China

The fightback
User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Dec 31, 2022 2:22 pm

Image

Covid in China: Western propagandists look set to be disappointed again
The following article by Indian commentator Maitreya Bhakal, originally published in the Global Times, addresses the latest round of Coming Collapse of China hysteria in the imperialist media. Bhakal observes that, having relentlessly mocked China’s dynamic Zero Covid strategy for the last three years, the West is now hoping beyond hope that the lightening of Covid restrictions will trigger a massive public health crisis which will in turn foment widespread dissatisfaction with the Communist Party of China-led government. In these hacks’ fantasy world, the ensuing instability could deliver a mortal blow to Chinese socialism.

Bhakal concludes that the West’s journalists and politicians are destined for frustration: “As with many of their other predictions, whether China’s economy that’s been collapsing for thirty years, or the Communist Party that will be overthrown any time now, Western propagandists look set to be disappointed again.”
If there’s one quality that defines Western civilization, it is racism. Western culture is often filled with bigotry and intolerance.

Few things demonstrate this better than the West’s propaganda around COVID-19. After all, people generally don’t die in China like the way they do back home. Children aren’t shot in schools, civilians aren’t randomly killed by the police, and drug deaths and violent crime are extremely rare. As a result, any event that causes Chinese deaths is warmly welcomed by Western propagandists.

As usual, all of this is blamed on China’s political system. Western propaganda is as one-sided as it is lazy: anything wrong in China – from an initial setback against a new disease, to bad weather – is always blamed on China’s supposed “authoritarianism.”

Today, almost three years into the pandemic, Western “democracies” lie devastated. China has four times the population of the US, and its COVID death toll is about 5,200. So far, America’s death toll is 211 times higher, Britain’s 37 times higher, Italy’s 34 times higher, Germany’s 30 times higher, Spain’s 22 times higher, and Canada’s 9 times higher. All these “rich” “democracies” are at the forefront of criticizing China on “human rights”, but they can barely provide their own populations with the most basic human right: the right to live.

So much for the superiority of “democracy.”

Last month, China witnessed a few small-scale protests. The aims and political persuasion of the protestors varied. Some had genuine questions on the direction of China’s COVID policy. Some were protesting local lockdowns in their localities or cities. Some were university students. Some were Westernized liberals. Others were Western propagandists and provocateurs – Western “journalists” or “NGO workers” or “English teachers”, who somehow always seem to materialize at Chinese protest sites.

The Western media pounced. One would be forgiven for assuming that China was undergoing a revolution, that the whole nation was on fire, and that every other Chinese citizen was out on the streets rioting. The protests were described as “widespread civil unrest”, and the “biggest threat to the Party since decades.” Every trope in the book was deployed.

This month, China announced that the dynamic zero-COVID policy was going to become less stringent. This was in accordance with the newer variants of the virus such as Omicron, which are milder in nature.

This was to be expected. After all, there is a reason why the policy is called “dynamic” zero-COVID. When variants become milder, restrictions may be eased and calibrated as required. Moreover, most of China’s population is vaccinated, and the remaining are being jabbed at a record pace. Only Western propagandists can fail to see through this common-sense approach.

And they failed. The same people who had once criticized China’s zero-COVID policy as excessive, are now criticizing its moderation. When yesterday China prepared too much and was over-reacting – today, as The Economist agued, it had “not done enough to prepare”. If everything China does is wrong, the opposite is also wrong too.

Hoping against hope

Western propagandists are desperate. The schadenfreude is palpable. For them, China’s recent “rollbacks” bring back memories of the initial Wuhan wave, and they hope failed COVID-19 fights in their own countries will be repeated in China, which they seek to enjoy.

Yet, China’s socialist system has shown again and again that it is capable of unprecedented resilience and adaptability. It was the first in the world to handle a pandemic of this scale, it was the first to impose lockdowns (other countries then followed suit), and it was the first in the world to manufacture vaccines en masse and even export them.

What makes this combination even rarer is that China managed to keep its death rate amongst the lowest in the world despite having the largest population on Earth – an extraordinary combination of nimbleness and flexibility.

As with many of their other predictions, whether China’s economy that’s been collapsing for thirty years, or the Communist Party that will be overthrown any time now, Western propagandists look set to be disappointed again.

https://socialistchina.org/2022/12/23/c ... ted-again/

Image

On the work of young communists in China
We are pleased to publish here the text of a speech by Ms Li Na, Communist Youth League branch secretary of Bureau VII of the International Department of the Communist Party of China (IDCPC), given on 17 December at the second of two online seminars on the theme ‘The 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China and its World Significance’, organised jointly by Friends of Socialist China and IDCPC.

Li Na’s speech gave a fascinating insight into the workings of the Communist Youth League at a branch level, including the league’s role in organizing study of Marxist theory and recruiting young members – “as the Party’s development needs new blood.”
I am Li Na from the Bureau for North American, Oceanian and Nordic Affairs of IDCPC. I am very honored and grateful to have this opportunity to speak here with you all.

The successful convocation of the 20th CPC National Congress marks a milestone in our Party’s history, as the whole Party and the entire nation embark on a new journey toward building a modern socialist country in all respects, and advance toward the Second Centenary Goal. As one of the youngest Party member of our Bureau’s Party branch and the Secretary of the Communist Youth League branch of our Bureau, today I want to share with you the CPC’s operation at primary-level and the Party’s youth work basing on our own practice.

I. Primary-level CPC organization

As is pointed out in the Report to the 20th CPC National Congress, “the Party’s advantage and strength lie in its close-knit organizational system”. As world’s largest political party of government with over 96 million members, the CPC attaches great importance to strengthening its over 4 million primary-level Party organizations, including those in Party and government offices and public institutions. Today I want to focus on 3 major functions of primary-level CPC organization, taking our Bureau’s Party branch as an example.

First, primary-level Party organizations play a key role in ensuring the Party’s leadership. The Director General and Deputy Director General of our Bureau are also the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of our Bureau’s Party branch, which guarantees that all our work is led by the Party and guided by the theories and policies of the Party.

Second, the Party branch organizes theoretical study in various forms to make sure that all of its members are well aware of the Marxist theories and the latest theoretical exploration and policy addresses of the Party leadership. For instance, recently our Party branch has held general meetings to study the 4th volume of Xi Jinping: Governance of China upon its publication, as well as General Secretary Xi Jinping’s address at the opening session of the 20th National Party Congress and the Report to the Congress. Besides, our branch organizes tours and visits to museum, exhibitions and institutions at least once a month. Recently we’ve visited the former residence of Li Dazhao, a founding member of the CPC who sacrificed his life for the revolution in 1920s. This month we also visited the exhibition “Forging Ahead in the New Era” at Beijing Exhibition Hall, which showcases China’s great achievements in the new era under the leadership of General Secretary Xi Jinping. These activities have helped us broaden our horizons and learn more about the history and achievements of our Party.

Third, primary-level Party organizations are responsible for member recruitment, as the Party’s development needs new blood. It takes at least 2 years for an applicant to be granted full Party membership. After handing in a formal application letter to the Party organization, the candidate needs to undergo a strict procedure of training and tests. When the candidate is finally qualified to join the Party, the branch holds a general meeting for admission in which the candidate takes a solemn oath and becomes a probationary Party member. At the latest oath-taking ceremony of our Comrade Xin Yuzhou in September, all members of our branch renewed our oath together with him. With the standard and innovative operation of our primary-level Party organizations, the CPC continues to grow bigger and stronger.

