Skip to content

The Systematic Cause for Chaos in the West Versus the Great Order in China

{Editor’s Note: Qiushi published an article praising China for having a system that is superior to that of the West. It argued that the West has entered into a chaotic state. Its economic and social models face severe challenges. However, at the same time, China has achieved great peace and order, thanks to its superior system.

The following are excerpts from the article.} {1}

In recent years, the Western countries have faced frequent chaos. The situation got even worse in 2016 when Trump, a political outsider, was elected President of the United States. Many of his policies have created huge controversies, have caused fierce fighting among the political parties, and have further deepened the divisions in society.

The large number of refugees from the Middle East pouring into Europe has caused political turmoil in almost every European country. The Brexit Referendum brought continued uncertainty to the world’s economy. With the rapid spread of anti-globalization and populism, the right-wing forces continue to grow in many countries. Terrorist attacks have never been this rampant in the Western countries. Debt, financial crises, and welfare calamities have caused people’s living standards to stop improving or even to decline.

In summary, the chaos in the West has become a major reason for the insecurity and instability in the world. The Western model faces serious challenges.

China’s political order is in sharp contrast to the West. In the past few decades, China has risen rapidly in the world in a way that the West thought was unbelievable. It has shocked the West and the world.

The chaos in the West and the order and the achievements in China all took place with growing globalization as the background. Why, when the West fell into disorder or even great chaos, was China able to achieve great order?

I. It was because of the difference between China’s and the West’s understandings of and strategies for globalization.

The nature of globalization that the U.S. and the European countries have spent endless efforts promoting is the globalization of neoliberalism. It was meant to serve international monopolistic capitalism. The main characteristics of neoliberalism are liberalization, privatization, and marketization. It promotes loosening economic control and utilizing capital to maximize profit. In any business fields, it even adopts the rule, “the strong wins over the weak.” Meanwhile, in order to maximize the interests of capital, these countries also inserted the so called demand of “political democratization” into their neoliberalism.

Economic globalization under neoliberalism has enabled many Western countries to achieve extraordinary wealth. However while the Western countries gained the growth of capitalism overseas, they also had to face domestic issues such as a loss of manufacturing jobs, deindustrialization, as well as an alarming rise in the rate of unemployment. These countries have not established a real and fair (wealth) distribution system. Therefore, only a few elite classes have been able to monopolize the gains from globalization, while the general public has had to bear the burden of globalization. The end result is a rapid growth in poverty, a widening wealth disparity, and a wide spread of social divisions and contention.

The neoliberalism policy that the West promotes worldwide has also enabled the capital from the West to control the economic lifeline of the developing countries. Wall Street financial giants rob the people of their wealth. For those countries that have accepted the “democracy” that the West has exported, they have either become dependent of the West, are in a deteriorating political state, or are trapped in internal chaos or even war.

China has been actively and smoothly adapting to globalization. It has clearly defined globalization as economic globalization not political globalization or “Westernization.” Therefore not only will China not give up socialism; but it will also utilize the superior nature of the socialist system to overcome the shortcomings and deficiencies of globalization and of neoliberalism and will eventually surpass capitalism.

II. It was because of the different political systems between China and the West

As for the political system, the political parties in the West are known to represent the interests of certain groups of people. Different parties represent the interests of different groups. Therefore the country’s policy is often shifting and caught in the fights that the political parties and various special interest groups have with each other. These shifts can easily cause a country to miss its goal, but the Chinese Communist Party is a party that represents the interest of all of the groups.

From the perspective of the economic system, in order to protect its capital interests, neoliberalism advocates a free market and is strongly against any form of governmental control or intervention. This type of free globalization of capitalism and financialization has weakened the stability that the government’s macroeconomic policy can bring. It could drive a country into a financial, debt, and economic crisis and stop the growth of its people’s income. However the socialist market economy that China is developing is a new model that enables the development of both the public and the private sectors. This type of system surpasses neoliberalism’s economic model.

