Skip to comments.The Coming Collapse of China: 2012 Edition
Posted on 01/02/2012 7:12:49 PM PST by Hojczyk
I admit it: My prediction that the Communist Party would fall by 2011 was wrong. Still, I'm only off by a year
In the middle of 2001, I predicted in my book, The Coming Collapse of China, that the Communist Party would fall from power in a decade, in large measure because of the changes that accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) would cause. A decade has passed; the Communist Party is still in power. But don't think I'm taking my prediction back.
Don't believe any of this. China outperformed other countries because it was in a three-decade upward supercycle, principally for three reasons. First, there were Deng Xiaoping's transformational "reform and opening up" policies, first implemented in the late 1970s. Second, Deng's era of change coincided with the end of the Cold War, which brought about the elimination of political barriers to international commerce. Third, all of this took place while China was benefiting from its "demographic dividend," an extraordinary bulge in the workforce.
First, the Communist Party has turned its back on Deng's progressive policies. Hu Jintao, the current leader, is presiding over an era marked by, on balance, the reversal of reform. There has been, especially since 2008, a partial renationalization of the economy and a marked narrowing of opportunities for foreign business
Second, the global boom of the last two decades ended in 2008 when markets around the world crashed.
Third, China, which during its reform era had one of the best demographic profiles of any nation, will soon have one of the worst. The Chinese workforce will level off in about 2013, perhaps 2014,
(Excerpt) Read more at foreignpolicy.com ...
Incorrect again. China is one of the manufacturers designated as such by the rich, globalist masters of the universe, who have outlawed new, small manufacturing starts in most counties and cities of the USA (keeps potential competition—other families, down). China has also established new trade of its products in exchange for natural resources (oil, metals, etc.) from other “developing” (third world) countries.
Many paid propagandists have been harping for over five years now, the feel-good canard that China has begun to collapse. They’ve done so out of fear that higher prices of Chinese goods and freight fuel will slow their import/merchant rackets down. There’s no China collapse, although the collapse of our USA and most of the rest of the West may slow it down a little.
We Americans should get started with some real work again (making useful things), but that’s not likely.
Because the means of production are still in the hands of a few. They (the power brokers) just today pimp their people out as in China. You still have a small group and essentially a single party. You have no free men, no rights, no ownership of what really matters. Books have been written on this and I talked about this in 1997 already and wrote about it here in 2003 (if you care go back): There really is no difference between communism and fascism except in a self described academic way that ignores the means and the end and rather focuses on the colors of flags or titles. Both arrive at the same point but declare themselves to be the antithesis of the other. They fight each other to the death because they are competing for power, but both do the same things once in power. Stalin or Hitler, no difference. Mao or Stalin, no difference. Except academically where with semantics and rhetoric one tries to carve some difference out.
So many seem to swoon over the marvels of Red China's capitalism. Yes, the Commies are still in control but relax Red China is essentially capitalist now, they assure us.
No it ain't. The last I heard they prefer "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics." Deng, et al. studied and adopted Lenin's New Economic Policy (NEP).
Following the Russian Revolution "War Communism" had total control over the economy leading to such things as shortages of all kinds, particularly food, there were "disgruntled workers, peasant unrest, and open rebellion among the soldiers and sailors stationed on Kronstadt Island, Lenin resolved to reverse direction."
NEP as a "concession to market forces soon led to the denationalization of small-scale industry and services; the establishment of trusts for supplying, financing, and marketing the products of large-scale industry; the stabilization of the currency; and other measures, including the granting of concessions to foreign investors [Lenin called them: useful idiots] . . . the Soviet economy revived . . . [there was] the re-emergence of a 'capitalist' class in both the countryside (the kulaks) and the towns (NEPmen)".
As with all capitalist economies there were ups and downs. There was "anxieties within the party about bourgeois degeneracy and the loss of revolutionary dynamism." Stalin was now in charge and that was the end of NEP, kulaks, and NEPmen.
Deng, et al. regularly consulted with experts including Armand Hammer the wealthy American and owner of Senator Al Gore Sr., at al. Hammer was in Russia during the 1920s.
The Chi-Coms have not and will not make Stalin's mistake. They understand Lenin who noted that NEP had to be pursued "seriously and for a long time."