II. Party’s Work Concerning the Young People

As you may know, people of my age are known as Generation Z. The Generation Z in China is indeed a very lucky generation, for we are born in a remarkable time of peaceful development and we grew up along with a strong and prosperous China. We are presented with incomparably broad stages to display our talents and bright prospects to fulfill our dreams.

General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out on the 20th CPC National Congress that “work concerning young people should be regarded as a matter of strategic significance”. Under the guidance of his instructions and the leadership of our Party branch, our Bureau’s Communist Youth League branch is committed to provide various platforms for young cadres under age 28 to exchange views and improve ourselves. We have a Marxist theory study group, an English study group and a reading club that hold activities on a weekly or monthly basis. Recently we have had workshops on Marxist classics including Communist Manifesto, Mao Zedong’s On Contradiction and On Practice, etc. which was greatly helpful for enriching our minds.

A lucky generation is also supposed to be a generation with historical responsibilities. We will always bear in mind General Secretary Xi Jinping’s words that we should steadfastly follow the Party and its guidance and strive to be a generation with ideals, sense of responsibility, grit and dedication to make our contribution to building China into a modern socialist country in all respects. We are also more than happy to compare notes with dear friends from the UK every so often and learn more about each other. Thank you.

https://socialistchina.org/2022/12/26/o ... -in-china/

Image

Telling the truth about China, and learning from China’s example
We are pleased to publish the text of a speech by Eben Williams, a Glasgow-based member of the International Committee of the Young Communist League (Britain), given on 17 December at the second of two online seminars on the theme ‘The 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China and its World Significance’, organised jointly by Friends of Socialist China and IDCPC.

Eben discusses the significance of the 20th Congress, in particular its relevance to young communists in Britain, contrasting Xi Jinping’s work report with the political pronouncements of Britain’s political leaders. The work of the CPC Congress reflects a profound orientation towards, and dedication to, meeting the needs of the masses of the people. The CPC’s adherence to the mass line couldn’t be more different to British parliamentary politics under the dictatorship of capital.

Eben calls on the progressive movement in Britain to learn from China’s experiences, to tell the truth about China, to take inspiration from the achievements of the Chinese people, to unite with Chinese people in the global struggle against imperialism, and to “redouble our efforts to strengthen the anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist resistance here at home.”
First of all, a warm hello to our comrades from the International Department of the Communist Party of China and a big thank you to Carlos and Keith and all of our comrades at Friends of Socialist China for the invitation to join this important discussion on the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China and its world significance. I hope to give a few of my own thoughts from watching the congress, the perspective of young communists in Britain that have grown up watching the rise of China, and a small call to practical action.

As communists, our work is obviously very broad, and we do all kinds of different things to help build power for the working class where we live, but one of the areas of our work that I’m most interested in is our work building relationships with other working class and communist organisations around the world through our membership of the World Federation of Democratic Youth and through our International Department. This includes both the Communist Party of China and its youth wing, the Communist Youth League.

Recently, comrades from the CYL invited us to watch the opening ceremony of the 20th National Congress online, together with them and other comrades from around the world. Many of our members are inspired by the Chinese socialist project and this was an exciting opportunity to say the least, like staying up until 3am to watch some kind of communist Superbowl of historic importance.

I was astounded by the scale of it, with more than 2,200 party delegates, representing over 96 million party members, representing over 1.4 billion Chinese citizens, all gathering together at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing to chart out the country’s future in one of the most advanced democratic exercises in the world.

I was moved by the Party’s commitment to ceremony and to its history, honouring the fallen martyrs of the revolution in a minute’s silence, including comrades Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, Liu Shaoqi, Deng Xiaoping, Zhu De, and Chen Yun.

But mostly, I was impressed with the care and precision put into the report from the outgoing committee delivered by General Secretary Xi Jinping in his opening address. I learned that this report took painstaking efforts and many, many months to prepare, and the contrast to speeches given by our own political leaders here in Britain couldn’t be starker, and reveals core differences between our two countries.

For example, China’s ruling class will always stress unity, because, in the language of the Party, China is a “people’s democratic dictatorship under the leadership of the working class based on an alliance of workers and farmers.” In China, the will of the majority forms the basis of the Communist Party’s mandate to govern, whereas Britain’s ruling class survives by sowing division and turning us against each other. Fundamentally, this is because it is a dictatorship of capital that does not have that same mandate and class basis.

Where our politicians will work hard to conceal their intentions and, where possible, only make them intelligible to the tiny, privileged elite at the highest echelons of our society who benefit, the rest of us will fumble in the dark. Many of us will become conscious of being lied to by our leaders, but instead of uniting against them, we will fall into political apathy, escapism, dead-end philosophies for our liberation, or even the clutches of the far-right. Meanwhile, a fierce anti-communist agenda works to prevent us from finding real solutions.

In total contrast to this, China’s leaders aim for clarity, ensuring that all citizens, regardless of education or background, are able to understand where China has come from, where it is now, and where it is going. How does China aim to improve the lives of the masses? What are the barriers it faces and how will it overcome them? The answers given in the outgoing report and produced during the Congress will now be studied and analysed by Party cadres in cadre schools and discussion groups throughout the country, so that they can perform their work better. Meanwhile, the media will work to make these complicated political strategies intelligible to the masses through TV and radio programmes and newspaper articles, right down to bitesize infographics on social media and Marxist education apps on your phone. Anyone seeking to understand the most powerful communist government and socialist country in the world (and people from across the political spectrum must surely want to do this) must also dedicate themselves to studying and understanding the impact of the 20th National Congress, the meaning behind President Xi’s speech, and the theoretical basis of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.

The YCL are no exception, with our members often raising questions about China’s socialist road. We therefore have a responsibility to educate our members so that they can go on to tell China’s story to more working-class people here in Britain, and help rebuild the defence against this new wave of McCarthyism and the US-led “New Cold War”. I myself joined the YCL partly because of what I saw as a much more credible view of China compared to other organisations and parties on the Left. Indeed, the so-called “crimes” of China seem to be the only thing that all of these other different groups can agree on.

It’s worth mentioning that our membership is all aged between 12 and 29, which means that it is entirely made up of people born after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. We are the generation born after “the end of history” when capitalist hegemony seemed eternal and any viable alternatives seemed on the brink of collapse. There are therefore comrades who watch the National Congress and see China as taking up the mantle of a new Soviet Union, a new socialist superpower capable of challenging US imperialism and offering hope to working class people around the world that live under capitalist oppression.

Although there are parallels, China is, of course, not the Soviet Union. And despite the West’s high hopes and best efforts, China has not taken the same path towards dissolution, nor has opening up to capital allowed it to succumb to capitalist restoration. Instead, it has survived into the 21st century to hold its 20th Congress, to celebrate its many achievements over the past 5 years, such as achieving its First Centennial Goal and eliminating absolute poverty, and China is now well on the way to becoming a powerful country with countless achievements for humanity closely allied with the Global South and other socialist nations.

