Frank Li is a Chinese ex-pat that settled in America after receiving a PhD in the US. He is an electrical engineer and entrepreneur.
His take is informed from both the Chinese and American (Western) points of view and he offers a reasonably objective analysis in comparison to the largely one-sided and ill-informed one that one generally encounters in the West. His work covers the social, political and economic spectrum but this one focuses on economics.
The dramatic rise of China over the past four decades not only has rocketed China's economy to the top of the world (in terms of PPP - purchasing power parity), with no end in sight, but also is ending western dominance over the past 200 years, at least.
What does that mean to the world? Everything, from politics (End of Democracy?) to economics!
This post is about economics. It highlights two giant economists: Adam Smith behind the West’s economy and Karl Marx behind Chinese economy....econintersect
Adam Smith vs. Karl Marx
Frank Li | Chinese ex-pat living in the US
See also
Enter the dragon.
Sputnik International
China Wages Cold War Seeking to Replace US as Main Power - CIA Official
See also
Enter the dragon.
Sputnik International
China Wages Cold War Seeking to Replace US as Main Power - CIA Official
8 comments:
“Adam Smith laid the foundations of classical free market economic theory.”
True, but Adam Smith favored authentically free markets. That is, markets not owned and controlled by oligarchs, and not crippled by debt bondage and rent extraction. Adam Smith said authentically free markets are those founded on ethics and fairness.
Adam Smith especially opposed parasitic rentier oligarchs.
Neoliberals oppose free markets and ethics. Neoliberals have reversed Adam Smith, yet they claim Adam Smith as an ideological forebear.
“A successful nation requires both capitalism and socialism, balancing them optimally.”
Exactly.
“Smith said Capitalism alone does not work. Rather, some kind of government intervention (or socialism) is necessary. The challenge is to balance between the two, not one without the other.”
Exactly. All systems in the universe, from the spinning of electrons to the orbit of galaxies, self-destruct if they lack balance and regulation. It is the same with human physiology, and with national economies. The USSR collapsed because it lost the balance. The USA will collapse for the same reason.
“Marx’s call for the need of violent proletarian revolutions is wrong. A society can peacefully evolve into a mixture of capitalism and socialism, without a bloody revolution, like China did in recent decades.”
Violent proletarian revolutions are a temporary solution at best, since they do not really change average people’s beliefs, assumptions, and mental habits. What we need is a change in the mass mind. This will unleash unstoppable power. Violence is unnecessary and counter-productive.
Everything in this universe operates by agreement and belief. Change these, and we change the universe.
“China is trying to replace the United States as a global dominant power and is pursuing a cold war against Washington, CIA Deputy Assistant Director Michael Collins said at the Aspen Security Forum.”
No.
China is simply doing what’s best for China, while the U.S. Empire self-destructs from corruption, inequality, debt bondage, and rentier parasitism.
It’s like there are two people in a room. One person takes care of his health. The other person is committing suicide, while whimpering that, “He’s attacking me!”
Nice analogy. Very à propos.
Very good article, Tom. Yes, there should be a balance. What we have here is a rip off culture.
Li, educated in China under Marxist, understand dialectics. He comes with an interesting synthesis of the Chinese and Western systems that combines the strengths of both and avoids the weaknesses of each. His posts are worth reading.
There's a collection of his postshere.
Tom here is another one from Li that is revealing:
http://econintersect.com/pages/contributors/contributor.php?post=201704252348
“What, then, is the key difference between religion and philosophy? It is faith vs. reasoning - Which one is better? You reason and decide!”
I think this is correct.... there is scripture to support this....
Superficially correct. Much more to it than that though. Like most matters of significance, it is nuanced.
Both the traditionalism of the shapes Chinese culture is broadly Confucian, and the traditionalism that shapes Western culture is broadly Christian.
Mao tried to change that and failed. Xi recognizes that is traditionalism in Chinese by rehabilitating Confucius.
But this is painting with a single color and using a very broad stroke.
BTW, same with his Adam Smith-Karl Marx analysis.
Post a Comment