From the social governance perspective, neoliberalism emphasizes personal rights and lean government. It believes that the role of a country is limited to protecting people’s personal rights and freedoms. If the economy is doing well and the interests of vast groups are relatively balanced, the country will run smoothly. If the economy is declining, welfare is hard to sustain, wealth disparity is widening, and conflicts among various races, interest groups, and social classes are deepening, a Western democratic government will have a hard time dealing with various types of crises. In contrast, through the exploration and practice China has taken, it has reached unprecedented social stability. It has formed a complete social system that fits the unique situation in China. The most unique aspect is the positive exchange between the country and the society. It has formed a social governance model where the political party leads, society assists, and the people participate.

III. It was because of the difference between China and the West of three forces in the political system

From a deeper perspective, behind the West’s chaos and China’s order and achievements, there is a huge difference in the three types of powers used in managing a country: the political, social, and economic powers.

In many Western countries, the political, social, and economic powers are seriously unbalanced with the economic powers weighing significantly heavier than the others. It means that the country’s political power lacks a much needed independence and neutrality and the economic power infiltrates its social power. It is just like the media that has the power of the “fourth estate.” Because the monopolized economic party controls them, they can only move in the direction that group tells them. They are truly unable to represent the will and wishes of the majority of the people. The direct result is that the West’s democracy has changed to a type of democracy that only serves the monopolistic economic powers and where the interests of the people have to give in to the interests of the economic power. It has resulted in a sharp increase in wealth disparity and the majority of the people are unable to receive the actual benefits of globalization.

China’s political power, on the other hand, has maintained its independence from the influence of social and economic powers. While it maintains the balance between social and economic powers, it is also able to sustain its own style and the ability to lead the social and economic powers. This is the key reason why China has been able to overcome the disadvantages of globalization and to rise successfully.

Endnote:
{1} Qiushi, “The Systematic Reasons for the West’s Chaos and China’s Great Order,” August 2, 2017.
http://www.qstheory.cn/dukan/qs/2017-08/02/c_1121422337.htm.

 

Apple Daily Comments on Xi Jinping’s Work Report at the 19th CCP Congress

The following is a summary of Apple Daily/United Morning Post’s observations on Xi Jinping’s report at the 19th Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Congress:

Reading the full text, the first impression is that it is trying to de-personalize (downplay) the names of Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao, and even Deng Xiaoping {from the CCP’s chapters}. The reports of the recent Party congresses have constantly mentioned Deng Xiaoping Theory, the three represents, and the scientific concept of development. However, Xi almost failed to mention the names of Jiang and Hu in his report. He only mentioned the three represents and scientific development once. Even Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping’s names only appeared once.

On the contrary, “socialism” and “people” were mentioned 146 and 202 times respectively. These two words in the political context of the Chinese Communist Party have special implications with a deep mark of Mao Zedong’s brand. During the Cultural Revolution, they appeared frequently together with Mao Zedong Thought, great leaders, and class struggle in the CCP’s mouthpiece and documents. Xi’s report repeatedly mentioned Marx (19 times), which was also rare in the past Party Congress report.

Second, Xi Jinping spent more than half of the report describing how the past five years’ commitments got fully implemented and at the same time depicting the beautiful landscape of future development — the “new utopia” for the CCP and the Chinese people.

Strangely, Xi Jinping achievement that he is most proud of — anti-corruption  — was not discussed much in the report; it was only mentioned seven times. Xi talked more about his strict rule of the rectification of the party. Perhaps, he did not want to let Wang Qishan {Xi’s chief assistant in the anti-corruption campaign} grab the limelight or perhaps anti-corruption has caused dissatisfaction within the party and thus talking about anti-corruption too much was not appropriate.