The Chinese government is deeply aware of the lessons learned from the Soviet Union so that it can avoid the same fate, and is therefore extremely self-critical of its work. As a point of improvement in the opening report, President Xi raises concerns of serious internal issues facing the Party of ten years ago, including what he calls “deeply shocking cases of corruption.” An honest assessment of these contradictions can only come from a position of revolutionary conviction, and Xi Jinping’s presidency has been defined by the Party leadership’s commitment to resolving them, waging a fierce battle against corruption that has struck down “both tigers and flies”, and ushering in a “new development philosophy” for the “New Era”, which places high quality and balanced development and tackling inequality alongside economic growth as vital priorities for the country. The YCL can only commend these efforts.

China may not be the Soviet Union, but it is much, much further removed from a country like the United States. As President Xi highlighted in his speech, China is proud to carve out a new path of development and “will not tread the old path of war, colonization, and plunder taken by some countries,” stating clearly that “[t]hat brutal and blood-stained path of enrichment at the expense of others caused great suffering for the people of developing countries.” China will therefore follow its own path of peace, self-reliance, and win-win cooperation.

So, as socialists, communists, and progressives here in the imperial centre, in countries that took that other path of development, what story should we tell about China when talking to our friends and our neighbours?

First and foremost, we must tell the truth, prioritising exposing the lies told by the capitalist media, but also letting the facts of China’s achievements speak for themselves without falling into the trap of arguing that China can do no wrong. We are materialists, not idealists, and we need only “seek truth from facts” to succeed in articulating how the China miracle has been a victory for socialism and Marxism-Leninism.

Secondly, our research into China’s journey must always be used primarily to inform the hard work to be done here at home. Our working class is suffering from a full-scale offensive from our oppressors, including a cost-of-profits crisis and an assault on trade union and protest rights, but it’s also fighting back with the biggest surge of trade union activity that has been seen for many years, and an escalating militancy which cannot go to waste. China’s achievements show us that it is through action, through throwing ourselves into working-class struggle in trade unions, tenant unions, and communities, through escalating their struggles, and through doing the hard work of building a militant and revolutionary Communist Party that’s fit to lead, that we too can follow the socialist road. As friends of China living in an imperialist country, the best way for us to show solidarity to our comrades abroad is by redoubling our efforts to strengthen the anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist resistance here at home.

So, to the young people who are aware of the devastating impacts of capitalism on our planet, who are ground down by the barbaric actions that capitalists are taking in our country, but who have not yet taken the necessary steps to fight back, we must remember: nobody is coming to save us, so we must learn from China’s example of self-reliance and train to become examples ourselves.

If not us, then who? If not now, then when?

Thank you very much.

https://socialistchina.org/2022/12/28/t ... s-example/

Image

China stands on the right side of history and on the side of human progress
We are honored to publish below the text of the speech by Ms Wang Yingchun, Deputy Director-General of the Bureau for North American, Oceanian and Nordic Affairs, International Department of the Communist Party of China (IDCPC), given on 17 December at the second of two online seminars on the theme ‘The 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China and its World Significance’, organised jointly by Friends of Socialist China and IDCPC.

Comrade Wang Yingchun’s speech provides an inspiring summary of the major decisions, themes and achievements of the 20th Congress, and outlines the CPC’s positions on issues of global importance – particularly the pursuit of world peace and security, and putting sustainable, sovereign development at the center of the international agenda. The decisions of the Congress reflect the CPC’s resolute opposition to hegemonism and Cold War, and its commitment to respectful and mutually-beneficial relations on the basis of international law and the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. China seeks “to be a pillar of global progressive forces and inject strong positive energy into safeguarding world peace on its new journey to fully build a modern socialist country.”
Good morning! I’m delighted to join you in this webinar. As old friends of China and experts on China, all of you have been following China and the CPC for a long time. I believe you’ve had deep understanding of the 20th CPC National Congress. Last weekend, I attended your online exchanges with Professor Liu Genfa of CELAP and Professor Qu Bo of China Foreign Affairs University. It is inspirational.

The significance of the 20th CPC National Congress is self-evident. My colleagues and I are still in the process of studying. I think it can be understood from the following perspectives:

From the history of the CPC, the Congress was held at a crucial moment when our Party has successfully completed its century-long struggle and embarked on another journey to take new tests. For the CPC, the largest Marxist party of government in the world, moving from one century to the new one is a very important historical juncture.

From the course of the new era of socialism with Chinese characteristics, the Congress was convened at an important moment as the first decade of the new era came to an end and the second has begun. It has outlined the strategic plan for building China into a great modern socialist country. All the Party members and the Chinese people have high expectations and high hopes from the Congress.

From the perspective of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times, the Congress elaborated in depth on major issues such as breaking new grounds for adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times and Chinese modernization. Xi Jinping Thought of socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era is the Marxism of contemporary China and the Marxism of the 21st century. The great changes in the new era over the past decade have fully demonstrated how true and practical this scientific theory is. So it greatly strengthened the conviction of the CPC and the Chinese people in upholding and developing socialism with Chinese characteristics.

Internationally, the Congress takes place at a critical time when the world is undergoing profound changes unseen in a century and the international situation is becoming more volatile. How our Party responds to the situation, creates new opportunities and breaks new grounds will not only have bearings on China’s reform and development in the future, but also on world peace and development.

Next, I would like to share some of my observations around the theme of this event, “The 20th CPC National Congress and its world significance”.

The Congress has provided strong positive energy for safeguarding world peace
People all over the world long for peace, so does the Chinese nation for more than 5000 years. When Zheng He led what was then the world’s largest fleet to make seven maritime expeditions going as far as the South Seas and across the Indian Ocean (the Western seas) more than 600 years ago, he brought silk, tea and porcelain instead of war, colonization and plunder. China always believes that all countries, big or small, strong or weak, developed or otherwise, should uphold and promote peace.

General Secretary Xi Jinping proposed the Global Security Initiative, stressing that security is the prerequisite for development and mankind is an inseparable security community. He calls for a vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security. We advocate that all sides should adhere to mutual respect and consultation on an equal footing, bridge differences through dialogue and resolve disputes through negotiation. We oppose hegemonism and power politics in all forms. We have decided our position on the merits of matters, pushed for the political settlement of hotspot issues, be it the Iranian nuclear issue, the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue or Afghanistan issue. And we have been playing a constructive role in the Ukrainian crisis in our own way. We stand firmly on the right side of history and on the side of human progress. China has actively promoted international security cooperation and sent more than 50,000 personnel to UN peacekeeping operations. China is the second largest contributor to UN peacekeeping and the largest contributor of peacekeepers among the permanent members of the UN Security Council.

The report of the Congress solemnly declares that China firmly pursues an independent foreign policy of peace and that “taking the road of peaceful development” is one of the five features of Chinese modernization. I believe comrades here will agree that China’s development is a growing force for world peace. China has always been a builder of world peace and will never seek hegemony or expansion. This is the solemn political commitment of the CPC. We are confident that China, the world’s second largest economy with a population of over 1.4 billion, will continue to be a pillar of global progressive forces and inject strong positive energy into safeguarding world peace on its new journey to fully build a modern socialist country.

