China admits conflicts

[I think not]

China admits to 'deep-seated conflicts' amid economic boom

By Richard Spencer in Beijing
(Filed: 06/03/2006)

China's prime minister gave a surprisingly gloomy assessment of the state of the country's booming economy and fast-changing society in his annual speech to parliament yesterday.

In the face of near-euphoria among governments and businesses in the western world about the pace of its growth, Wen Jiabao said long-term economic health was at risk while society faced "deep-seated conflicts".

For years, Communist leaders have worried about the growing wealth gap between the expanding cities of the east coast and the rural interior. But yesterday Mr Wen, delivering the annual "work report" to the rubber-stamp National People's Congress, added the need to be concerned about "social equity".

This was a strong nod to concern that inequalities are not just caused by different rates of economic growth but by such issues as corruption and illegal expropriation of land by officials. "Some deeply-seated conflicts that have accumulated over a long time have yet to be fundamentally resolved, and new problems have arisen that cannot be ignored," he said.

Mr Wen is already seeking to address some of these issues with a policy of building a "new socialist countryside" - a plan to spend £25 billion on improving incomes in rural areas and providing better education and health care.

But Mr Wen also addressed fundamental economic issues caused by the speed of economic growth, which most outsiders regard with wonder rather than concern.

China's entry into the World Trade Organisation in 2001 was a nervous time for international businesses and China's banks, which feared whether the country's export-led economic miracle would survive the strict, pro-competition rules it would have to face.

In fact, the reverse was the case, with growth from 2002-04 that surpassed predictions. But Mr Wen alluded to fears that the growth was unsustainable. Much of the investment has gone on factories and power stations, which is starting to lead to over-supply.

That is one reason for the threat of trade wars - as in last summer's "Bra Wars" with Europe - as companies cut prices to stay competitive. Many now risk bankruptcy as a result.

"Production gluts are increasingly severe, prices of related goods are falling and inventories are rising," he said. "Profits are shrinking, losses are growing and latent financial risks are increasing." If companies start defaulting on debts it could trigger a crisis in the banking system, which has given out huge loans to fuel the investment.

Mr Wen is under pressure on several fronts. He needs to bring excessive growth under control, but keep it high enough to employ China's vast pool of surplus labour to avoid social unrest.

For President Hu Jintao, the answer to corruption has been to intensify a campaign to revive the teaching of Marxist theory to party cadres. There has also been a shift away from economic reforms such as the privatisation of state-owned industries.

But while diplomats and China's growing activist movement have welcomed the shift towards spending on the countryside, many say that without changes in the party's autocratic management system it will have little effect.

"I used to be an optimist about (Hu and Wen's) reformist tendencies," said one western diplomat. "But I think it's become clear that what we have here is a return to old ways of thinking."

Mr Wen yesterday set a target of eight per cent for growth this year. This is lower than most economists predict, suggesting that he fears that the higher growth is now, the harder it can fall.

The answer for many economists and Mr Wen himself is to boost the domestic economy - leading to an unusual call for the once strictly puritan Communist population to go out and spend.

But he accepted that this depended on improving health care and pensions, the lack of which drives the determination to earn and save.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/03/06/wchina06.xml

 

[Jersay]

Conflicts are growing but it is a problem that other nations have to deal with as well.

I don't think you like China ITN.

 

[Machjo]

Actually, I'd have to agree with the article for the most part. Another thing to seriously look at is policies leading to major inefficiencies. And perhaps even more importantly, the so-called "trust crisis", referring to such rampant corruption, dishonesty, etc. at all levels of society that trust in others is at an all time low. For a society to function effectively, members of said society must be able to trust one another to move forward on major projects. Otherwise, people just cose in on themselves, the main concern being self-preservation and avoiding getting frauded. This only leads to paralisis in the end. And no I'm not anti-Chinese; Many Chinese friends of mine have themselves pointed out this "trust crisis", and I myself have witnessed so much dishonesty and corruption it's disgusting.

