Bitcoin Forum

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/16/opinion/why-chinas-political-model-is-superior.html

For those without free access: http://pastie.org/private/uxnuzaibibu562qqydlmyg

I expected to see the usual communist claptrap but the writer is a venture capital guy and he makes a very strong anti-democratic case.  

What do you guys think?

The site says I have to log in.

Added a link to my OP: http://pastie.org/private/uxnuzaibibu562qqydlmyg

Thanks for the heads up.

All systems are shit. ;)

There are too many conflicting objectives.

This article is complete biased nonsense with weak arguments. Communism is not superior to ANY political system with the exception of fascism.

Look at who wrote the article:


WTF? The author's mother was experimenting in idiotism when she developed his brain.

The US is throwing everyone in prison to compete with china on wages....thanks for incentivising the police state.

Maybe you should read it?  Communism isn't mentioned.

http://www.ted.com/talks/yasheng_huang.html

article doesn't explain china. Just points out that democracy in usa is overruled by money

"special interests manipulate the people into voting for ever-lower taxes and higher government spending"

Democracy in the USA isn't just overruled by money, it's also the voters themselves that are overruled by money. This was the core argument against democracy way back in the 19th century: that the average person is not informed enough to know how to vote, so it would just give more power to the demagogues.

Me? I'd be fine with whatever model of government as long as there was freer immigration and genuine choices for individuals to pick what country suits them best so we can get some competition going to see what model works best (including policies like moving more services to states and municipalities to promote this). It might seem like it disagrees with my general libertarian ethic, but I think that if you talk to an anarcho-capitalist in the right way I'm sure even they would be fine with the idea of private cities and the like if the free market decides that vertically integrating health, education, insurance and the like is the most efficient option (I'd prefer not trusting that much to a single entity, but I wouldn't deny others the right to do the same - it's sort of like an iPhone vs Android debate).

Read it again - that is absolutely not what it says.

Do you think America will be better off with a Chinese style autocracy like Lin advocates or something else?

China is doing great now because they have opened their borders to the world, but will crash in two years.
Then their "system" wont appear so great.

Corruption Threatens China’s Future
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2007/10/09/corruption-threatens-china-s-future/g4

The American media have a love hate relationship with China.  They would love to have a strong federal government that could regulate the minuta of every economic activity in America, but hate China or perceived human rights abuses.

I travel to China 4 or 5 times a year; sometimes living in China for almost 6 months out of the year.  I don't go to foreigner areas, ride the normal public transportation, and live in normal people's homes.  This is what I experience.

CORRUPTION
I agree.  The corruption is terrible.  Imagine taking a family member to the doctor and having to tip the doctor so he gives your family member the best service.  Consumer protection is terrible.  There are common scams of getting people to pay thousands of RMB for worthless vitamins because it is "traditional Chinese medicine."

The police are basically worthless; nothing more than bad traffic enforcement or people that tell you the directions.  If there is a problem with someone else, you win by making the biggest scene.

This does not even go into the corruption that is high in the Chinese housing market.  Local governments get a large part of their budget from land development.  They stole land from prior owners, give it to the developers, and take a nice portion for their personal fee.  Now the housing market is crashing.  Some homes in China have reduced their selling price by 70%.

POLLUTION
The first time I went to China I stayed in Shenzhen, the first SEZ of china and borders Hong Kong.  The pollution was so bad I got an ulcer in the back of my throat.  Now, most of the time I go to Guangzhou and stay in the countryside with relatives.  I stay away from the city if I can.

LABOR
Chinese people do work hard, but no harder than Americans.  When I first went to China I had trouble with their afternoon naps.  I just couldn't follow their lead.  What is terrible about Chinese labor is their laws.  They are not enforced.  If a Chinese employee is late for work or makes a mistake, then the employeer cuts the employees pay.  If the employee quits their job before their next paycheck.  It is common that they will never receive that paycheck.  Non-payment of employees is common.

PROTECTIONISM
The myth that Chinese people don't buy a lot of things is false.  China is the largest purchaser of luxurious items now.  What China does though is require any companies to sell their products in China to join with a Chinese company.

THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF CHINA AND THE RULE OF LAW
There is not really any laws in China.  5000 years of civilization has not changed the fact that the Party is the law now.  Henry Kissinger may say China has 5000 years of diplomatic history and have many tricks up their sleeve, but a totalitarian party that crushes any revolt by the people is a party that is in fear of losing power.  That fear makes them short sighted.  Until the Party is overthrown there is no way for China to be a model for other nations.  If a man gets to rich and successful he is put in prison.  If people protest for more rights, they are stomped on.

THE PEOPLE OF CHINA
This is the strength of China.  People with dreams and passions.  The people of China want China to be a modern nation.  They don't care about being a superpower, but want to be equal members in the world and given respect.  The people of China are some of the most hospitable people I have ever met.  While not all people achieve great knowledge, generally people of the nation see the pursuit of knowledge as a virtues endeavor.

Superior my ass,

nytimes are full of idiots.

Good post stochastic.  I've been to Shenzhen a few times and it is hideously polluted.  All of your points about the utter absence of law matched exactly my experiences.  Finding someone to trust was so hard :(  And even then, the contracts are written in a way that assumed each party is a crook and where there are inspections, you use a different inspector every time and never give a clue in advance who the inspector is.

If you think crushing kids, and making sure they are dead is superior, then there is something wrong with you OP.

You didn't read the article.

Almost true. We (this world with its known history) have no resilient experience with communism.
Those so called communists are violating the basic communistic rule: "common ownership of the means of production"
China is just another Oligarchy, so nothing superior to any other regime on this planet. Just its bias is slightly tuned differently.