The Congress has offered new opportunities for common development
Development is the eternal theme of human society and the top priority of the CPC in governance and in rejuvenating the nation. In the new era, we have continued to promote all-round material abundance as well as people’s well-rounded development, and created two miracles, namely rapid economic growth and long-term social stability. Over the past decade, China’s GDP has grown from 54 trillion yuan to 114 trillion yuan, contributing about 30 percent to global growth on average annually, more than the combined contribution of the G7 countries. Thus, China becomes the primary driving force for world economic growth. We have built the world’s largest education, social security, and healthcare systems, and Chinese average life expectancy has risen to 78.2 years. We have won the battle against poverty, lifting nearly 100 million people out of absolute poverty and contributing 70 percent of the global poverty reduction.

We have worked hard to put development at the center of the international agenda. General Secretary Xi Jinping put forward the Global Development Initiative to accelerate the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and achieve stronger, greener and healthier global development. We have promoted high-quality Belt and Road cooperation and signed cooperation documents with 149 countries and 32 international organizations. The Belt and Road Initiative has become a popular international public good and a platform for international cooperation, providing a strong driving force for global development. More importantly, the great achievements China has made in economic and social development over the past 10 years have successfully promoted and expanded the Chinese modernization, created a new form of human advancement, provided other developing countries with valuable experience and set a successful example, and offered humanity a new choice for achieving modernization. The Congress has outlined an ambitious blueprint for advancing the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation on all fronts through a Chinese path to modernization. We will adhere to the fundamental national policy of opening-up and adopt high-quality opening-up to help create a new development pattern and achieve high-quality development. China will provide new opportunities for the world with its own development. We will input more resource for global development cooperation, remain committed to narrowing the North-South gap, and firmly support and help other developing countries accelerate their own development.

The Congress has injected new impetus to win-win cooperation
As we meet, the world has entered a new phase of instability and transformation, with geopolitical tensions overlapping with the evolving economic dynamics. The COVID-19 pandemic keeps resurging. The global economy faces mounting downward pressure and growing risk of recession. Food, energy and debt crises are emerging together. The Cold War mentality, hegemonism, unilateralism and protectionism are mounting. Human society is facing unprecedented challenges, when no country can stand alone. This requires all countries to pull together in times of difficulty, replace division with unity, confrontation with cooperation and exclusion with inclusiveness, accommodate the legitimate concerns of others while pursuing their own interests, and promote common development of all countries while pursuing their own development.

China is committed to the belief that the future of the world lies in the hands of all countries that international rules be written by all countries, that global affairs be managed by all countries, and that the fruits of development be shared by all countries. China is both a strong voice and practitioner of win-win cooperation. Over the past decade, we have worked hard to build a community with a shared future for mankind, firmly upheld international fairness and justice, advocated and practiced true multilateralism, and unequivocally opposed all hegemonism and power politics, and all acts of unilateralism, protectionism and bullying. As a responsible major country, we have taken an active part in the reform and development of the global governance system, and carried out comprehensive international cooperation in the fight against COVID-19, which has won widespread international acclaim.

Since the 20th CPC National Congress, the world has witnessed a wave of China’s “head of state diplomacy”. General Secretary Xi Jinping met with many visiting leaders of foreign countries and international organizations, and attended the G20 Summit, the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting, the first China-Arab States Summit, and the first China-Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Summit. He has been vigorously promoting global governance, setting comprehensive vision for regional cooperation, and ushering in a new era of comprehensively deepening bilateral and multilateral relations. This fully demonstrates China’s strategic choice and firm confidence in working with other countries to meet global challenges and strengthen solidarity and coordination. On its new journey, the CPC will strengthen exchanges and cooperation with political parties and organizations of other countries on the basis of the principles of independence, complete equality, mutual respect and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs. China will continue to develop friendly cooperation with other countries on the basis of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, promote the building of a new type of international relations, deepen and expand global partnerships of equality, openness and cooperation, and strive to expand converging interests with other countries.

China has been and will always be a defender of the international order. We stand ready to strengthen solidarity and cooperation with other progressive forces in the world and jointly create a better future for mankind.

Comrades and Friends,

The 20th CPC National Congress has outlined an ambitious blueprint for China’s future development. On the new journey, we will unswervingly continue to uphold and strengthen the overall leadership of the Party, adhere to Marxism and follow the path of socialism based on our national conditions, so as to safeguard and deliver the fundamental interests of the people and make new and greater contribution to the noble cause of peace and development of mankind. A China that continues to modernize itself will provide more opportunities for the world, inject greater impetus into international cooperation and the world socialist movement, and make greater contribution to the progress of mankind!

On the journey ahead, we are also ready to maintain exchanges and cooperation with you, true friends of China, Chinese people and the CPC.

Thank you!

https://socialistchina.org/2022/12/30/c ... -progress/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Jan 07, 2023 3:30 pm

Image

Backgrounder: Optimisation of Covid-19 response measures in China
The following report on the optimisation of Covid-19 response measures in China has been provided to us by our comrades at the International Department of the Communist Party of China. It provides a comprehensive description of the changes that have been introduced in the last few months, along with a clear explanation of the rationale behind those changes.

The report points out that the success of China’s Dynamic Zero Covid strategy has meant that “the infection rate and fatality in China have been kept at the lowest level globally”. The extraordinarily low infection rate over three years has given China’s healthcare system, epidemiologists and medical researchers time to better understand the virus, to develop vaccines and treatments, and to prepare medical facilities and supplies.

The authors note that, “in the light of the marked decline of the pathogenicity and virulence in Omicron and the steady rise of China’s capacity for medical treatment, pathogen detection and vaccination, China has taken the initiative to refine its Covid-19 response measures.” The essence of the changes is to shift focus from preventing infection to preventing severe cases and fatality, whilst at the same time allowing a return to some level of normality for the bulk of the population.

The major changes described in the report are: 1) An end to routine compulsory PCR testing; 2) An end to hospital quarantine for asymptomatic and mild cases; 3) An end to nucleic acid test and health code requirements for public spaces (other than schools, nursing homes and medical facilities); and 4) a re-opening of borders to international travellers.

These changes do not constitute an adoption of the type of “laissez-faire” or “let it rip” approach being implemented in the West. The new measures are being adopted in an orderly fashion in response to changing reality, most notably the reduced virulence of the dominant Omicron variant, and China’s high level of vaccination coverage (92 percent). Beijing, Guangzhou and other cities have already passed the peak of infection and are gradually returning to normal – without having experienced high levels of severe illness and death.

The report concludes by citing China’s contribution to international cooperation against the pandemic – “China shared COVID-19 prevention, control and treatment protocols with more than 180 countries and international organisations, dispatched 38 medical expert teams to 34 countries, and provided over 2.2 billion doses of vaccines for 120 plus countries and international organisations” – and calling for continued mutual learning and close cooperation between the countries of the world.
Over the past three years, the COVID-19 pandemic has wreaked havoc around the globe and posed enormous challenges to all countries including China. In 2020 when this public health emergency first broke out, the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Chinese government made a decisive decision to categorise COVID-19 as a Class-B infectious disease that would be subject to the preventive and control measures for a Class-A infectious disease in accordance with the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Prevention and Treatment of Infectious Diseases. The strict management of the disease has enabled China to pull through the difficult times when the virus was wreaking havoc and to withstand multiple global waves. It has also helped buy precious time for the research, development and application of vaccines and therapeutics and getting medical supplies ready, thus minimising the number of severe cases and mortality, and greatly protecting the health and safety of the people.

