| Communism and Capitalism | |
|---|---|
| Oct 1, 2005 04:31 |   |
 | I read a travel review where the writer was surprised by the mix of communism and capitalism in China. https://community.travelchinaguide.com/review2.asp?pp=1&i=478 I guess many people who havent been to China face the same question, so here are some ideas about this topic: What you see today is the toughest stoneage capitalism in the world. Like DARWINs idea of survival of the fittest.You know, Chinese are very pragmatic. As long as tomorrows prosperity is higher than todays, nobody cares about who runs the country. Lets say, if I have one more tv and the chance for a car tomorrow, I will do everything to reach that and Im satisfied. In MASLOWs Pyramid as a hierarchy of needs, food ranks the lowest while self fulfilment comes in the end, when every other wish is already satisfied. So physiological and belonging needs have to be satisfied first. The rather poor US social insurance system looks like an utopian Cockaigne compared to China. But that is no criticism! Instead, their politics are very clever. See Russians wanted to start at the top of the Pyramid and changed the political system first - the result was a catastrophy! Chinese do it the other way round and despite some bad mouths, it seems to become very successful! Since DENG XIAOPINGs early market liberation starting shortly after “great” chairman MAO passed away, the Chinese reached an average economic growth of nearly 10% over the last twenty years. Of course it is easy to have a strong growth if you start at zero, but keeping it over such a long time and avoiding the Asian crisis a few years ago, is fascinating. My favourite is the philosophical argumentation of the economic change. Think of it, after fighting for equality and fraternity for some fifty years DENG just said it is not important if a cat is white or black, as lond as it catches mice. The further (condensed)argument of communism is that it follows the social development after capitalism on a higher stage. Which means you have to exploit people first before you can make everybody equal (in bad words;-) So there is Communism printed on the outside, but with INTEL inside;-) |
| Oct 4, 2005 08:36 | #1 |
| for a funny interpretation of DARWINs theory take a look at: http://www.darwinawards.com/ I hope you can share black humour;-) |
| Oct 20, 2005 17:26 | #2 |
| There was a question recently: "So whom do you think will be washed out? People use knife(reminds me of killing:))&folk VS people use refined branches?" To avoid any misunderatanding and to make sure, with survival of the fittest I meant the conditions within Chinese economy, no war of the (cultural) worlds on my mind. And stoneage capitalism refers to the early Manchester days of industrialization, where the single worker had no right at all... |
| Oct 21, 2005 05:04 | #3 |
| as a Chinese ,I can not say which is better ,communism or capitalism . Chinese economy does promote quickly ,but there are many side effects inside ,such as the decline of morality and the more and more serious problems about public security ~~ All we can do is not to judge which one is better ,because every coin has two sides ,but to think about how to perfect a economic system ,no matter market economy or planned economy. take advantage of each method to make people live a better life in a secure and peace environment |
| Oct 22, 2005 19:03 | #4 |
| To CONNY: Last week I gave a homework to my students. Their major is Logistics, 3rd year. The topic was "Environment and Pollution". I told them to prepare something at home and to be ready to talk over the question. And you know what, I enjoyed my class for the first time since I teach in this college. 99% of the students come from rural areas of different parts in China. They would often say: "I don't know, I don't have an opinion, I don't have a point of view". You can imagine the feeling when you have to teach them English and not general knowledge. Environement is one of the most difficult topics from a lexicological point of view, but it seems to be quite interesting for them, and they knew how to use the appropriate vocabulary [!].  |
| Oct 23, 2005 23:25 | #5 |
| I know how you feel when you asked a question to your students but no one reply you ,you have to do it yourself .Silence is a common scene in class in China :( regime depends on the economic system .Both Communism and Capitalism take advantage of complex economic system . free competiton economic environment can not exsit in reality ,macro control of government is not almighty ,so nowadays Communism countries adopt market economy in certain degree and planned economy do exist in Capitalism countries . what's the essence of Communism and Capitalism ? |
| Oct 24, 2005 03:10 | #6 |
| This regime just uses market econonmy to survive, otherwise it would have already broken down. Having a plan doesnt mean you do planned economy. Neo-classical theories, where the state has to set some regulations to a certain (as little as possible, but as big as necessary) regulations is NO planned economy.... China reminds me of the early Manchester days. |
| Oct 24, 2005 03:42 | #7 |
| Neo-classical theories was challenged a lot by Keynesianism ,and developed as Neoclassical Synthescs in late 1960s which combined the theory of marco control from Keynes and micro economy of neoclassical . that is to say ,macro control is necessary .what we used today is called planned market economy :p |
| Oct 24, 2005 04:25 | #8 |
| Oh, Conny, your major seems to be a long time ago - but on your pic you are still sooo young and cute;-) Keynes Theory criticized the classical theory - remember Adam Smith and the unvisible hand? The market regulates itself, no political regulations needed and so on....until the black friday and the following crisis, where people wondered why the market did not regulate itself. John Maynard Keynes said as a criticism of the classical sentence in the long run the market would regulate itself: "In the long run we are dead", we cant wait until the market corrections happen somewhere in the future- quite funny! So, for example the US government started to invest heavily so that the economy revitalized - which is against the classical theory which denies any governmental interference. But it worked. But the later political interpretation of Keynesianism in some European countries, where they interfered also in normal situations hoping that the cycle of up and down would balance the governmental investitution debts in bad times by raising tax surplus in good times - did not work and lead to heavy budget deficits and even worse crisis.....there was a new idea of developing the classical theory with some necessary extend of governmental interference in certain situations, but avoiding the heavy interference of the last interpretation of Keynes, the Neo-Classical Theory is what most countries use in their economy politics today. And this is worlds apart from the ruinous planned economy of communism of the past. There were no incentives to do more or to do it more efficient, so that if the moderator (or "dictator") does a mistake in his year plans, the whole economy goes down. The moderator says what everybody has to do. The huge leap into starvation was such an example - 50 to 80 millions dead! Sorry for this long, boring monologue! |
| Oct 24, 2005 04:42 | #9 |
| yeah , I confess that my knowledge need to up to date :P it is not boring at all . the controversy between neoclassical synthesce and neo-cambridge school promoted the development of economy ;and I hope to know more about your views, what's the essence of Capitalism ? |
| Oct 24, 2005 04:50 | #10 |
| Nonono, it is not about loosing face or anything...everybody can mix up or confuse things, especially by googling;-) |
Page 1 of 5 < Previous Next > Page:
Post a Reply to: Communism and Capitalism
Copyright © 1998-2025 All rights reserved.