIS (Bank for International Settlement, alias, central bank of all central banks), and a strong Fifth Column that doesn’t yield an inch of their power. The Chinese leadership could implement the necessary changes towards full financial sovereignty – but, why is that not happening? – Western threats and their secret services have become ever more sophisticated abduction and “neutralizing” machines over the past 70 years.

The next question is what’s the Chinese lending limit to countries who have already or will subscribe to the Belt and Road Initiative to help them repay western debt and integrate into the new eastern economic model and monetary system? The question is relevant, because China’s money supply is based on China’s economic output; unlike western currencies which are purely fiat money (hot air).

Also, how will ownership of foreign assets, i.e. infrastructure funded and perhaps built, dealt with? – Will they become Chinese property, increasing China’s capital base and flow of money? – Or would they be negotiated as long-term concessions, after which a country may repay to acquire sovereign ownership, or transfer part or all of the assets to China as a shareholder. These are relevant considerations, especially with regard to the huge B&R investments foreseen in the coming years. These decisions should be made autonomously by Chinese leadership, totally outside the influence of western monetary czars, like IMF and WB.

[dropcap]A[/dropcap]nother issue which is steadily and increasingly cropping up in the west, of course to demonize China and discourage “western civilized” (sic) countries to associate themselves with socialist China – is China’s concept of “Social Credits”. It is largely based on what the west calls a dictatorial, freedom-robbing surveillance state – with cameras and face-recognition everywhere. Of course, totally ignoring the western own Orwellian Big Brother Surveillance and lie apparatus which calls itself democracy – and in fact is a democracy for the elite of the plutocrats, gradually and by heavy propaganda brainwashing and converting what’s left of ‘democracy’ into outright fascism – we, in the west, are almost there. And this, to the detriment of the “Silent Lambs” – as per Rainer Mausfeld’s latest book, in German, “Why are Lambs Silent” (German Westend-Verlag). Yes, that’s what we have become: “Silent Lambs”.

It is too easy to demonize China for attempting to create a more harmonious, cohesive and peaceful society. Granted, this surveillance in China as in the west, demolishes to a large extent individualism, individual thinking, thereby limiting human creativeness and freedom. This is a topic which the Chinese socialist government, independent of western critique, may have to address soon to keep precisely one of the key principles of Chinese society alive – ‘social cohesiveness’ and a sense of equality and freedom.

What is the “Social Credit” system? – It is a digital footprint of everything the Chinese do, as private citizens, as corporate managers in production as well as banking, workers, food sellers, in order to basically create an ambiance of full transparency (that’s the goal – far from having been reached), so as to establish citizens’ and corporations’ “creditworthiness”, in financial terms, but also assessing crime elements, political inclinations, radicalism, to prevent potential terror acts (interestingly, in the case of most western terror acts, officials say the ‘terrorists’ were known to the police – which simply leaves you to conclude that they acted in connivance with the forces of order); and to enhance food safety in restaurants and by other food sellers.


In other words, the aim is to establish corporate and individual “score cards” which will work as a rewards and punishment system, a “carrot and stick” approach. Depending on the crime or deviation from the rule, you may be reprimanded and get ‘debits’ – which you may wipe out by changing your behavior. Living under the spell of debits may limit, for example, your access to comfortable or speedy travel, better and speedier trains, air tickets, certain cultural events and more.

Yes, the idea of creating a stable domestic society has its drawbacks – surveillance – demolition of much of individualism, creativity, by implanting conformity. The government’s axiom is “we want a society where people don’t desire to break the rules, but the earliest stage is that they are afraid to break the rules.”

In the end, the question is, will the “Social Credits” approach to societal living, meaning a total surveillance state with every data recorded into a network of total control, be beneficial or detrimental for the Chinese goal to push ahead with her extraordinary and mostly egalitarian economic development approach, transport and industrial infrastructure, scientific research and cultural exchange – called Belt and Road, alias the New Silk Road? – Only the future will tell; but the Chinese are not alone. They have solid partners in the SCO – and long-term economic development endeavors never work in linear values, but with the unknown of dynamics to which humans are uniquely adapted to adjust.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.