 

[Jersay]

But there is corruption and trust problems in say Canada for instance.

Now I haven't been to China and they do have problems I am not doubting that but all countries even America have problems along this line between the rich and the poor and corruption and such.

You just have to make the politicians listen and if you have to use violent means to do so, if it is leading in that direction you do so.

 

[I think not]

Conflicts are growing but it is a problem that other nations have to deal with as well.

I don't think you like China ITN.

You're partially right, I don't like the Chinese political system, how it attempts to keep fractured states together. The Chinese people I have no problem with. They live all around me.

 

[Jersay]

China has been a state longer and will be a state longer than America.

And you could say the same with America when they kept the confederate states from leaving.

 

[I think not]

I have and I do, and this negates China's history how?!?!

 

[cortez]

despite the content of the post- the form expresses a realistic appraisal of some potentially serious domestic consequences of disparate unregulated economic growth--
its a sign of a heathy government that it doesnt stick its head in the sand about these types of things or
tries to distract from them by focusing on external foes
or other smoke screens

an unreastically jingoist speech by the chineese prime minister would be a cause for concern--- about their leadership

as far as the veracity of their stated concerns-- seeing as these would provide no positive proganganda value-- should probably be taken at face value

 

[Jersay]

Because it will loose a piece for a while but it gathers it back after a certain period of time.

 

[Colpy]

Conflicts are growing but it is a problem that other nations have to deal with as well.

I don't think you like China ITN.

Nobody sane in the west likes Red China.

This is the same regime that has killed as many as 70 million people since the success of the revolution in 1949. That makes them by far the worst government for murderin history. The USSR only comes in second, with Hitler's Germany a poor third.

The Chinese are boosting military spending by double-digit percentages every year. They consistently threaten the democratic state of Taiwan, they have played sabre-rattling games with the USA and Japan, they support every scumbag dictatator in the world, from Mugabe in Zimbabwe, to the murderers in Sudan, to the lunatic in North Korea. They have territorial claims in the South China Sea.

China executes about 8000 people a year, 20 times what the rest of the world combined executes.

Religion is tightly controled in China, with as many as 800 Christian ministers incarcerated for running unapproved churches.

Despite its name, the party running China is no longer a true communist party, it is a fascist party, defined as a tightly controled market economy in a police state that encourages nationalist fervour.

China needs to be isolated economically, and contained militarily.

 

[Finder]

Conflicts are growing but it is a problem that other nations have to deal with as well.

I don't think you like China ITN.

Nobody sane in the west likes Red China.

This is the same regime that has killed as many as 70 million people since the success of the revolution in 1949. That makes them by far the worst government for murderin history. The USSR only comes in second, with Hitler's Germany a poor third.

The Chinese are boosting military spending by double-digit percentages every year. They consistently threaten the democratic state of Taiwan, they have played sabre-rattling games with the USA and Japan, they support every scumbag dictatator in the world, from Mugabe in Zimbabwe, to the murderers in Sudan, to the lunatic in North Korea. They have territorial claims in the South China Sea.

China executes about 8000 people a year, 20 times what the rest of the world combined executes.

Religion is tightly controled in China, with as many as 800 Christian ministers incarcerated for running unapproved churches.

Despite its name, the party running China is no longer a true communist party, it is a fascist party, defined as a tightly controled market economy in a police state that encourages nationalist fervour.

China needs to be isolated economically, and contained militarily.

My god colpy we actually agree on something again!

"Despite its name, the party running China is no longer a true communist party, it is a fascist party, defined as a tightly controled market economy in a police state that encourages nationalist fervour."

I'd also argue that the use of communist symbolish is an attempt to hide the facsist and kleptocracy tendencies of the Communist party. The first people who were able to buy up state run indestries were high ranking communist party members. I believe it was Trotsky who coin the word "state capitalism", which is at work here, but this would be an advanced "state capitalism" as well. Plus the serfdom of the working class and the farmers is another aspect of extreme capitalism or fascism.