Skimmed over it, then wondered whether the author is one of China's paid bloggers. And that's where the thinking stopped. The superior system paying its supportive bloggers? They're just bigger, not better.

Smart > Libertarian > Democratic Capitalist > Random Socialist/Capitalist hybrids > Communist > Military-based Dictatorships

Where "Smart" would be a system in which the participants are intelligent and well-informed and acting accordingly, which is an utopia. Each of the jumps is huge. I'd give a lot to get a stable Libertarian ecosystem to live in, but they always get killed by jealous zealots before they can play their real strength.

China would be with the "Random Socialist/Capitalist hybrids". As they shifted to capitalism, their power multiplied. But it's still just blind hits, not even close to what a billion-people-country should be able to achieve. I give them credit for acknowledging human reproduction is getting out of hand, this is a topic that is shunned elsewhere. But in terms of economy, they should start learning from Taiwan and Japan... oh, but they hate them to much, it's totally unthinkable. You know, the Japanese and WW2! And Taiwan should belong to China!! Childish.

China executes drug traffickers murderers and pedophiles.

+1 china

Although I think everyone everywhere else wants to do that, too, except others realize there is no "oh shit wait this person was innocent" reset button with execution.

Perhaps the Chinese care less about 1 wrongful death than others do.

Well I think its fair to say that they Chinese care less about several 1000 wrongful deaths than others do.

The Chinese system's flexibility is firmly rooted in the willingness of the Chinese government to shoot people by the 1000, the most recent example being Tienanmen Square in 1989 but there were years where the state killed over a million people.  When I made the OP, I knew there was something "missing" in the guys logic and I think that's it.  A simple assertion that to run a country "properly" you got to be willing to have occasional educational massacres.

Because drugs, and everything else, pays for terrorism.

Until US companies own the land. Then whatev's.

Well considered you are right, at least some hints provide this view.
Plus the war on terrorism needs to be battled by any means shouldn´t it.
Wouldn´t we have to legalise drugs now to dry out terrorism money supply?

lol I was being facetious. Forgot my tongue in cheek smiley. US companies owning the land was a jab at the whole Iraq war bullshit around oil.


For the part that is correct about the statement, I'm sure it would help that. In general though (the "and everything else" part), it depends on who's terror you're talking about. The US population is being terrorized by its own banking system...people are terrified of it; people aren't only terrorized by violence, just the threat of harm is enough. There have been more TV shows and movies about terrorists in the US than there have been actual attacks.

I still think if we started executing people for serious crimes we wont have as many problems. People will think twice before doing things knowing they will be executed. I stand by my comments......

+1 china.

They used hang pickpockets in public.  People watching the hanging often had their pockets picked. 

LOL thats funny. There will be crime everywhere no matter what. They still have drastically less crime than the US. A few years ago some big company in china was mass producing baby formula. Infants started dying. The government analyzed the baby formula and discovered there was no nutrients in the formula. The company stopped putting them in to cut costs and maximize profits. They executed the people in charge. Here in the US if you have enough money or power you can get away with shit like that. I like chinas no excuses policies. You fuck up you pay the price. Thats the way it should be.

Forget oil, you've got a more direct example with poppies in Afghanistan.  The Taliban had eradicated them, but as soon as we (America, fuck yeah!) show up, heroin and opium flow out of Afghanistan like chocolate from Willy Wonka's factory.

Well that is all just about free economy, I guess.  ???
The official explanation around here sound like this:
Devastating the poppy crop would ruin the sprouting local economy thus angering the rural population. (neither joke nor pun intended)

Due to our state secretary of defense I think it was around 2004 we are defending our freedom over there.
Well now I am wondering when the freedom to grow poppy finally comes along.  >:(

It is very simple why China's political model is superior.

The name of the political class in China is "communist party". The name is not important. The most important thing is that there are 3 or 4 political wings within the communist party that have different views on how China must develop in future. They must compete for the votes of ordinary party members. In the US the name of the political class is "political establishment". There are only 2 wings there that name themselves republicans and democrats. There is almost no competition between them because there are only 2 of them. They can always make a deal at the expense of the society! When one of them is on power the general public has no choice but swap them with the only other choice available. Actually, there is no choice! You know from the real life market economy that in order to have genuine competition in a given market segment you have to have at least 3 independent companies competing for market share... I'm glad that in the UK political system there are 3 alternatives now.

This is an interesting point. There are only really two main alternatives in Australia, too...Liberal and Labour. Greens and democrats exist, but aren't really contenders since the system allows them to pick who to move the votes that were sent to them to someone in the liberal/labour parties of their choice. The result, as you point out, is Jack Johnson vs John Jackson.

Why are do we narrow down to only 2 contenders? How can you realistically grow a non-retarded 3rd and 4th alternative?

Or the Chinese government gets rid of its enemies by saying they're drug traffickers, murderers and pedophiles and executes them.

Depending on how you count there are at least 5 in Germany ... let me think ... ouch ... we can easily compete with Greece!  ???

I will risk to say that we should put a bullet on the head of Bush and Obama for being drug trafficking.
After all, it's the Chinese way and it's superior.

"The fundamental difference between Washington’s view and Beijing’s is whether political rights are considered God-given and therefore absolute or whether they should be seen as privileges to be negotiated based on the needs and conditions of the nation."

I wouldn't call them God-given so much as a result of human nature. That being said, I will "negotiate" for my rights by any means necessary. As the crypto revolution continues, those means become easier and easier, in part because rights are natural.

The author portrays power slipping away from the communists as if they're approaching some intentional harmonious equilibrium, when in reality, both governments are simply being purchased by the same corrupting powers-that-be.