Source: Wenxuecity (republication of Apply Daily/United Morning Post), October 18, 2017
http://www.wenxuecity.com/news/2017/10/18/6670555.html

Duowei: Whoever Is Bringing Disaster to the World, China Comes to the Rescue

Duowei, a Beijing-controlled Chinese news media stationed overseas, published an article discussing China’s “Belt and Road” initiative as the future of global governance. Below is an excerpt from the article:

A number of problems and difficulties have gradually emerged in the current practice of globalization and global governance. Globalization has suffered twists and turns, including de-globalization, anti-globalization phenomena. The global challenges are increasingly grim. The shortcomings of the existing global governance system continue to emerge. These shortcomings are mainly reflected in the imperfect value system of global governance, the ineffectiveness of the governance mechanism, a lack of consensus between sovereign states, especially between major powers, and the large number of negative effects the hegemony of the United States has contributed in recent decades. This is especially true since the U.S. put forward its national priority strategy. Therefore, seeking new global governance values and practices has become the consensus of the international community.

Given this situation and context, the “The Belt and Road” initiative is undoubtedly an innovation to the existing global governance model.

At “The Belt and Road” Construction and Global Governance International Forum held at Renmin University of China on September 30, Wu Zhicheng, director of the Institute of Global Issues of Nankai University, and special researcher from the Contemporary World Research Center at the International Department Central Committee of the CPC (Communist Party of China), pointed out that the “Belt and Road” initiative is a new value in global governance that focuses on peaceful development. The Western countries are the main creators of the values of the current global governance. It has become more and more outdated in meeting the needs of current global governance practices. Countries looking for development are gradually freeing themselves from the Western “universal values” and the “Washington consensus” superstition and are beginning to explore other development paths.

Starting from Eurasian countries, the “Belt and Road” initiative is taking the approach of step-by-step cross-regional governance. It will also have a radiation effect in the Eurasian continent, slowly affecting more areas, and more countries and regions. That is, from points joining to a surface, from a line to a region, it will form a cross-regional and global cooperation governance situation.

Source: Duowei News, October 5, 2017
http://news.dwnews.com/china/news/2017-10-05/60016049.html

WSJ Chinese: Chinese Government Trying to Gain Shares of Private High-Tech Companies

Wall Street Journal Chinese recently reported that the Chinese government is considering investing in one or two percent of the shares, called “special administrative stock” in Chinese domestic high-tech companies. Trials have started in two companies. This ownership investment is intended to acquire one or more seats on the board of privately owned large high-tech companies in order to participate in their management and operations. Over the past 20 years, Chinese high-tech companies have enjoyed massive growth and obtained significant shares in critical industries such as financial, insurance, transportation, communication and entertainment. These companies also own a large amount of data regarding the day-to-day behavior of the Chinese population. Examples of these companies are Tencent and Alibaba. Owners of these companies privately expressed their deep concerns about this potential move, since this type of government stock ownership may result in lawsuits for those companies that trade overseas. For the Chinese government, the cost is also a concern. For example, just to hold one percent of Tencent will require US$4 billion. The biggest worry among shareholders and the company owners is the potential to lose independence as well as the capability of innovating.

Source: WSJ Chinese, October 12, 2017
http://cn.wsj.com/gb/20171012/biz132448.asp

SINOPEC Is Selling Its Argentina Assets at a Loss

Well-known Chinese news site Sina recently reported that SINOPEC (China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation) is looking for buyers for its assets in Argentina. The primary asset is located in the Santa Cruz region and is priced at US$0.75~1 billion. This asking price is not even half of the cost SINOPEC paid in 2010 when it first bought this asset from U.S. Occidental Petroleum at US$2.45 billion. SINOPEC has been losing money (around US$2.5 billion as of 2015) in Argentina and it is also facing labor troubles. It is estimated that there may be 15 potential buyers mainly from the U.S., Europe, Africa, and Latin America. However, Russia and Mexico are also interested. The SINOPEC selling plan has not yet been announced publicly, so all information sources remain anonymous. New oil fields have been found near the SINOPEC fields that sold recently. This may further hurt SINOPEC’s deal. SINOPEC is the largest oil refiner in Asia.

Source: Sina, October 9, 2017
http://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/hkstock/ggscyd/2017-10-09/doc-ifymrcmm9556742.shtml

Free High Quality Images Download Free Stock Images Download Free Images Free Stock Photos & Images Beautiful Free Stock Photos (CC0) Free stock photos