From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Subject: Re: "When China Wakes: a survey of China" by 'The Economist'
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 07:36:55 GMT

In article <1g6iesINNphh@uwm.edu> jiqing@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Jiqing Wang) writes:
>
>Here are some interesting points from "When China Wakes", a survey of china
>by <The Economist>, 11/28/92.
>
>1. China's economic performance in the past 14 years has brought about one of
>   the biggest improvements in human welfare anywhere at anytime. Real GNP
>   has grown by an average of almost 9% a year. By 1994, China's economy is
>   sure to be 4 times bigger than in 1978. If China hits its targets, which are 
>   reasonable, by 2002 the economy will be 8 times bigger than in 1978.
>
>2. The official figures about China are gibberish. China is already the world's
>   third, or fourth, biggest economy in real terms, behind only America, Japan,
>   and maybe Germany.
>
>3. China in 1991 is a bit more advanced than South Korea in 1970 when S. K.'s
>   GNP per head was $1100 (in 1991 dollars).
>
>4. A conservative estimate will put China's real GNP at $1.4-1.5 trillion,1/4 
>   of America's. If purchasing power parities are used, China's economy is
>   more than 50% of the size of America's.
>
>5.If China continues to follow in Taiwan's footsteps it will be as rich as
>  today's Taiwan in 25 years, when its output will equal 80% of the output of
>  the OECD then. (OECD: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development,
>  consisting of 24 western countries, including the US,Japan,Germany, Britain, 
>  France, Italy, Canada, Austrilia, etc.)
>
>6. China has a road-map for getting out of poverty. The guide is provided by
>   China's East Asian neighbors, and the Chinese has studied it carefully.
>
>7. Gradualism has worked in China. The tides of history may have given Russia
>   and Eastern Europe no choice but "big-bang" reform. But it is Russia, not
>   China, that is suffering from hyperinflation and 20%-a-year falls in 
>   industrial output and is asking for western hand-outs. 
>
>8. The Chinese reforms have succeeded thus far because they introduced a great
>   deal of competition into the economy, first in the countryside, then in the
>   cities, between rural industries and state industries, between provinces in
>   the coasts and provinces in the interior, then with foreign companies.
>
>9. Deng Xiaoping's "socialism with Chinese characteristics" is really 
>   "capitalism with Chinese characteristics".
>
>10. Privatization may not be needed. This can be done by encouraging and
>    developing private and foreign companies, which will reduce the weight of
>    state companies. Taiwan never did any privatization. In 1952, 90% of 
>    Taiwan's industrial assets were owned by state firms. Now state firms own
>    only 20% of industrial assets. 
>
>11. Chinese politics at top level is cruel, personal and lawless, which makes
>    it unstable. But there is also considerable stability and continuity down
>    belown. When Deng dies, there may be swift shifts at the top. But once a
>    coup is executed, it is back to business as usual for the governing 
>    apparatus.
>
>12. The Chinese system is unlikely to collapse like the Soveit's because:
>    1).The Soviet Union was a colossal economic failure while China has been
>    a colossal success. It is  rare, if not unheard of,for a government which
>    has raised living standards so spectacular as China's to collapse. 2).China
>    is still 75% rural and the party is still popular in the countryside. 3).
>    There are no alternative power centers. The Soviet Union collapsed because
>    of 6 years of free debates and Boris Yeltsin. 4).Keeping power is the only
>    issue for the party. It will do everything to keep power. If developing the
>    economy is the best way to keep power, the party will develop the economy.
>    The Communist party has become very pragmatic.
>
>13. The end result of the reform must be a society and economy in which 
>    communism as such is gone. This need not be done at once. Actually, the
>    party has a significant role to play in China's transition to a full market
>    economy. As is shown by the dismaying Russian experience, a powerful and 
>    impartial force is needed to police some aspects of the transition. Market
>    forces alone can not provide all the discipline. 
>
>14. The reform is pervasive and irreversible. According to Lee Kuan Yew, it is
>    no longer a question of what the leaders want. It is a question of what the
>    people want. The Chinese people have learned of the prosperity of Taiwan and
>    Hongkong and Sigapore. If people in these places can make it and people in
>    China cannot, it must be because of the bad system. Then let's get rid of 
>    it. If the leaders don't bring progress and prosperity to replace poverty
>    and backwardness, they can not stay in power or they may get killed by the
>    army.
>
>15. No matter where you go in China today, the most emphatic sensation you get
>    is the intensity of the desire to modernize and to grow. Governers and party
>    secretaries: their only interets seem to be foreign investment, trade and
>    economic reform. The experience so far suggests that human welfare would be
>    better served by the Communist party gradually decommunising itself than by
>    the Russia-like dislocations a sudden collapse would bring. China, with 
>    more than a decade of successful reform already behind it and no longer an
>    economy of shortage, would be much better placed than Russia to start 
>    growing again if the Communist party did evaporate.
>
>16. Western countries have tended recently to think about the smaller matters
>    concerning China: import barriers, arms sales, student dissidents. These
>    all count, but by 2010 western policy-makers should long since have started
>    thinking about much grander topics. What will happen when a fifth of man-
>    kind become industrialized? The west cannot say it wasn't given plenty of
>    warning. After advising it to let China sleep, Napoleon went on to add that
>    "when China wakes it will shake the world."
>
>
When I started read this article I suspected that Brits are trying to stir up
sinophobe around the world especially among China's neighbors and West nation,
it confirmed my suspection in last paragraph.
   Civilization's up and downs are the matters most part are out of people's 
control, but people do have influence to derail, speed up or slow down the
process. If china is going to take off, I long before belived she will. others
can hardly do anything about it, if China is skillfully managed it and avoids
traps set up by those who want to undermine China. 
   But Not matter who is the strongest, if people get involved with each other
they will less likely get into conflict. Close trade relationship is the only
way to resolve the dangerous conflict becasue common interests is bigger than
mutual mutual difference. Like two people embrassed each other so close that
they do not have space to swing their fists to hit the other even they wants
to.
   I prey for China and the World.
chunde


Newsgroups: soc.culture.china