Karl Marx would have laughed at the concept that the Chiness communist party represents any type of Marxism at all, and he would laugh harder that they call themselfs communist, at that I think he wouldn't even call them socialists.

 

[cortez]

Conflicts are growing but it is a problem that other nations have to deal with as well.

I don't think you like China ITN.

Nobody sane in the west likes Red China.

This is the same regime that has killed as many as 70 million people since the success of the revolution in 1949. That makes them by far the worst government for murderin history. The USSR only comes in second, with Hitler's Germany a poor third.

The Chinese are boosting military spending by double-digit percentages every year. They consistently threaten the democratic state of Taiwan, they have played sabre-rattling games with the USA and Japan, they support every scumbag dictatator in the world, from Mugabe in Zimbabwe, to the murderers in Sudan, to the lunatic in North Korea. They have territorial claims in the South China Sea.

China executes about 8000 people a year, 20 times what the rest of the world combined executes.

Religion is tightly controled in China, with as many as 800 Christian ministers incarcerated for running unapproved churches.

Despite its name, the party running China is no longer a true communist party, it is a fascist party, defined as a tightly controled market economy in a police state that encourages nationalist fervour.

China needs to be isolated economically, and contained militarily.

true - but ya aint exactly lilly white are ye

perhaps you can give us an estimate of the casualities incurred by the british and and american empires

how many HUNDREDS of millions were killed in order to establish global capitalism

you have to be contained

 

[I think not]

Karl Marx would have laughed at the concept that the Chiness communist party represents any type of Marxism at all, and he would laugh harder that they call themselfs communist, at that I think he wouldn't even call them socialists.

See Finder you hit the nail on the head, this is why I personally despise what communism has become, far from what Karl Marx envisioned. As a philosopher Karl Marx has written some awesome work, a utopian society, free from greed, manipulation and control of the populace.

Can you say that anyone in history that attempted to create Karl Marx's dream came even close to it? I don't think so. They created states of prosecution, death, and they did not even afford its own people basic human rights. In the process, they have implemented socialist economic policies that have been perceived by the west as a first step (which Karl Marx has stated) towards communism.

I personally believe that some day in the far future, states and people will create a mixture of socialism and capitalism or some other ism that will end all this misery in the world. Human beings are not ready for it, we first need to evolve ourselves before placing trust in government that has flawed and weak individuals that can easily be swayed towards power and greed.

There has been not a single example where Karl Marx's socialism has worked, quite the contrary, in most cases it has been turned into killing machines. We need to grow up first before contemplating plunging the world into a larger version of the USSR, China, North Korea, Vietnam etc..

 

[cortez]

cut and paste can be a waste

you know who would be having a BIGGER laugh-- about -- the west--

ADAM SMITH - of the wealth of nations fame

he might be saying
oh my god the idiots thought i was saying that they could do anything no matter how ruthless in order to make a profit-- if they do that they are going to get a nasty back lash

karl marks the backlash

 

[cortez]

sorry- double post

big picture

capitalism failed
socialism rose a counter to its failure
it too has failed

rockets away!!!!!!

 

[Jersay]

If it has changed ITN, than it is not communism anymore it is right-wing fascist stuff.

 

[Machjo]

But there is corruption and trust problems in say Canada for instance.

Now I haven't been to China and they do have problems I am not doubting that but all countries even America have problems along this line between the rich and the poor and corruption and such.

You just have to make the politicians listen and if you have to use violent means to do so, if it is leading in that direction you do so.

Oh you have no idea. Corruption permeates the soceity here. It's an open secret that many students cheat on tests and teachers and professors let them, public school headmasters focus more on money than on education and will do whatever their students' parents want even if they know it's not pedagogically sound because it makes the parents happy, businessment buy government officials, the local sales clerk will raise the price if you look rich, married men have women on the side, married women have men on the side, salespeople will tell you anything to make a sale, people will buy you a gift with expectations (if someone offers you a gift, expect them to ask for something in most cases), pirated CDs and books abound, ... Just trust me... Canada pales in comparison.