About the Author
 Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a former World Bank staff and worked extensively around the world in the fields of environment and water resources. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for Global Research, ICH, RT, Sputnik, PressTV, The 4th Media (China), TeleSUR, The Vineyard of The Saker Blog, and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance


[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

 Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.



The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” -- acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump -- a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report 

 




China-Africa, A New Accord

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. BREAKING THE EMPIRE'S DISINFORMATION MACHINE IS UP TO YOU.


[dropcap]F[/dropcap]or 500 years, without exception, foreign agency in the land of Africa has been exclusively self serving and brutally exploitative. Thus it is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine the possibility of any other kind of relationship between outsiders and Africans. But today, at such a crucial time of global transformation, for many reasons including the future for entire populations and the world, it is vitally important to not only imagine, but to observe and support, based on concrete facts, the building of exactly a different kind of relationship.



OVERVIEW

The triennial Forum on China–Africa Cooperation series of meetings between Chinese and African heads of state, who together decide the course of engagement and plan specific projects, began In the year 2000, marking a new historical chapter for both continents. Let us take a brief look at the kinds of projects which have taken place:

”From a total of 1673 projects implemented by Chinese companies in African countries, 757 were in manufacturing and related sectors, 215 in social sectors, 192 in healthcare, 161 in education, 115 in transport and infrastructure, 106 in agricultural sector, 83 in energy, and only 44 in mining.” (As of 2015, africa-me.com)


“There are an estimated 800 Chinese corporations doing business in Africa, most of which are private companies investing in the infrastructure, energy and banking sectors. Unconditional and low-rate credit lines (rates at 1.5% over 15 years to 20 years) have taken the place of the more restricted and conditional Western loans. Since 2000, more than $10bn in debt owed by African nations to the People’s Republic of China has been canceled.” (wikipedia)


“Education and the transfer of technological know-how are increasingly part of China’s soft power efforts in Africa. There are more than 20 Chinese-run agricultural training centers and over 40 Chinese language schools, Confucius centers, across the continent. China’s minister of foreign affairs Wang Yi said last week his government would offer 10,000 scholarships to African officials to study in China over the next decade. China is already the top destination for African students from English-speaking countries, ahead of the United Kingdom and the United States.” (qz.com)


The 7th FOCAC took place earlier this year, attended by 53 (all but 1) African heads of state, in which a new development plan involving 60 billion in investment deals for Africa was announced. A brief breakdown is here. For an even larger comprehensive overview of Chinese projects in Africa, see this report from the Institute of Developing Economies based in Japan.


7th Forum of China Africa Cooperation, 2018


PROBLEMS

When ever there is power asymmetry and parties are operating on an uneven economic basis, the danger for injustice arises. Even though representatives from the Chinese Communist Party oversees the operation of each and every major private enterprise, and the corporations are answerable to the democratic people’s government, with so many projects undertaken on such large scale, the occurring of a myriad of conflicts and problems is unavoidable. From unfair deals to corrupt business practices, from labor issues to culture clash and racism, these issues must be acknowledged and taken seriously, and we should prioritise the perspective of structurally disadvantaged parties.

But when confronting these complications, mistakes, and crimes, it is important to hold a balanced perspective, and keep a few things in mind: The mistakes and abuses of individual companies do not reflect state policy. Disputes and complications on a local level should be evaluated on a case by case basis, and in proportional relation to the scale and scope of larger developmental plans. Unfair and bad practices must not be swept under rugs, but they should not be used to judge the sum total of Chinese activity.

From all evidence, the modus operandi of the People’s Republic is on the whole not at all purely extractive and self-serving, but characterised by an ethic of mutual benefit, and crucially, a dedication to the assistance of African independent economic development. The Chinese built or funded roads and railways do not only carry materials out, such as those built by the British, but facilitate trade between African regions (for example, the Kenyan railway).

The Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) line constructed by the China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC) and financed by Chinese government in Kenya’s coastal city of Mombasa, May 30, 2017. REUTERS/Stringer TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY — RTX389W3


Geopolitics

US global power is in decline, and US politicians have explicitly named China as its “biggest threat”, for now and in the coming years. But there are even bigger dynamics at play: Western powers have always sought the return of their property, ever since they “lost” China to the communist revolution in 1949. Contrary to popular rumor, the ideological “Cold-War” waged by the bourgeois empires against socialism never ended after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Besides the continuing of classic destabilisation campaigns against the PRC, exactly the same as those we have seen in Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Ukraine, with funding Islamic extremism in Xinjiang and “pro-democracy” elements in both HongKong and mainland, the US global media empire is stepping up Anti-China and Sino-phobic propaganda. In addition to the constant and fraudulent fear-mongering claims of “totalitarianism” and blatant lies without any evidence such as “1 million Uyghurs detained”, the internet is over run with articles about Chinese “colonialism” and “imperialism” in Africa, talking of “debt traps”, “financial-domination”, despite all the evidence to the contrary.


Cold War era “Yellow Peril” propaganda poster depicting evil East Asians


Propaganda vs. Reality

To assess use of the words “colonialism” and “imperialism” to describe China in Africa, like some have been doing, we must first be clear on what these terms mean.

Colonialism involves the drawing of artificial borders, imposition of foreign laws, forced religious conversions, the banning of indigenous languages, enslavement of local populations, violently suppressing uprisings, and crucially, the establishment of colonies. China has done exactly none of this.

Imperialism suppresses the independent economic development of host countries. It creates and sustains artificial poverty through the removal of democratically elected leaders and the installation of puppet dictators. It destabilises the host country with the funding of extremist groups, and masterminding of wars, in order to keep prices low for foreign markets, perpetuating chaos and discord for economic exploitation. It maintains political domination, focuses on extractionary industries, and invests only in sectors with high rates of profit.

The People’s Republic is doing precisely the opposite: assisting in African development without meddling in politics under the guise of ”political restructuring”; and without militarist intimidation masked as ”security aid”. The mutually beneficial relationships are empirically evidenced, in which resources are traded for development in needed areas. Chinese loans have “comparatively low interest rates and long repayment periods” (Deborah Bräutigam, Washington Post), and sometimes debts are entirely forgiven. Aiding in the sovereign economic advancement of host countries contradicts and undermines the very basis of imperialism; and this is only a continuation of Chinese-African relations since the revolutionary days.


Maoist era poster depicting Africa — China friendship


In the Congo, most resource rich place on Earth, thus most cursed under capitalism, there were 5.4 million official casualties of war between 1998 and 2008, in what the UN has called “the worst humanitarian disaster since WW2”. This continuing series of brutal wars, often conducted with child soldiers, are over the control of mines to supply Western corporations with crucial minerals. Chaos and conflict keeps prices low, and these conditions were created through the installation of West-friendly corrupt dictators, after US and French forces assassinated the democratically elected post-independence socialist leader Patrice Lumumba. And these atrocities are still happening as you read these words.

Let us be honest: If China had been in a position to engage with the Congo since 1961 instead of the US and allies, none of the severe and colossal tragedies touched on above would have unfolded, and reality in this most wonderful place with the most beautiful people and amazing culture would be exponentially better today.

To call Chinese involvement in Africa today “colonialism” or ”imperialism” is not only to cheapen the word to the point of total meaninglessness, but an insult to the millions of victims of actual imperialism.



A New Accord

The status quo for Africa in the past 70 years of post-colonial Western imperialism has been horrific, as the US and Europe keep bleeding the continent dry for their own enrichment. The only thing that can break this cycle of exploitation is independent development, in which the PRC is playing an important role.

Even with overwhelming anti-Chinese bias in West-dominated global media, many studies from nonpartisan groups reflect positive attitudes, such as this one from the pan-African research network Afrobarometer:

“Findings from… 2014/2015 surveys in 36 African countries… suggest that the public holds generally favourable views of economic and assistance activities by China. …the note found that public perceptions not only confirm China’s important economic and political role in Africa but also generally portray its influence as beneficial.”