The global COVID-19 situation has changed significantly. In the light of the marked decline of the pathogenicity and virulence in Omicron and the steady rise of China’s capacity for medical treatment, pathogen detection and vaccination, China has taken the initiative to refine its COVID-19 response measures. We have adopted in an orderly fashion the 20 refined measures and 10 new measures, and decided to manage COVID-19 with measures against Class-B instead of the more serious Class-A infectious diseases, shifting the focus of our response from “stemming infection” to “protecting health and preventing severe cases”. We aim to better adapt our response measures to the new development in the epidemic and features of new mutations, effectively coordinate COVID-19 response and socioeconomic development, protect the safety and health of the people to the maximum extent possible, and restore normalcy to people’s work and life. The shift is science-based, timely and necessary.

I. Specific measures of China’s adjustment of COVID-19 response
Domestically, there are three major changes. First, identification of sources of infection. While COVID-19 was subject to the preventive and control measures for a Class-A infectious disease, infection cases were identified through compulsory nucleic acid testing among high-risk groups and mass testing in risky areas. After the policy adjustment, infection cases will be mainly detected in the course of treatment at medical institutions, via self-monitoring and through conducting testing among key groups of people. Second, management of sources of infection. Under previous rules, confirmed cases and suspected cases were quarantined and treated in isolation, while close contacts were required to receive epidemiological investigations and observation in isolation. After the optimisation, asymptomatic and mild cases can monitor their health at home. Third, response measures at community level. Epidemic prevention and control at community level will mainly target at key places, institutions and groups of people. Restrictions on other places and other people’s movement will be reduced or even removed to minimise impacts on people’s life and work. Negative nucleic acid result and health code requirements for entering public places will be scrapped except for certain facilities such as nursing homes, welfare houses, medical institutions and schools. On-arrival testing and health code checks will no longer be needed for domestic travel. Cross-regional coordination on tracing and managing personnel with potential spill-over risks will be scrapped. High-risk and low-risk areas will no longer be designated.

Externally, according to the Notice on Provisional Measures on Cross-border Travel to be effective on 8 January 2023:

First of all, policies on frontier health and quarantine will be adjusted. Inbound travelers will need to show a negative nucleic acid test taken within 48 hours prior to departure, without the need to apply for a health code from Chinese embassies or consulates. The health declaration form needs to be filled in as required by the customs. Those who have no issues to report in their health declaration and have been given regular customs inspection and quarantine clearance can enter China without being subject to quarantine. Closed-loop transfer and quarantine at designated facilities will no longer be applied to inbound travelers. Imported objects will not go through prophylactic disinfection, nor will cold-chain food be put under spot check.

Second, the flow of personnel will be facilitated. China will further refine arrangements for foreign nationals’ entry into China for such purposes as resumption of work, business, education, visiting relatives and family reunion and provide corresponding visa facilitation. Outbound tourism for Chinese citizens will be resumed in an orderly fashion. Restrictions on the number of international flights will be removed with phased increases in flights and refined distribution of flight routes.

Third, measures will be taken to guarantee freight transport at ports. China will gradually resume entry and exit of passengers by land and water on the basis of comprehensive assessment. For international cruise ships, a pilot programme will be carried out before the gradual opening up. Greater convenience will be provided for Chinese and foreign crew change in China.

China will continue working to make its COVID-19 response measures more science-based, targeted and responsive to the evolving COVID-19 situation, and better facilitate the safe and orderly cross-border travel of Chinese and foreign nationals.

II. Feasibility and prospect of China’s adjustment of COVID-19 response measures
1. China is well-positioned to refine its COVID-19 response measures thanks to its efforts in the past three years. In responding to the outbreak of COVID-19, the CPC Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core has always put the people and their lives above all else, and led the whole Party and people of all ethnic groups in concerted efforts in launching an all-out war to stop the spread of the virus. The health and safety of hundreds of millions of people have been protected to the greatest extent possible, and the impact on socio-economic development has been reduced to the minimum level.

Always committed to pursuing progress while ensuring stability, China has adjusted and improved its COVID-19 policies in light of evolving realities. On top of the nine guidelines for containment and treatment successively released, China has introduced 20 refined measures and 10 new measures respectively in response to the notable turn of situation. By doing so, China has held the strategic initiative firmly in its hand.

Giving top priority to people’s health and safety, China has well balanced COVID-19 response and routine treatment. All-out efforts have been devoted to acute, severe and critical cases, and a category-based approach has been applied to the treatment of key groups. Thanks to those measures, the infection rate and fatality in China have been kept at the lowest level globally.

With its commitment to a science-based approach to combating the virus, China has dedicated its efforts to the research and development of vaccine, rapid testing agent and medicine, launched the largest vaccine rollout programme worldwide, and worked to see to it that both traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine are used.

China has stayed committed to enhancing its capability for epidemic prevention and control, and emergency response. It has proceeded with reform and improvement of its disease prevention and control system, and increased the stockpile of resources for treating severe cases and of the supply of key medicine. Parallel emphasis has been put on both addressing immediate vulnerability and strengthening long-term protection.

Practice has fully proven that China’s COVID-19 policies are science-based, effective, and compatible with the national realities. They have been recognised by the people and will stand the test of history.

2. China is fighting a prepared battle. The CPC and the Chinese government are taking a host of measures to protect the health and safety of the people. The shift to manage COVID-19 with measures against Class-B instead of the more serious Class-A infectious diseases is only a change in ways of management, which in no way indicates a “laissez-faire”, “complete opening” or “lie flat” approach.

First, the features of the current virus variants and China’s vaccination situation has demonstrated positive changes. Omicron has become the global dominant virus strain. Despite the large number of infections, the rate of serious cases and mortality stays at a low level. China has administered over 3.4 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines nationwide, with vaccination and full vaccination coverage exceeding 92% and 90% of total population respectively. The health and personal protection capacity of citizens have significantly improved.

Second, we have tried our best to raise the prevention and treatment capacity of the entire medical system and given equal emphasis to both severe case treatment and the provision of daily medical services. Improvements have been made to the category-based approach applied to medical treatment. The capacity of community-level medical institutions has been strengthened. Additional fever clinics have been established. Medical resources for severe cases have been boosted nationwide, with a daily resources dispatch system in place. The strength of community-level medical institutions has been better leveraged to offer the category-based health management for the elderly with combined underlying conditions. Efforts have been made to continuously beef up emergency call answering capacity, emergency vehicle transfer rate and vaccination coverage for the elderly.

Third, we have boosted medical supplies through multiple channels. The production, distribution and supply of drugs have been boosted. Sufficient nucleic acid testing sites are retained at the community level for the convenience of the people. We have ensured that retail and online pharmacies have sufficient supplies such as antigen testing reagents so that the public can timely purchase necessary anti-pandemic materials online and offline.

3. China has full confidence in a smooth and orderly transition. All countries go through a period of adaptation when shifting gear in their COVID-19 policies, and China is no exception.

The current COVID-19 situation in China is within expectation and under control. Beijing was among the first to pass the peak of infection and production and life is gradually returning to normal. Relevant departments have made scientific assessments of possible infection peaks in other provinces, and are guiding localities in making necessary preparations such as increasing their medical resources and the provision of medical services. We in China are confident that we will be able to protect people’s health and minimise severe cases while accelerating the return of normal economic and social life for a complete and final victory against COVID-19.

