By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google
Sign up with Facebook
Q: Did the west make a mistake?
For decades, many in western governments believed that China would change and reform as it grew economically. It now seems very clear that this is not going to happen.
Did the western governments make a mistake about China, or is it part of a longer term plan by the western corporations that built China's economy?
I would say unplaned. the original idea would of been to create a market for the west to dump product on however it back fired never under estimate a Chinese girl with money on her mind
Total mistake. It's time to begin retracting all we've given them.
981977405:
What did you yourself actually give to them? what "we" did, what "we" gave them, et.c, etc., in another post you referred to "our" oil. Sorry, nevermind, but it's not "your" oil and perhaps you might have written what "Western corporations" did or "Western governments". As an individual, you did precious little.
kchur:
You grew up in the eastern block and moved to China so your probably don't understand the concept of democracy and voting. But then again even in China Chinese say "us" to mean China and I think that is true of every country so maybe you are just differently abled and a very special little man, 981.
nevermind:
An economy, 981. Do you really think China would be where it is if the west hadn't allowed its companies to move to China to manufacture? At one time it WAS illegal to do business with China, but we were nice enough to change our laws to help you. We also gave you a crapload of aid in the meantime. That's what I am talking about when I say what we've given you.
I don't think 'the west' made a mistake, nor do I think they honestly had any plan to change China. The corporations saw 1+ billion people with few luxuries in an emerging market, they saw the potentially immense profit and put pressure on their governments to allow them in.
The rest is merely justification after the fact.
nevermind:
The US cozied up to the west in an effort to further alienate Russia, that was the initial plan.
a revision of the relationship between "the west" and China is long due in "western" governments. those who believed that prosperity would lead to human rights should now be men enough to be willing to cut commercial ties with China
Scandinavian:
this article has some information about this topic http://answers.echinacities.com/node/109438
Deng Xiao Ping based the "new" China almost 90% on the Singapore model. As for human rights, freedom of press, etc., etc., I would say that Singapore is very close to a one-party semi-police state. I cannot speak to freedom of the press in Singapore but by all accounts it is a highly controlled model.
And that is where China is at the moment, I think. The Singapore model has remained as it is and so does the China model. Anyway, my thoughts. I'd be glad to know what the rest of you think.
I think its been a much slower process than anyone in the west imagined but there are still some signs that reform is happening in China. I think it was the popular thought within China that as the economy grew a lot of problems would disappear but now we have lots of people seriously questioning whether money/materials can solve all the problems. More and more young people especially are rejecting the "materialist" attitude that has been so prevalent here. Its a start. However, for that to really have an impact on the future direction of the country then 2 things have to happen. First, things like retirement benefits for older workers, education standards and affordable housing have to improve. Many Chinese don't want to live such a materialistic life but they just kind of get sucked into it i think for some of the above reasons. Second, you have to learn to value something other than materials. Simply saying its not the way won't change much. In short the vacuum has to be filled with something of greater worth.
kchur:
What signs? Over twenty years ago, Deng Xiaoping promised George HW Bush that China would become a democracy eventually, but it would be gradual and take a while. I imagine that after he said it, he turned to his friend and joked in Chinese about how inferior foreigner monkeys believe anything. Then he had a whole lot of people **** **** *** in downtown Beijing in a place name I wont even mention.
Scandinavian:
It is a democracy, the leaders are elected by the big assemblies they have every decade. That is the wrong meaning of democracy in most peoples minds, but when Deng met Bush, that could very well have been what Bush was promised.
Traveler:
I am also interested. What are the signs of reform that you speak of?
kchur:
The party's nominations are confirmed huge non-elected assembly whose members are entirely confirmed by the party and who have always approved the central government's decisions and appointments? But even if they voted a nomination down legally it would just be "advice". You don't seriously believe that China is a democracy do you?
Scandinavian:
of course I don't believe that China is a democracy. but I do believe that it is part of the brainwashing that the people are informed that it is a democratic process.