Having said that, I have plenty of excellent Chinese friends, and am well aware that Canadians do all of these abhorrent things too. All I'm saying is that it's much, much more common in China, not just in government, but at all levels of society. They've even coined the term "trust crisis" or "crisis of trust" to describe it, with calls to go back to traditional confucionist education (frowned upon by the party, but still gaining ground as the party feels the public pressure and realises that Marxist education has failed miserably overall in inculcating ethics in the general population) with the party turning a blind eye to it. Religion is on the rise, be it Christianity, irlam, Confucianism, buddhism, yu name it, and whenever I ask people, it's often out of this search for "trust". Nostalgia for the good old days of Mao is strong also, due to the near zero tolerance under his watch for much of this corruption. but unfortunately, Mao's style was imposing morality by the government as opposed to inculcating it in hearts. So as soon as the government couldn't be everywhere all the time watching everyone, the moral fabric of the society just collapsed!

Canada just does not compare. Yet I still love China for the genuine friendships I have made here. That more than makes up for all of Chian's problems. And despite everything, China will get over it and will certainly become a great nation in future. It's just a learning stage.

 

[Machjo]

"Nobody sane in the west likes Red China."

1. China's not in the red :wink:
2. If anything red, I'd say it's too right wing (i.e. nationalistic) than left (i.e communist). Communism would be a concern, but chinese nationalism is an even greater one in my opinion. Ideally it would be centrist, but if we had to choose an extreme, left would still be a less bad alternative to right.

"This is the same regime that has killed as many as 70 million people since the success of the revolution in 1949. That makes them by far the worst government for murderin history. The USSR only comes in second, with Hitler's Germany a poor third."

Perhaps. But it's changing at breakneck speed, not only economically but culturally likewise. Shock growth if you will.

"The Chinese are boosting military spending by double-digit percentages every year."

That is a legitimate csude for concern; but then again, the US certainly has no moral authority on that front when we look at thow they've ysed their military inthe last few decades since WWII. I'm not using comparison as an excuse (i.e. I'm not saying 'cause the US did it, China can too), just pointing out that if any organization is going to criticize China for this, the US won't be taken very seriously as a moral authority in that regard.

"They consistently threaten the democratic state of Taiwan,"

Yes they do, and I do think they act a little silly there, again a proof of a growing nationalism. Consider mind you that the day Beijing sais Taiwan is free to go, the party would be toppled, possibly even by popular uprising. Replace Beijing with a democratic government, and you'd probably end up with a Bush in power looking upon Taiwan as an Iraq! You see, the thing is, in the Chinese psyche, Taiwan is a renegade province of China. This is not just a govenrment issue, but a popular and strongly held opinion. You'd be surprised at how many mainlanders would likely volunteer to topple Beijing should it ever allow Taiwan to go, and then move into Taiwan themselves. Compared to popular opinion, the current government on the mainland is moderate. Still want democracy on the mainland? That solve-all-problems panacea?

Anotehr complication likewise is that many though not all Taiwanese likewise consider themselves to be Chinese but just don't like the mainland government. Things here re: taiwan are much more comlicated than you could immagine. Best for us to keep our noses out of that one since it genuinely is an internal matter to be solved among the Chinese people themselves (and yes, many Taiwanese also consider it to be an internal matter likewise).

"they have played sabre-rattling games with the USA and Japan, "

True. With the US, it's definitely merrited since the US meddles in China's internal matters (Taiwan to China is like California to the US). As for Japan, their both at fault due to the combined force of a rising Japanese nationalism (i.e the shrine visits, growing Japanese political involvement int he world, the text-book issue, etc.) along side a rising Chinese one. They feed on one another to an extent too, which again makes things very dangerous. The best thing to do from what I could see would be for Chinese education to turn to more confucian ideals (which tend to be much more fundamental and universal) as a counter-balance to this rising naitonalism. And of couse the Japanese need to seriously deal with their rising naitonalism too.

