Many people hope that China's economic development will lead to democracy, as was the case in Taiwan and South Korea. That, however, is a vain hope.
When civilization moved towards capitalism, which led to rapid economic development, the first step was both painful and cruel. In England in the 1500s, farmers were evicted from almost 10 million hectares of land. They were forced to the cities where they worked for low wages, while five-year-old children worked 10-hour-days in mines and textile factories.
That was how the "original capital accumulation" by the nobility came about.
Taiwan was far luckier. The four Asian tigers -- Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore -- started labor-intensive production for export to the US, Japan and Europe. This transferred the local contradiction between exploiter and exploited to Europe and the US. Taiwan's miraculous economic growth then allowed it to escape the excessive exploitation of domestic labor that occurred during the early stages of the industrial revolution. Despite rapid economic growth, the gap between rich and poor diminished.
China's growing economy is now copying the Asian tigers' export-oriented approach. But although China tries to export its internal contradictions, it cannot do so successfully, which led to China's US$70 billion trade surplus with the US last year, while the manufacturing industry has entered an era of "microprofits."
If China wants to turn to domestic demand, the amount of natural resources that would be consumed by 1.4 billion people is frightening, and certain to cause an explosion of raw materials.
An increase in raw materials and a decrease in finished products would lead to even smaller profits. With no colonies to plunder, the only route remaining is harsh exploitation of local labor.
The development strategy established by Deng Xiaoping (
The so-called socialist market economy was divided into two parts -- a socialist-style control of labor and a market economy where employers were free to exploit labor, allowing quick accumulation of capital.
Since this rapid economic growth is built on depriving people of democracy and freedom, it is strange to think that economic growth will bring democracy in its wake.
Income inequality in today's China is severe. The difference in average income between Guizhou and Shanghai is tenfold. There is also a big difference in legal salaries between different provinces, and the difference is even greater in illegal salaries.
There is a huge army of laborers ready to be further exploited. China has been turned into a giant camp for slave labor.
Chinese President Hu Jintao (
I cannot see any chance of changing a system that exploits the domestic "colonized," the laborers. Economic and social rights have been restricted, and democracy and freedom will be more forcefully controlled. In this area, Hu has a tighter grip than both Deng and Jiang.
If one looks to the people and to actual experience, there is a chance that the Chinese people would be able to build a democratic politics. But a look at the system, however, gives no reason for hope.
Lin Cho-shui is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
RSS