Interesting concept, never thought I'd cite RT http://rt.com/news/china-economy-growth-prospects-729/
All good things come in time. Westerners may spit on an employer who offers $4 a day, but the fact of the matter is that the values ARE DIFFERENT. The Chinese are largely glad to have a job. They are glad to be able to, even on that megar salary, somewhat support their families. They are glad to work. The cruel irony imposed by such nativists in the US who call for greater domestic manufacturing and at the same time call for greater workers' rights in foreign countries is that the loss of demand in China leads to loss of jobs, which leads to the weakening of the Chinese to demand those workers' rights. And this cites nothing new, nor surprising. Its been that way for a long time now. I am surprised that you are surprised, Pedro. Oh and this: “In many villages there are riots and people are on strike,” Murray added. “If those towns all got up on the same day and rebelled China would have big problems.” is absolutely worthless. If it happened in ANY COUNTRY, that country would have problems. That is a WORST CASE scenerio. As for the 'cycles' idea: Yeah, thats Capitalism for you. This article is basically complaining that the vast majority of people are not benefiting as much as it seems, which is true. As one who believes in a Communist ideal [or something very much related], I would prefer a greater distribution of the prosperity.
I guess surprised isn't the right word. More of a finally have some numbers to back up some assumptions I have. What's interesting to me about this is (and I understand that the Chinese haven't really been marxist for a while now) is that the entire purpose of Mao's revolution was to empower the rural class, and it seems like they've completely failed that charge
To say that they have outright failed may be somewhat hasty. While yes, if we were to take a snapshot now and compare things as they are to as they were meant to be, the failure would be somewhat obvious. However, one must always remember that some groups take a bit of a longer view on when something has to be accomplished. In their eyes, it is entirely possible that they believe that the goal of empowering the rural people could take another 50 years or even a couple of centuries, so long as it materializes at some point, the delay is acceptable. In making predictions about the future, people in power are often critisized for being wrong, but not acknowledged when they are right. In this case, the predictions of Mao may have been wrong [I have to check if he actually had a timeframe], but so long as it is accomplished at some point, you will find that many people are willing to forgive the calcutlation error. Just look at how long it took the US to kill Osama bin Ladin. Celebrated... after only more than a half decade of searching, two wars, and the invasion of an ally's soverign terrictory. But yes, they did fail, as far as the current service record is concerned, in spite of the progress in the rural areas. On another note [though still related]: To accomplish many a political/social endevor to the extent that the orignial thinkers wanted it is often to have the or quite near the absolute support and determination of the people. The fact of the matter is that things like Communism, Marxism, and Maoism can be easily viewed as worst-case-scenerio-solutions. That is to say, the majority of people would likely only turn to it without a large amount of guidence if and only if they felt the depths of what it is meant to prevent. In this particular ideological circle's case, the poverty of the people would have to be so appalling to them, so deep-cutting, that it scarred them so much that they could not bear to ignore a political/social ideology that promises to bring an equalibrium that would prevent it [the poverty] from every happening again. Like it or not, that has not actually happened yet. So basically, in a sense, the Communist movement in China and other countries were failures because they were premature. The society had not seen the depths of suffering that was supposed to be reversed and the people did not all support the movement. That isn't to say that it cannot happen in the future. If you look at the ceiling of life and the basic quality of life, you will see that it is rising in some areas faster than others. The difference between the middle class and the upper class will not be so important as when the middle class faces its inevitable shrinking due to the normal fluxuations of the Capatalist economic model. The difference in the future will be simple: they will have much more to lose. The middle class at the beginning of the recent recession had exponentially more to lose than the middle class prior to the Great Depression. Future recessions may still bring the middle classes of their eras down to only the same depths that the recent recession did. The problem is that the expectations would have changed and what is seen as sad now would be seen as absolutely unacceptable then. The only thing that is standing in the way of this actually happening is ironically a series of public-aid organizations and services that mirror and relate to that which they were built to prevent. Then again, that which is right is not exclusive to one side or the other. Of course, its late here, so I might just be rambling due to sleep deprivation.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,824379,00.html Interesting article. It seems that China isn't as stable as people think it is (during power transitions at least)
The CPC has always seemed solid on the surface, with their problems underneath. Its somewhat a tradition in the culture itself to keep only people 'in the know', 'in the know'. All the CPC really did was try to implement it on a mass scale. Most likely, these leaks are the result of someone telling another who has a very big mouth something that they thought the person already knew and knew to keep quiet about. Its a little thing that they inherited from their predecessors who inherited it from their predecessors and so on. The new power struggle is simply the result of oppertunities that appeared in the midst of the change in leadership. It is entirely possible that party members have been planning this for years. That some of them are seeking to improve conditions for themselves is no surprise. That the internet is making leaks easier to spread is pretty obvious. Look at the West. Obama says one thing to Russia about his plans post-reelection and in minutes it 'viral'. I wouldn't put much stock in the rumors of 'gunshots' in the Zhongnanhai though. The likelyhood of a totally violent transition is slim to none. I am pretty sure that the situation is just overblown by the media in the West.