"they support every scumbag dictatator in the world, from Mugabe in Zimbabwe, to the murderers in Sudan, to the lunatic in North Korea."

In waht way exacly. China is actually well reputed for giving money no strings attached. Is that foreign interference or support? I suppose that depends on how one defines it.

They have territorial claims in the South China Sea."

And so does Canada in the North West Passage. So what's the point. Again, as long as Chinese nationalism can be cooled down and that these claims can be solved through internaitonal law, then nothing to worry about. But the rising naitonalism is a concern without a doubt.

"China executes about 8000 people a year, 20 times what the rest of the world combined executes."

Perhaps. I haven't followed that.

"Religion is tightly controled in China, with as many as 800 Christian ministers incarcerated for running unapproved churches."

NO SYMPATHY HERE. I'm religious too. I feel that China's religious laws are indeed suffocating, but by no means repressive. I don't ahve the same freedom of religious organization in China as I do in Canada, but it's not as repressive as the foreign media perceives it to be, not to mention that it's ever improving. Christians can congregate, Bibles can be bought in certain book shops, they're free to talk about their religion among friends as long as their procelitism is not aggressive. There's evena Christian bookshop in town for crying out loud. What you're talking aoubt are the house churches, for which there is no need. What about giving to Caesar that which is Caesar's? Their freedom isn't great, but it's enough to teach their faith legally if that's what they want. So why break the law? Add to that that if they knew the history of Christianity in China and its relatinshit to the Opium Wars, one would understand the reservations the Chinese have about organized religions. So from that standpoint, we have the participants of teh Opium Wars to thank for the current religious controls. thanks guys.

"Despite its name, the party running China is no longer a true communist party, it is a fascist party, defined as a tightly controled market economy in a police state that encourages nationalist fervour."

Fascist? Not yet... and hopefully won't be. As for promoting nationalism in schools, yes, the party has been doing that, but to some extent it's also backfired (read my comment about taiwan above, where now the party has no choice but to act tough on taiwan if it doesn't want to p-ss off the whole population, a creation of its doing, ironically enough), and now it's reaping the fruits of its labours.

"China needs to be isolated economically, and contained militarily."

No! That would be the best way to feed the flames of nationalism in that country, and that's the last thing we need to do. Insead, Canada ought to work through the UN to applaud China in it's positive steps in granting more religious freedoms. If we criticise, China can also conslude that no matter how much progress it makes, it can never satisfy us, and so eventually just give up and just turn in on itself. Instead, even when progress is moderate, let's let them know that we've noticed and applaud them for their efforts. Only if they outright digress should we criticise, and even then proportionately to how much they've actually digressed. And as for political matters, that's internal policy which Canada cannot even begin to understand and so should just stay out of it altogether.

 

[Finder]

Machjo, though I think China has the ability to be a true socialist, or social democratic nation in the future, it however has chosen to take another course.

China often calls itself a nation of two systems that of Communism (sometimes they say socialism) and that of capitalism. Yet what we have seen as of late in China is a type of state Capitalism which Trotsky had prodicted in both China and the soviet union, that where the party because the ruling class or that in itself becomes bourgeois, acts like it and follows in the traditions of it. You may or may not know George Orwell another devoted socialist democratic also in a sence predicked this as well. I think if they were alive they would be amazed at how right they were and how extreme it is. Well the state capitalist system evevoled from the radical days of Mao's cultural revolution where the so called "wokers vanguard" (a concept marx himself would have been again) ravaged the land like any little facsist army would killing Communist, socialist and democratic intellecturals and politicians lead into the next phaze which started in the 80's which was the moderations of the party and the elimantion of the radical elemint to make way for the capitalist class to come.