There have been lots of news about Red China extorting and outright stealing intellectual property, technology, and know how. Once the Chi-Coms are confident that they can provide the innovation needed they will seize the "useful idiots'" property and kick them out with nothing. That's NEP.
I hope the useful idiots are not so dumb to beg Congress for a TARP to compensate them for their losses. We citizens will insist that they be tried for treason in response.
Over 150,000 companies in China are state owned. All of the banks are state owned. In many of the most remote counties of the USA, there are zoning laws against any manufacturing on remote, private properties.
Starve the B. Become more self-sufficient, and stop buying.
These regimes simply incorporate a hybrid approach where they let the reigns a bit loose but still hold them in their hands. They allow trade and limited communications, they want that technology, the business practices and management techniques as well as the direct investments in capital machinery etc. They want their select students to study abroad and learn key things... But at the end of the day the people in that nation are still slaves under a regime that has no semblance of real rule of law, democratic principals, or rights for citizens etc. All the means of production are still held by the same old people that 30 years ago sat in the Polit Bureau. Instead of wearing a green uniform with a giant bus driver hat and huge medals or a blue uniform as in China, they today put on a suit and give themselves titles like CEO. If you get in their way, you end up dead or like him: http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2005/10/23/billionaire_sent_to_siberian_prison/
The difference between today and 30 years ago is a perception of freedom and the fact that we get slave labor from there (China) or resources (Russia).
And, the USSR would be just like Russia...
Under communism, businesses are owned by the government. Under fascism, business can be privately owned but is controlled by the government. The West is one of the two now (overly controlled by monopolies with stated concerns of environmentalism, animal worship, feminism, homosexualism, phony property values excuses, family-busting programs, etc.). China is both.
That was the plan .. the New Economic Policy (NEP) which Lenin needed immediately to build an economy to save the Revolution and for the long term to support his communist state. Eventually the State would take everything. Stalin came to power and ended it way too soon.
Deng copied NEP and the Chi-Coms will not make Stalin's mistake but they will seize foreigners' property and kick them out with nothing when (IF!) Red China can make it without extorting or outright stealing intellectual property, technology, and know-how.
He makes several credible arguments.
I’ve always wondered whether the traditionalist ChiCom leadership will be capable of responding to a rapidly changing population that starts to view itself as entitled to a new kind of global manifest destiny.
No, they’re most definitely communists. Everything with them is a means to an end to spread communism worldwide.
The capitalization of socialism(communism) has begun..
-OR- the socialization of capitalism its the same thing..
And will continue until people see that socialism is a political disease..
and democracy is the carrier..
Democracy is indispensable to socialism. The goal of socialism is communism. -V.I. Lenin
The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism .-Karl Marx
Guys, any trade is against communism. Rejecting enterprise, market and trade is a main idea of communism. You can’t tell China has communism + enterprise, market and trade no matter how many limits you are including there. It is like claiming making sex in a name of virginity (as soon as it is a safe sex:) And your limits aren’t fair anyway because China as it is built via enterprise, market and trade.
Have you ever talked to a Chinese? They are nazy under red banner, there is no communism there.
Sounds like the Japanese just prior to Pearl Harbor.
I have no first-hand knowledge but all Chi-Com horrors including the killings of at least 60 million Chinese citizens are contemporaneous events for me beginning in the 1940s with the killings of the "landlords" as our Commies, dupes, and dopes cheered Mao's "agrarian reformers."
My favorite Chi-Com quote vis-a-vis us is "We can lose [insert current population of America here] how many can you lose?"
I hope you can post this information often so everyone gets to know the Chi-Coms' game as it spreads to all continents -- including ours it appears.
How come all socialist and communist countries are antidemocratic, then? A republic cannot work without representative democracy, and neither can a constitutional monarchy; these need separation of powers and the rule of law to prosper rather than autocracy. Communist states have pseudodemocracy, where the power lies with appointed bodies and the elected bodies act as a rubber stamp; same with socialist entities such as the European Union. All communists (save, arguably, in South Africa) have come to power via violent revolution instead of being elected into power; they degenerate into non-democratic oligarchy or autocratic monarchy/cult of personality.