III. Solidarity and cooperation is the most powerful weapon for the international community to overcome COVID-19
During the most trying period of COVID-19 prevention and control in China, the international community extended valuable support and assistance to China and the Chinese people. In the spirit of humanitarianism and multilateralism, China also provided support to the best of its capability for the international community to fight against the virus. China has actively offered humanitarian assistance to the international community, especially to countries and regions with weak COVID-19 response capacity. China shared COVID-19 prevention, control and treatment protocols with more than 180 countries and international organisations, dispatched 38 medical expert teams to 34 countries, and provided over 2.2 billion doses of vaccines for 120 plus countries and international organisations. By doing so, China has actively involved in the international cooperation against COVID-19, thus contributing to the global pandemic response and boosting hope and confidence for countries to overcome the pandemic.

At the same time, China has been open and transparent in sharing relevant data and information with the international community including the WHO. Following the recent adjustment of COVID-19 policies, relevant authorities in China shared COVID-19 genome sequence data from recent cases in the country through GISAID at the first opportunity. It is our hope that all sides take a science-based approach to ensure safe cross-border travel and keep global industrial and supply chains stable, so as to contribute to global solidarity against the pandemic and world economic recovery.

Political parties shoulder the weighty responsibility of improving people’s wellbeing, promoting national development and safeguarding world peace and stability. In April 2020, we issued a Joint Open Letter on closer international cooperation against COVID-19. As the pandemic has not yet come to an end, the Communist Party of China stands ready, in the spirit of the Joint Open Letter, for communication and exchanges with world political parties and political organisations, on promoting right perceptions, opposing the politicisation of public health issues, and fostering objective and friendly international public opinion concerning the pandemic. Through mutual learning and closer cooperation, we can promote the building of a Global Community of Health for All and contribute to world peace and development and the building of a human community with a shared future.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/05/b ... -in-china/

Image

China under Xi Jinping: putting politics in command
This article by Jenny Clegg – a revised and enlarged version of a three-part series originally published in the Morning Star (part 1 | part 2 | part 3) – provides a broad overview of China’s political trajectory in the present era.

Jenny takes on the media caricature of Xi Jinping as an “authoritarian” leader, analysing his political development over the course of several decades, noting in particular his longstanding commitment to combating climate change, his dedication to poverty alleviation, and his belief that China should shift away from using GDP growth as the central metric of economic success. As CPC General Secretary and China’s President, the most prominent aspects of Xi’s record have been the extremely rigorous (and popular) anti-corruption campaign; the success in eliminating extreme poverty; a major focus on environmental questions; and the centring of a common prosperity agenda that is already operating to reduce inequality and improve the conditions of the poor.

Sympathetic but not uncritical, the article provides valuable insights and a realistic assessment of China’s prospects for developing into a “modern advanced socialist country that is strong and prosperous” by the centenary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China (2049).
1. Who is Xi Jinping?

The Communist Party of China’s 20th Congress confirmed Xi Jinping as General Secretary for a third term. According to the mainstream media, China is lurching once again toward ‘one-man rule’ under the ‘thrice crowned’ leader. But what kind of rule will this be? China is the world’s second largest economy and the politics of its leader is of great consequence for the world.

So what are Xi’s politics? What has his leadership over the last 10 years meant for China and what direction does he intend the country to take over the next 5 years and beyond?

Xi’s political development

The son of a revolutionary hero who became a vice premier of China in the 1950s only to later fall victim to political turmoil in the Mao period,[1] Xi himself was a ‘sent down’ youth spending seven years from the age of 15 working in a poor community in China’s West. Serving for a time as a commune leader, he adopted the work style of ‘plain living and hard work’ – the ideal followed by the CPC from its earliest days.

Whilst these formative experiences moulded his core political outlook, it was through his work as Party Secretary of Zhejiang Province from 2002 to 2007 that a more concrete politics took shape.

Zhejiang is a commercialised province, one of those key Eastern seaboard areas which have driven the country’s hi-speed growth. After China joined the WTO in 2001, local cadres were exhorted to promote business, help new enterprises and court foreign investment, creating new jobs and opportunities.

But rapid industrialisation also brought increasing inequality, environmental degradation as well as corruption as the boundaries between politics and business blurred. Now in the senior ranks of Party leadership, one of some 3,000, Xi expressed his concerns in a series of articles in which he put great stress on the moral standards of the cadres and the need to prevent Party officials from solidifying into a privileged elite removed from the rest of society.

Power, he argued, was not a personal possession, to be used not for self-aggrandisement but for the public good. Grass roots levels were crucial – this was where the Party worked together with the people to build a better future. Emphasising the quality not just the quantity of growth – ‘not everything has to be done for GDP’; and the importance of the environment – ‘there is only one world and only one environment’ – Xi was paving a new way forward.[2]

Cleaning up the Party

By 2012, when Xi became Party leader, China had recovered rapidly after taking a serious hit in the 2008/9 world financial crisis, resuming the fast growth that had seen the economy more than double in the previous decade. It was up to him now to realise the previously set goals of achieving a ‘moderately prosperous society’ by 2020.

Xi’s first step was to refocus the Party on its high values of public service, launching a far-reaching anti-corruption campaign targeted at ‘tigers’ at the top as well as ‘flies’ at the bottom. His insistence that his immediate family should not undertake any business dealings struck a chord with people, gaining him much popularity.

A graduate in chemical engineering, with a PhD in Marxist legal theory, Xi was also a good communicator, a skill acquired during his years in the countryside, and the fact that he could put over his political message in an accessible manner, avoiding stilted rhetoric, also added to his popularity.

Determined to restore ideology to the heart of the Party, he encouraged Marxist study as well as wider Marxist intellectual debate, these not for the sake of theorising but in order to drive policy and practice forward.

His affirmation in 2013 of the role of the market as playing ‘a decisive role in the allocation of resources in the economy’ saw a widening of market reforms whilst a new emphasis on commercial law which, together with the wider establishment of enterprise-based Party committees, vastly improved business practice. From 2015, a massive infusion of government support reinforced the role of state-owned enterprises at the centre of economic policy.

Two particular advances of Xi’s first term were, on the domestic front, the 2016 Made In China Initiative which laid the basis of China’s technological upgrading to a higher stage of modernisation; and, of international consequence, the Belt and Road Initiative, setting out a new mode for China’s integration with the world community.

Revitalising Chinese politics

Greater economic success was bringing rising expectations and a more diversified society: a middle income group of some 400 million including those owning their own homes, many university-educated and having travelled abroad, co-existed in the cities with millions of migrants from the countryside, many still in hardship. At the same time a small but highly visible section of super-rich, heading private business empires, was becoming more powerful.

Increasing opportunities and day-by-day improvements in people’s livelihoods had meant the CPC enjoyed high levels of public support and satisfaction.

However the pace of growth had become unsustainable and a slowdown was inevitable. This meant that the Party had to find new sources of appeal to a more diverse public to maintain its legitimacy, delivering not only to a huge population, but one wanting many different things, no longer satisfied with just seeing China grow stronger.