While we must stay vigilant and hold Chinese companies to a high standard, lets not fall prey to capitalist propaganda, and keep the bigger picture of China-Africa comradery in mind. The long term plan China is in the early stages of implementing involves building alliances based on strength with other formerly colonised nations, through win-win relationships and a policy of non-interference, to displace capitalist hegemony, counter imperialism and militarism, and remove the obstacles to global socialisation, and eventually, communisation.

 


About the Author

[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.





Parting shot—a word from the editors

The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” -- acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump -- a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report 




WORLD AFFAIRS: AS THE WEST STUMBLES, CHINA AND EURASIA LEAD—A REPLY

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. BREAKING THE EMPIRE'S DISINFORMATION MACHINE IS UP TO YOU.

 

WORLD AFFAIRS: AS THE WEST STUMBLES, CHINA AND EURASIA LEAD

[dropcap]A[/dropcap]s the commentary below suggests, the Western world is indeed facing a grim, no-win dilemma. Not so the non-West, especially China.

The power and influence of the West’s long-dominant Empire is visibly waning, along with its predatory neoliberal global order. What has risen to challenge it on its home ground is not socialism or its humane impulses to care for the 99%, and not the 1%. The heyday of that effort has come and gone.

The new, emerging challenger to the status quo is a right-wing “nationalism” that’s crude, ugly, vindictive. Anti-foreigner, anti-women, anti-everything-that’s-not-us, it is fueled by the frustrated aspirations of have-nots – the angry losers under the neoliberal order. They are the karmic payback for the depredations of the Empire’s elites.


A police officer walks past a new high-speed inter-city train that connects Shanghai and Hangzhou in Shanghai, China on Tuesday, Oct. 26, 2010. The Shanghai-Hangzhou high-speed railway started operating today, shortening the travel time from 1.5 hours to 45 minutes. Photographer: Qilai Shen/Bloomberg


The proof is the stunning triumphs of the xenophobic right over the past couple of years – Brexit, and electoral victories from the US, Italy and Austria to Hungary, Poland and now, Brazil. Even Angela Merkel, that durable icon of neoliberalism, is fading into the sunset. Today’s “America First” has distinct echoes of history’s “Deutschland über alles.”

If the West is in a deep funk, it’s an entirely different story elsewhere. Especially in Asia, hope and optimism prevail. Increasingly pulled into the orbit of its dynamic epicenter, China, the region leads the world in economic growth. It has also matched or surpassed the West in many other areas of human endeavor and achievement.

Above all, Asia has accomplished this over nearly seven decades without the toxic clash of ideologies that has so devastated the West (and its imperial territories) in modern times. In essence, Asians in the post WW2 era haven’t given a hoot about “isms” – capitalism, socialism, fascism, democratic liberalism, etc.


Excited young people go shopping on the street of Hong Kong


China's modern cities have sprung up in less than a generation, announcing the arrival of a far more rational socioeconomic system.


Essentially pragmatists, Asians care about what works, what delivers results – not sweeping, romantic ideals whose aims almost always exceed real-life capabilities to deliver. The avatar of this ethos was, of course, Deng Xiaoping, Chief Architect of Reform in China. It was he who resurrected the world’s largest nation from death by ultra-left communism and put it on its continuing march to renewed greatness.

In coining his most famous policy guideline, Deng was only expressing something already in the Chinese, and Asian, DNA: It doesn’t matter if it’s a socialist/market-driven/democratic cat; it’s a good cat if it catches the mice. Though Deng was a committed Marxist who sought to care for the 99% of Chinese and make the nation strong & prosperous, he was also slyly subversive of communist dogma that ran against China’s realities or interests. He junked those parts and replaced them with inspirations from China’s own traditions, custom-tailored to concrete Chinese conditions. They worked like a dream. That’s the meaning of his Socialism With Chinese Characteristics. And therein lies the man’s greatness.

Down-to-earth pragmatism aside, the great force for progress in modern Asia has been nationalism. In the West, of course, the N-word has a status comparable to that of the F-word. And that’s entirely understandable … going by the Western experience. It was the clash of nationalisms that caused countless wars and deaths in Europe, culminating in the two cataclysms that are called “world wars,” but were essentially Western civil wars -- among European nationalisms. To Westerners, nationalism is one ugly beast.