As indestory progressed in Chine by the late 80's Chiness Communist leaders were profitting largely from the gains of slave labour in the factories and the fields but still supported or gave lip service to the aspects of socialism, providing for the people, food, education and so and so forth. By the 90's as some indestries went private Chiness Communist bosses were the first to buy up the indestries and venturers (yeah this makes sence, could you even call the communist party and its members communist or even socialist by this time). Now in the next decade we have a further problem with the advent of capitalism in China and thats the widing gap between the rich and the poor. Those Workers in the so called workers state making next to nothing to make the west cheap sh*t, yet those who call themselves communists privately operating the indestry this is happening in.

Economically this is facsism, state controled capitalism.

There is not one communist, socialist or social democrat dead or alive who would say the communist party of china is anything on the left. In fact, generally the high ranking members of the communist party of china today resemble the conservatives of the west then the Liberals or social democrats.

Also another indication of facsism is the national "myth" which China clearly has. A menifest dystiny which has clearly been seen over Taiwan and Tibet.

Though Communists leaders are talking about a return to some of there socialist roots, the fact they actually have to publically talk about this is enough to make me believe it's merely propaganda and the only socialism you will see, or rather capitalism in disguise of socialism is maybe a slighty higher wage.

Further more, I can think of none of my readings of Lenin, Mao, Marx, Engals or even Stalin which would make China look remotely communist... With my readings of socialist and social democratic theorists, you might say that China believes in socialist-syndicalism
but even that is pushing it way too much. Generally speaking China is a fascist nation with a scoailist facade.

I don't know if there's people in China who actually believe in this facade, but I'm sure there are those who just hate the regime and fight against the facade. My only hope in the Communist party of China is that it allows a democracy with a left right split across the party. Perhaps China can inch its way to democracy...


Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike China, I'm glade it's emerging as a super power and thus can check the USA somewhat, but it is not some sort of socialist utopia or free market capitalism, but one of state capitalist goals.

 

[Machjo]

"Machjo, though I think China has the ability to be a true socialist, or social democratic nation in the future, it however has chosen to take another course."

Whatever system China adopts in future, it will definitely need to promote some kind of spirituality. The main problem in china right now has nothing to do with the government or what political system to adopt, so much as the death of basic virtues among the population (although I'm also witnessing a sort of renaissance among sertain limited circles which will hopefully blow a breath of life in to a future China).

"China often calls itself a nation of two systems that of Communism (sometimes they say socialism) and that of capitalism. Yet what we have seen as of late in China is a type of state Capitalism which Trotsky had prodicted in both China and the soviet union, that where the party because the ruling class or that in itself becomes bourgeois, acts like it and follows in the traditions of it. You may or may not know George Orwell another devoted socialist democratic also in a sence predicked this as well. I think if they were alive they would be amazed at how right they were and how extreme it is. Well the state capitalist system evevoled from the radical days of Mao's cultural revolution where the so called "wokers vanguard" (a concept marx himself would have been again) ravaged the land like any little facsist army would killing Communist, socialist and democratic intellecturals and politicians lead into the next phaze which started in the 80's which was the moderations of the party and the elimantion of the radical elemint to make way for the capitalist class to come."

Nothing wrong with a capitalistic system per say; the problem lies in that it has no spirit. It's all about me me me and making a quick buck however, materialism at its best.

"As indestory progressed in Chine by the late 80's Chiness Communist leaders were profitting largely from the gains of slave labour in the factories and the fields but still supported or gave lip service to the aspects of socialism, providing for the people, food, education and so and so forth. By the 90's as some indestries went private Chiness Communist bosses were the first to buy up the indestries and venturers (yeah this makes sence, could you even call the communist party and its members communist or even socialist by this time). Now in the next decade we have a further problem with the advent of capitalism in China and thats the widing gap between the rich and the poor. Those Workers in the so called workers state making next to nothing to make the west cheap sh*t, yet those who call themselves communists privately operating the indestry this is happening in. Economically this is facsism, state controled capitalism."