Xi was to start his second term as CPC leader in 2017 with a message of unity calling for the ‘rejuvenation of the nation’ – a recommitment to the revolutionary goal of becoming a prosperous modernised society with a world power status.

The 2017 19th Party Congress opened the new era with a shift from Deng’s focus on economic growth – in Chinese Marxist parlance, the main contradiction to now be addressed was ‘between unbalanced and inadequate development and the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life.’

Despite this upgrade, Xi made clear China’s status as a developing country had not altered as he brought to the fore the two centennial goals: to achieve moderate prosperity, eradicating extreme poverty by 2021, the hundredth anniversary of the founding of the CPC; and to make China a modern advanced socialist country that is strong and prosperous by 2049, 100 years on from the foundation of the PRC.

In the last five years, China has continued to make considerable advances – in tackling air pollution; the huge investment in green development, taking China to the forefront in the production and use of renewable energy; massive advancements in transport and in R&D with the proliferation of innovative uses of automated technologies; the provision of basic pensions, social security and health insurance, some world class universities – to mention just a few. Most significant were the eradication of extreme poverty together with the pursuit of zero COVID which successfully kept deaths down so far to a tiny fraction. China has also become increasingly assertive in foreign affairs.

Then with the 20th CPC Congress approaching, Xi made some striking statements – that ‘houses are for living in not for speculation’, that ‘the disorderly expansion of capital’ was to be prevented. Backed by crackdowns on gaming, private education, and the hi-tech sector, these were indications of a ‘socialist turn’ ahead with a re-assertion of state power over the market.

Sequencing steps forward

None of this is to deny that China has considerable problems and shortcomings: abuses of human rights, exploitative conditions in some sections of industry, persistent corruption. Nor is it to claim than policies are universally popular – clearly patience wore thin among sections of the population with dynamic zero COVID. Undoubtedly there were serious concerns, even among some people generally sympathetic to China, regarding the ways the situations in Hong Kong and in Xinjiang were handled. But complex contexts are obscured by the West’s hyper-politicisation. The question is how to go about tackling the problems and making improvements.

Politics is not the fleeting day-to-day affair it often appears to be but a long term process which must be approached step by step. Starting from China’s actual conditions, building on the economic successes of his predecessors, and with eyes fixed on the goal of achieving developed country status, Xi set out first to restore the credibility of the Party as an organisation capable of tackling the country’s problems and improving the situation for the people – reviving its ethos of serving the people and renewing its Marxist ideological foundations. With the Party more focussed and disciplined, the second step was to reconnect with the people in the task of completing the ‘historical mission’ started in 1949 to become a modern country by following the socialist path.

Xi was able to convey a narrative about where China had been, where it had got to and where it was going, in a way that was meaningful to ordinary people, his forward-pointing message offering a shared sense of direction and a confidence and pride about China in the world beyond the diversity of socio-economic interests.

This had to be matched by efforts to regenerate the Party at the grass roots, in workplaces and communities, working together with the people as was seen in the campaigns to eradicate extreme poverty and to control the spread of COVID.

Taking this gradual approach, as China strengthens economically, Xi is moving beyond the Dengist framework of prioritising economic growth whilst keeping a low profile in the world towards an agenda of common prosperity and shared development.

The ‘reform and opening up’ approach is not so much being abandoned as put more firmly in the service of the overall interests of the country and the people as Xi brings politics back in command. As he says, the next five years will be critical.

2. China’s ‘common prosperity’ agenda
Marking out his third term as CPC leader, Xi has highlighted ‘common prosperity’ as an ‘essential requirement of socialism’ as he plots a course towards a modernised socialist state by 2049, 100 years on from the founding of the PRC.

First mentioned by Mao Zedong in the 1950s, the phrase was also used on occasion by Deng Xiaoping – his call for some to ‘get rich first’ always qualified with the phrase ‘so that they can help others to catch up’.

Xi’s aim is to reduce China’s considerable gaps in wealth and income, nevertheless what ‘common prosperity’ is not is an equalisation of incomes or a radical redistribution from the rich to the poor. His report to the 20th CPC Congress talks rather of increasing the incomes of low-income earners and expanding the size of the middle income group.[3]

Unequal China

China’s income per capita had by 2021 reached around $12,000, the World Bank borderline between an upper middle and high income country.

Along this route to ‘moderate prosperity’, as China built cities, encouraged private enterprise, developed share ownership and the property market, inequalities grew. Although the worst of China’s poverty has been eradicated, as Premier Li Keqiang was to admit in 2020, 600 million still have to survive on an income of only around $140 a month.[4]

The more vociferous burgeoning middle class has tended to occupy the attention of the government with demands to improve food standards, tackle air pollution and strengthen property and consumer rights. But what about the low pay and poor working conditions of the 300 million rural migrants? What about the 500 million or so left in the rural areas, some still scraping a living on small plots of land?

Inequality is structured into China’s society in the urban-rural gap and uneven regional development. In the coming years, rural dwellers will continue to migrate to the urban areas, clearing the way for agricultural modernisation with the aim of raising the remaining farmers’ incomes.

But the ‘common prosperity’ agenda also involves a shift from catering to the emerging middle class to improving the rights and conditions of the workers.

Improving pay and conditions

Low pay and poor conditions continue to affect the private sector in particular. Including household- and micro-enterprises, this accounts for some 80 percent of urban employment. Tougher regulations have now been introduced in the food delivery sector – minimum income guarantees, relaxation of delivery deadlines, ensuring social insurance coverage – whilst the ‘996’ pattern of working from 9 am until 9 pm six days per week, common amongst technology firms, has been ruled illegal.[5]

China’s labour laws set a reasonable standard by international comparison but implementation is very uneven. A recent Channel 4 documentary about Shein fashion, whose founder Chris Xu is a well-known tycoon, raises worrying questions about conditions of excessive overtime and docking of pay for substandard work.[6]

These practices may not be the majority, varying by sector, but they certainly do occur – they are against the law, as the programme pointed out. However in China, where business has expanded so rapidly over the last twenty or thirty years generally through personal contact, although practices have greatly improved, individual influence can still trump the law.

Xi Jinping’s Congress Report has called for improvements in labour laws and greater provision of law advice agencies to address the problems; collective bargaining – involving independent worker representatives elected from the shop floor in the car industry for example – may also start to play more of a part.[7] However, urgent though these improvements are, a radical readjustment in the relations between capital and labour in the private sector would cause economic disruption and will be approached with caution.

‘Common prosperity’ is also to cover more equitable access to improved public services. Measures for greater taxation of the rich and for improvements in social security are underway, however the central thrust of the policy direction is seen to lie in creating better quality better paid jobs. And the route forward for China’s 800 million strong workforce is through education.

“Invigorating China through science and education” [8]

China’s immediate priority is to upgrade its technological levels. Escaping the dead end of cheap labour exports for high-end imports means pouring investment into skills and indigenous science and technology. It is no longer a matter of simply producing Chinese brands to attract domestic consumers but innovating at the frontiers of new technologies to drive the industrialisation of the future.

This reorientation of the economic model has been underway for some time but has become a matter of survival as US decoupling aims to lock China into a trap where, no longer offering cheap labour at the lowest ends of the supply chain, it remains unable to compete at the top end.