Not so in Asia -- or in much of the non-Western world. Colonized or semi-colonized by Western imperialists, its peoples naturally turned to nationalism in the attempt to recover their own identities, which were erased or semi-erased under European rule. People who don’t know who or what they are, have no direction or future. Such rediscovery, whose animus was nationalism, was the essential first step in any struggle for national liberation and political independence.

So it is no accident that ALL the greatest heroes of Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America are nationalists: Rizal, Aung San, Nehru, Gandhi, Sun Yat-sen, Mao, Sukarno, Lee Kuan Yew, Nasser, Nkruma, Lumumba, Castro, Bolivar. The Asian ones, at least, were less concerned about which ideology they adopted to drive their anti-colonialist causes -- and much more about whether it could “catch the mice” of national liberation and independence. Marxism proved the effective vehicle in some cases, capitalism (as well as mixed bags of various “isms”) in others.

The legacy and spirit of these giants still provide the fuel for Asia's dynamism and progress today. English-language readers don't hear much about it because the MSM neither understand nor are much interested in reporting the central role of nationalism in Asia. Naturally, Asia’s nationalisms sometimes compete with one another, and the challenge is to manage them so they don’t spiral into war. In the post-WW2 period, Asian nations have been largely successful, especially in the absence of external intervention.

As for China, it is engaged in something epochal. Domestically, it is evolving a paradigm that's neither capitalism nor socialism, which are both Western constructs from the era when the West dominated the world. The “Chinese model” will be a unique mixture of elements from socialism and capitalism, with heavy infusions from China's own Confucianist, Buddhist and Daoist heritage.

Internationally, the Beijing-inspired Belt & Road Initiative is set to link the entire EurAsian landmass and transform it into the biggest development project in the history of the world. Africa will be a part of it too. Significantly, it will be a living illustration of how nations with different cultures & values can work together for mutual benefit. It will be mankind's best hope for a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable future in the 21st century.

As the West recedes and the Rest rise on the world stage, those who would evaluate international affairs solely from Western perspectives, and with Western benchmarks, will increasingly lose the plot. In the 21st century, the world needs multi-national, multi-cultural perspectives more than ever.


A fraternal comment by Patrice Greanville

[dropcap]I[/dropcap] offer the following comments to Thomas Hon Wing Polin in the spirit of comradely critique, as I very much appreciate his style of political analysis and the good will of his ideas.

Although I agree with much of what the author says in his essay above, a couple of things struck me as a bit off-kilter and deserving of special comment. While correctly castigating the rise of xenophobic, ugly nationalisms across the West, Thomas Hon Wing Polin—whose broad philosophical roots I believe encompass not just Marxian dialectics but Buddhism— credits what I suppose an enlightned form of nationalism with the emergence of Asia as a new model for wise human governance and progress. He declares (bold mine):

"Especially in Asia, hope and optimism prevail. Increasingly pulled into the orbit of its dynamic epicenter, China, the region leads the world in economic growth. It has also matched or surpassed the West in many other areas of human endeavor and achievement.

Above all, Asia has accomplished this over nearly seven decades without the toxic clash of ideologies that has so devastated the West (and its imperial territories) in modern times. In essence, Asians in the post WW2 era haven’t given a hoot about “isms” – capitalism, socialism, fascism, democratic liberalism, etc." (end quote)


This is an extraordinary assertion. For starters, the author conflates widely disparate cultures and nations, with a profound diversity of historical and economic development, into a smooth rubric, "Asia", insinuating that it has been nationalism that performed the miracle of newly-minted prosperity in an atmosphere of harmony.  Surely, while, say, Koreans, Thais, Japanese, Taiwanese, and the people of Singapore are all Asian indeed, they also present deep fissures in terms of their recent histories toward capitalism, fascism, communism, American imperialism, and not least—each other.  Thus, "nationalist" Koreans may despise "nationalist" Japanese, and the same applies to "nationalists" in Mainland China and Taiwan.  If so, these longstanding nationalist antipathies represent a brake on the success achieved so far, and not the other way around.