It is becomming a sort of corporate state, but that is only one element of fascism. Japan is also a corporate stae, but we still wouldn't call it a fascist state either. Now by capitalism being a problem, that depends on what you mean. If you meant a capitalistic system, then no problem. If you meant some kind of dogmatic capitalist ideology, then yes, that could be a problem, but not the biggest one; nationalism is what you'll really want to keep your eyes on.


"There is not one communist, socialist or social democrat dead or alive who would say the communist party of china is anything on the left. In fact, generally the high ranking members of the communist party of china today resemble the conservatives of the west then the Liberals or social democrats. "

Too generalized for me to comment on that.

"Also another indication of facsism is the national "myth" which China clearly has. A menifest dystiny which has clearly been seen over Taiwan and Tibet."

As for taiwan, such a myth is not unique to the mainland (many Taiwanese hope to rejoin the mainland in the future too, albeit after the fall of the communist party). and as for Tibet, here's teh sad truth; generally speaking, the Han want to keep Tibet. If China became a democracy tomorrow and had an election, I can guarantee you taht any party candidate who'd want to win the election would have to assert that tibet is a part of China, full stop. Whether I agree with this or not is not the point. I'm just sayng how it is.

"Though Communists leaders are talking about a return to some of there socialist roots, the fact they actually have to publically talk about this is enough to make me believe it's merely propaganda and the only socialism you will see, or rather capitalism in disguise of socialism is maybe a slighty higher wage."

they're desperate right now. They can see the moral fabric of their society failing, and can't perceive the source. It doesn't matter anymore whetehr they turn to capitalism or socialism; the problem has to do with character first and foremost. With socialism, half the population will just avoid taxes, pay under the table; with capitalism, employers will suck their employees for all they're worth. In the end, if china can bring back its soul, it could succeed under either system. But until then, it will fail under either. The educaiton system needs an overhaul. It focusses too much on just the material. Science, maths, computing, etc. But what about the moral fabric of the population? What about the Confucian ethic? They must bring it back before any system will work.

"Further more, I can think of none of my readings of Lenin, Mao, Marx, Engals or even Stalin which would make China look remotely communist... With my readings of socialist and social democratic theorists, you might say that China believes in socialist-syndicalism
but even that is pushing it way too much. Generally speaking China is a fascist nation with a scoailist facade."

China is neither fascist nor socialist. It calls itself socialist yet it's politically autocratic, economically state capitalistic, philosophically increasingly nationalistic and pragmatically anarchic. The growth of nationism could potentially lead to fascism, but I doubt (hope?) it will never go that far. but as for political theory, China's has bigger problems. Any political system, no matter how well designed it is, must still have the trust and respect of the people. My reference to anarchy refers tot eh complete lack of respect most people have for the law in this country. People will smoke under a non-smoking sign, drive past red lights, jay walk in full front of the police, pay under the table to avoid taxes, bribe people in my face, labour laws are regularly ignored and left unenforced, etc. etc. etc. No system, capitalistic of socialistic, can work under such anarchy. for any system to work, the people must first have some respect for the law.

"I don't know if there's people in China who actually believe in this facade, but I'm sure there are those who just hate the regime and fight against the facade. My only hope in the Communist party of China is that it allows a democracy with a left right split across the party. Perhaps China can inch its way to democracy... "

that's what you don't understand about china. In the west, we will respect a law even if we disagree with it, and then try to change it. In china, if they disagree with the law, they just ignore it and don't obey it, and move on with their lives as if nothin'. As for democracy, you're dreamin'. Even if it di happen, you'd just replace an autocratic nationalist regime with a democratic and perhaps even more dangerously nationalistic regime. Do you really want democracy in China right now? Come to China, get to knwo the culture, and you'll soon realise that democracy isn't a cure all. In some cases, what we have now might be better than democracy. don't forget, democracy is only as good as the will of the people. Remember Hitler was elected?


"Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike China, I'm glade it's emerging as a super power and thus can check the USA somewhat, but it is not some sort of socialist utopia or free market capitalism, but one of state capitalist goals."

I would like to see China as the country of the future, but certainly not as a military superpower.