In the Chinese model, governance is based on the traditional Mandarin system that resembles corporate governance in the West because it has shown itself to be highly efficient and effective model in accomplishing objectives.
TINA is not the only way. The West has to get over itself.
Niv Horesh, South China Morning Post
See also Mamta Badkar, Chinese Communist Party Publication Says Capitalism Is Approaching Its End And The World Has 'Marxist Fever'
As the Chinese leaders see it (and Russian leaders, too), they are winning, especially with the West sabotaging itself. The only response the West seems to be able to mount is putting obstacles in China's way. That is interpreted as a sign of weakness rather than strength.
See also Mamta Badkar, Chinese Communist Party Publication Says Capitalism Is Approaching Its End And The World Has 'Marxist Fever'
Here's a YouTube video comparing US and China systems:
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/s0YjL9rZyR0
Thank you, Elwood. That was an extremely interesting video.
ReplyDeleteVery informative. However, these developments have nothing to do with Communism or Marxism. China has abandoned those ideologies, while still laboring under the stigma of these labels. For goodness sakes CCP, change your damn name.
ReplyDeleteHowever, these developments have nothing to do with Communism or Marxism. China has abandoned those ideologies,
ReplyDelete"The commanding heights" are government controlled as they are under all systems in which government sets law, institutional arrangement, determines policy, issues the currency, etc.
"State capitalism" is a Western term looking at China from a Western POV.
The Chinese don't see it that way.
Under a capitalist system, the system serves capital by prioritizing it. Under a socialist system, capital serves the system with the system prioritized.
Very different organization and objectives.
There are three principal systems in the world today — capitalism, social democracy, and socialism. China adheres to the socialist model but uses markets. Social democracy uses markets, too.
See Socialism with Chinese characteristics
China follows a model that is runs through Marx > Mao > Deng > Xi. This is adaptation to changing conditions.
The Western model follows Classical Economics (Smith/Ricardo) > Neoclassical Economics (Marginalism ) > Keynesian Economics > Monetarism
See Socialism with Chinese characteristics
ReplyDeleteThis leads to state capitalism, or private capitalism. It has failed in numerous countries, the most notable being the Soviet Union. This approach has long been discredited by the outcome of every single country that has tried it.
As the TED speaker put it, Communism was the culmination of a grand story that did not pan out. China, along with the rest of the world, has moved on.
Here's another story: Communism will only come about when the economics of scarcity are replaced by the economics of gift giving. This will require the ability to produce enough goods and services for everyone. And it will require a change in culture.
No one knows if this story will pan out either. Perhaps barbarism will prevail.
The Western model follows Classical Economics (Smith/Ricardo) > Neoclassical Economics (Marginalism ) > Keynesian Economics > Monetarism
The West has seesawed between laisser faire and social democratic (plus social credit) versions of capitalism. There have been bouts with fascism too. The death toll among Western nations and China is comparable - not an enviable record by any means.
This leads to state capitalism, or private capitalism. It has failed in numerous countries, the most notable being the Soviet Union. This approach has long been discredited by the outcome of every single country that has tried it.
ReplyDeleteState capitalism. covers a lot of ground and is used differently by different people. Very interesting article.
Mussolini denounced supercapitalism for causing the "standardization of humankind" and for causing excessive consumption.[45] Mussolini claimed that at this stage of supercapitalism "[it] is then that a capitalist enterprise, when difficulties arise, throws itself like a dead weight into the state's arms. It is then that state intervention begins and becomes more necessary. It is then that those who once ignored the state now seek it out anxiously."[46] Due to the inability of businesses to operate properly when facing economic difficulties, Mussolini claimed that this proved that state intervention into the economy was necessary to stabilize the economy.[46]
Mussolini claimed that dynamic or heroic capitalism and the bourgeoisie could be prevented from degenerating into static capitalism and then supercapitalism only if the concept of economic individualism were abandoned and if state supervision of the economy was introduced.[47] Private enterprise would control production but it would be supervised by the state.[47] Italian Fascism presented the economic system of corporatism as the solution that would preserve private enterprise and property while allowing the state to intervene in the economy when private enterprise failed.[47]
The American Marxist Richard Wolff says that Stalinists claimed that State Capitalism was Socialism. It was a political ploy. However, that does appear to be the view among many Americans all these years later. If China were to declare that they were State Capitalist, I imagine American pundits would start calling them Socialists. Endless baggage.
ReplyDeleteIt's up to China to come up with their own terms. They'll still be criticized, of course.
Where is America's Mussolini?
ReplyDeleteUnder monetarism it's the Fed chair or at least the Board based on the assumption that GDP is a function of the real interest rate and the objective of monetary policy is to stabilize the real rate at equilibrium by changing nominal rates. At least that's what is believed. :)
Market socialism has never been allowed to exist by western pro-business (not pro-market) governments and states as it would challenge their own oligarchical societies. China is the closest thing (not completely though) that has existed for a long period because it has the size and resources so the aggressive western nations cannot challenge it (directly at least).
ReplyDeleteThey are not going to trust the West anyway, as they were set up a century or several decades behind through the Opium wars by the British Empire. The worst mistake they could make is let their western-educated rich into positions of power.
The Chinese leadership is adopting a Singapore model, which is an adaptation of the Western model to Asian values and mindset. Singapore is run by Chinese, after all.
ReplyDeleteSingapore a model for Chinese democracy