Now, before delving further into this topic, it's good to remember that while an embryonic nationalism already existed under mercantile feudalism, it took the capitalist revolutions of the 17th and late 18th centuries to bring this idealist, very bourgeois ideology to the fore. The point here is that being "idealist" it does not possess its own mainsprings for action, remaining in almost all cases a mask for hidden twists and turns in the class struggle. More on this below.

Thus, far from being indifferent to whether they were fascistoid, capitalist, communist or monarchic, the record shows that all of these nations—except for China—were and remain above all subject to the rules of hegemonic US imperialism, dutifully operating domestically and in foreign matters under an authoritarian, highly regimented capitalism, with some, like Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea, also acting as strategic "privileged" colonies with very limited authentic sovereignty. (Likewise Singapore, which with Washington's full support also chose a Friedmanian type of sternly auhoritarian capitalism.).

The last 70 years are eloquent. Most of these less-than independent actors have obliged Washington by implementing highly hostile gestures and policies toward Beijing and its allies, the most salient cases being of course the Korean and Vietnam wars, and the encirclement and stigmatisation of China. We must ask, therefore, can simple, indigenous nationalism —unexplained by localised ruling class interests and alliances—account for this near-universal fear of and rejection of China throughout this region until fairly recent times?

In his praise of Asian nationalism, a supposedly superior strain lacking the malignancy of its Western variety, the author both highlights and downplays the fact that nationalism —when used in colonialised countries—is and has been a defensive reaction against Western colonialism/imperialism, chosen by patriots like Castro, Chavez, and Deng chiefly for reasons of expediency, as these two malignant isms have very clear and traceable roots in capitalism itself.  So, yes, nationalism has been used because it is an ideology of tribal unification and resistance quicker to communicate than class struggle, per se, but the latter has also been applied with great success in places of extreme colonial/imperial aggression, such as Vietnam, Korea and China itself.

Along the same lines, in his effort to demote class-rooted ideology as en engine of history, Thomas Hon Wing Polin appears to imply that the wars in Europe, just to take the 20th century, from the Spanish Civil War to World War 2 and beyond, were merely a clash of perverse nationalisms. This is a huge oversimplification that obfuscates more than it elucidates. In Spain in the 1930s for example, the German-Italian axis and the Soviet Union fought on opposite sides, and the war was inherently and eminently a war of ideology: conservatism vs revolutionism; backwardness vs. enlightened progressivism; the desire to preserve gross inequality in land and property vs the desire to erase it; feudalism vs. republicanism, and religiosity vs secularism, not to mention global fascism vs. communism.  How is that subsumed solely just under "nationalism" is hard to fathom. Belligerent nationalism may have been the horse, but the jockey was the distinct class interests steering it down its path of eventual destruction.

The ultimate proof that class criteria superseded raw nationalism in determining the course of nations was the ferocious clash between Nazi Germany and the USSR, as seen in the distorted but eloquent mirror of British upper class attitudes. If simple nationalist interest had been the main factor explaining friendship and hostility why were the Anglo-Americans so friendly toward Germany —a highly capable and tremendously powerful emerging power—during its period of Nazi ascendancy while persisting in their boycots and hostility toward the Soviet Union? With the war already on after 1939, Churchill is on record as endorsing a delay in assistance to the Soviets to insure that the Germans managed to destroy as much as possible of the USSR's industrial and military plant, a fact that prolonged the war and assured greater numbers of casualties not only in Russia but among allied armies. Later, with Germany defeated by 1945, the outrageous idea of launching an immediate all-out conventional and nuclear attack on the Soviet Union was seriously entertained by the political and military chiefs of the victorious Western allies. The two atomic bombs on Japan, meant to intimidate the Soviets, were in fact the tail end of this criminal and semi-deranged posture. What were the British and American ruling classes afraid of then? The nationalism of an exhausted nation? Or the spread across the world of much feared communism, a direct threat to their accustomed privileges?