Call it a mistake, a misapprehension, a hope or a wish. China was opened for economic reasons by or on behalf of multinationals, not political reform.
Multinational corporations are not concerned with a country's political system as long as they may advantageously produce or sell their wares.
I believe the idea that China would substantially change was a bit of marketing, a story told to placate interested parties.
I further believe other government officials were and are aware that the desire for substantial political change in China is precatory at best.
Scandinavian:
"Multinational corporations are not concerned with a country's political system as long as they may advantageously produce or sell their wares."
do you really think any multinational corporations enjoy the political system of having to bribe their way in to get business, that they compete against SOEs that will have economic backing of the government as well as favorably legal treatment.
Traveler:
I , think you are right about the multinationals. They tend to control governments, whereas China is trying to control the multinationals (just as China controls Chinese companies). I will bet money on who wins, and it isn't China.
In the early days, China told the multinationals "Give us your technology and money, and we will give you minority, non-controlling shares, and very small returns on your investment." Even on those terms, with cheaper labour and such a larger potential market, projected profits were huge.
However, wages are no longer low, and domestic consumption in China is only about 35%, the lowest in the world. The projected profits are no longer so huge, and China keeps raising more barriers (auditing is a state secret) and making more unreasonable demands. It is becoming almost impossible for American companies to operate in China, and satisfy both countries auditing laws.
So perhaps it is no longer wothwhile for the multinationals to make long term plans in China, when other countries can offer more. Perhaps the multinationals were wrong thinking China could reform, and the domestic market expand. It hasn't. Instead, the country is flooded with cheap imitations of the goods the multinationals hoped to sell.
bill8899:
@Scandinavian: No, they clearly don't enjoy it, but if they can do business (somewhere) and reduce costs or sell more product, then they will. Do they (MNCs) endeavor to change political systems? Thus far they simply work within the system. I can't imagine where you found the idea that I think they "enjoy" it.
bill8899:
@Traveler: Yes, the game is changing. I respectfully decline your wager because I hate to lose. As you said, and I simply paraphrase, the rules were arguably acceptable 10 or 20 years ago, but now for various economic reasons the rules may or must change. I might add that the advantageous position enjoyed by the powers that be in China has diminished considerably in the past 10 to 20 years. Time will tell how well they adapt to these changes or if they will have the foresight to recognize the changes and the long term implications thereof.
Scandinavian:
@bill8899: MNCs are interested in conducting their business in a ethical manner. Once stories of corruption, pollution, exploiting workers etc surface then they will naturally have to rethink their China strategy.
E.g. Apple probably would not be moving production back to the US if it hadn't been for the bad press that Foxconn has managed to get. (poor economy and the tendency to buy products produce in the US of course has something to do with it too)
bill8899:
@Scandinavian: I agree with you 100%. The jig is up. I have no idea where that metaphor came from.
I don't think the west did any mistake............they thought the chinese people will not stay silent for a long time but we all see this everyday........the only mistake the west did is that they don't understand the chinese people's mentality......Chinese will never do anything against anything against the everyday BS they see and interact with.
Nessquick:
That is very right, I can see it at home many times. When i complain about some BS and talk with my wife, she just reply "but I / You / We can not do nothing with this" Or "we can not change it". But, how many things have been changed in the world, when people said "enough". Not all what they want, but much more than here. And when she ad "govt has the power to control that and that, is nice, that no one can complain to them" and so on ... But she is slowly be brainwashed by me personaly ( means washed to be clean western mind, not dirty western mind ) 
It was a folly for the West to believe that China, as it developed economically would be so naiv to give away power to it's own people. Power is rarely just given to people, power much more needs to be wrestled away from the power holder. I certainly believe that technology transfer was a mistake because China has grossly misused the technological gifts that we bestowed upon her. I'm thinking of the cyber espionage the Chinese government covertly engages in and copying and stealing of intellectual property.
However, China is now at a stage where its internal problems may get out of hand.