Indeed Hitler's assault on the USSR was not just a conflict between German and Russian "nationalisms" —as Hon Wing Polin suggests—but a true ideological clash with many important class implications and underpinnings. Russia had no chauvinist expansionist desires, inherent in fascism—Italian, German or Japanese—except the revolutionary desire to see a world populated by fellow socialist republics. For while fascism finds a great deal of its power and allegiance (and is almost always invested) in some rabid form of militarist nationalism, communism does not emerge from such tribalistic matrix at all, and in fact is quintessentally internationalist.

In sum, I'm sure the author remembers that class still exists, and that it matters in understanding political reality, including the success or defeat of develomental projects. Indeed, it is not accidental that it is in the West, notably in the US, the citadel of global capitalism, that the push to wipe out class as a social analytical tool has been most prominent and persistent, and that nationalism is usually embraced by most ruling classes in the West, the US being in a category almost by itself with its doctrine of exceptionalism.  So why join such a project in the name of raising a new model of social advance when the study of class and ideology does not per se preclude at all the development of socialism with Chinese characteristics? Good Marxism is by definition non-dogmatic. China can be proud to have sorted out difficult aspects of internal and external politics to achieve what she has in such a relatively short period of time. In many critical aspects, China is a great and enduring example for humanity. But for that, I think her leaders, starting with Xi Jinping, would readily recognise the debt the nation owes to Marxism (yes, an ideology that transcends nationalism) and the Communist Party, and, granted, the judicious incorporation of Chinese cultural ways of thinking dating back to the birth of this unique civilisation.


A final word

In his enthusiasm, and no doubt well merited pride, Hon Wing Polin makes another noteworthy claim in his closing remarks:

"As for China, it is engaged in something epochal. Domestically, it is evolving a paradigm that's neither capitalism nor socialism, which are both Western constructs from the era when the West dominated the world. The “Chinese model” will be a unique mixture of elements from socialism and capitalism, with heavy infusions from China's own Confucianist, Buddhist and Daoist heritage..."

A few things strike me again as odd here. One, this sounds like a reiteration—albeit without malice—of what many Western academics and capitalist apologists have been saying for a very long time, since Daniel Bell and Francis Fukuyama declared the "end of ideology" and "the end of history" in the 1960s. (Fukuyama is known for his book The End of History and the Last Man (1992), which argued that the worldwide spread of liberal democracies and free market capitalism of the West and its lifestyle may signal the end point of humanity's sociocultural evolution and become the final form of human government.).

The error here, in my view, is that class dialectics, though first recognised and articulated in its Marxian form in the West, is not just a mere "Western construct", but something that obtains in all latitudes, wherever a class divided society exists. To negate that is like claiming that water boils capriciously at different degrees in Shanghai, Atlanta, Paris and New York. I am certain that Deng, were he alive, would agree. Western ideas and modes of thought are, as the author often warns in his writings, toxic, false, mean-spirited and misguided, but this is not one of those instances. The class struggle has yet to be retired.

To close, let us bear in mind that any nation threatened by a dangerous adversary will instinctively rally around its national identity, and yet, this reaction to the menace can also be energised by ideological fuel. Soviet soldiers (and Mao's armies) fought bravely against the imperialist invaders, but their struggle combined both streams of consciousness—nationalism and communism. This is because today's imperialism's underpinnings, its malignant roots, are to be found, as ever, ultimately in the core dynamics of the ruling capitalist classes, not some nationalist veneer, no matter how impessive and threatening it may look, for this is after all simply a meta narrative for much deeper determinative undercurrents.

By the way, none of the above should be read as contravening our distinguished colleague's main thesis, that the sun is indeed rising in the East.

 


About the Author
A resident of Hong Kong, and a graduate of both Harvard and Columbia University, Thomas Hon Wing Polin is a contributing columnist to Asiaweek, the South China Morning Post and other leading internet venues • Patrice Greanville, a former economist and longtime media critic is this publication's editor in chief. 

[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.





Parting shot—a word from the editors

The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” -- acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump -- a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report