With Xi now throwing the state into gear to engineer the modernising breakthroughs, Western naysayers proclaim China’s bureaucratism can only suffocate new ideas and strangle innovation in red tape: only capitalism apparently can incentivise creativity.

But the Chinese system has its advantages as Xi focusses resources on developing a contingent of first-class scientists, highly skilled engineers and workers, pulling together ‘innovation teams’. In continuing to give high priority to higher education, Xi ’s Report calls for the better establishment of vocational education within it.

A network of national laboratories and research centres is complemented by flexible arrangements combining state and private ownership. ‘Guidance funds’ offered by local governments to start-ups look to boost R&D and train talent.[9] A system of state shares in private companies can be coordinated to foster clusters and to fill in the supply chain around core state enterprises at local levels.

In enterprise management, as Huawei has demonstrated, employee share ownership can be an effective way of stimulating motivation and loyalty. ‘Technology shares’ are a practice used in Chinese firms to tie in valued specialists and skilled personnel.

It is often in the actual process of production that new techniques are worked out. And here China has the legacy of its own pre-modern practices of invention, experimentation and learning-by-doing as renowned Sinologist Joseph Needham detailed in his volumes on Science and Civilisation in China.

The ability to draw on both Western and traditional approaches to science appears to be paying off now as China takes the lead in holding nearly one third of the world’s renewable energy patents.[10]

Indeed decarbonisation is seen to be the route to high-quality development with the government taking this as a lever to change the country’s entire social and economic structure.[11]

The Zhejiang Experiment

Xi has set the goal of doubling the middle income group to 800 million by 2035 as a mark of achieving a basic socialist modernisation. Zhejiang province, designated the ‘common prosperity demonstration zone’, aims to expand the middle income category – those between $14,000 and $70,000 – to 82 per cent of its population by 2025, above that of Germany and the US. At the same time, the enrolment rate in tertiary education is to rise to more than 70 percent; and ‘public service centres’ are be provided for urban residents with facilities offering preschool education, health and seniors care, and physical exercise, within 15 minutes walking distance; whilst life expectancy is to be lifted above the national average of 78 to over 80 years. [12] (US life expectancy is estimated to have fallen now to 76.1 years). [13]

China’s idea of a socialist future of ‘common prosperity’ may not be what some in the Western Left have in mind: whilst the professed aim is to regulate excessively high incomes, the private sector will continue to grow numerically if not as a proportion of overall economic value, China will still have its tycoons and will still make great efforts to attract foreign investment. Nevertheless in its focus on the real economy; its hybrid state-market approach linking production and consumption, supply and demand; and in its emphasis on maintaining the predominance of ‘payment according to work’, China’s economy clearly stands out as distinct from capitalist economies.

If it does succeed in containing the ‘disorderly expansion of capital’ in such a way as to achieve, even if only approximately, the Zhejiang targets across the whole of China in the next 27 years this surely would be something really remarkable. Thinking ahead we should be asking what such a massive increase in market demand might have on the future shape of the world economy.[14]

Right now though Xi is clearly facing serious challenges with the property market verging on crisis, the severe challenge in exiting from COVID and with the US tech war intensifying.

3. China’s socialist modernisation
The particular significance of 20th CPC Congress was in its raising of the goal of ‘socialist modernisation with Chinese characteristics’ to the top of the agenda to achieve the establishment of a modern socialist state by 2049. Xi Jinping’s Congress Report provides some content on the future plans – but first, what is modernisation?

Two Paths to Modernisation

As set out by Walt Rostow in his infamous 1950s work The Non Communist Manifesto – modernisation theory envisages five stages of development from simple to complex society with technology, entrepreneurialism, individualism and competition the key drivers.

According to the schema, China would appear to be somewhere along Stage 4: the drive to maturity – a long period of sustained growth and structural change with modern technology extending across the economy, poverty falling, the agricultural workforce declining, and wages rising as workers acquire greater skills. Infrastructure and communications, education and the media, professionalism are all developed to high levels together with a more effective leadership of a population, realising new opportunities as they ‘strive to make the most of their lives’.

Stage 5: the age of mass consumption then reaches the wealth levels of the West at which point citizens, hardly remembering the subsistence struggles of previous stages, live in comfort, spending the days enjoying the arts.

Modernisation theory is of course a fantasy designed to privilege the way of the West and camouflage its imperialist nature. Out of 190 countries, only 36 are considered to be developed according to UN rankings: comprising less than one fifth of the world’s population, their advance took place at the expense of class polarisation, environmental destruction, and plunder, war and colonialism.[15]

China plans to bring another fifth of the world’s population up to modern standards but by following a distinct path of green development, common prosperity and peaceful negotiation with the rest of the world – all seen as essential features of socialist modernisation Chinese-style.

Needless to say this is massively ambitious.

China has followed its own development stages: first Mao restored the sovereignty necessary to the country’s material progress against the forces of imperialism, establishing an industrial base; then Deng’s ‘reform and opening up’ unleashed the fast paced growth that raised China’s economy to second in the world, with the private sector’s dynamism contained within the frame of state and public ownership and control.

Now midway along its own ‘drive to maturity’, China is looking ahead to transition through these initial phases of the primary stage of socialism, reaching a basic level of socialist modernisation by 2035 en route to a modern socialist society by 2049.

China’s distinctive economic operation

Looking to modernise the industrial system, government focus is on the real economy, pursuing economic growth through its distinctive combination of market actors with the ‘strategic supporting role of the state-owned economy’.

The Chinese approach sees consumption and investment not as separate but integrally connected: consumption is taken as fundamental in stimulating economic growth; and investment is seen as key to improving the supply structure. Supply and demand are managed together.

In line with the commitment to significantly increase disposable income, more weight is to be given to work remuneration in the overall distribution of income and personal income is to grow basically in step with economic growth with pay rising as productivity increases.[16]

On the supply side, investment is to be guided strictly towards those areas designated by the state as priorities, redirecting flows of capital from unproductive speculation in the finance and property sectors towards the support of innovation in indigenous producer goods including those driving the green transformation.

To this end, whilst capital market functions are to be improved, the proportion of direct financing – either from state-owned banks or enterprises reinventing profits – is to be increased.

The next step in China’s modernisation on the supply side, as noted, is to build up its own contingent of skilled specialists in science and engineering.

Working at both ends of supply and demand, the ‘dual circulation strategy’ aims now to complete a larger part of exchanges of producer- and consumer goods within the domestic markets, curtailing the drain of unpaid labour overseas through unequal exchange.

These interlinkages of state and market, supply and demand, finally make possible the trilateral coordination of strategic industrial planning and fiscal and monetary policies as a particular characteristic of the Chinese economic system overall.

The complexities here demand more effective governance and attention is shifting towards improving democratic oversight and legal practices at all levels. China operates a system of consultation and participation through the people’s congresses, workers’ congresses in enterprises, community-level and voluntary organisations seeking a controlled approach to democratisation.

The view of the CPC is that opening the door too quickly can mean ill-conceived laws and poor decisions creating disorder leading to demoralisation. The experience of the Cultural Revolution still lingers since the chaos which ensued has an inhibiting effect on popular participation. Clearly, public motivation to take part in politics is vital to effective democracy and vice versa – effective governance gives momentum to active participation.

On security

According to the modernisation theory mindset, as societies approach the age of high mass-consumption, they reach a point of choice between concentrating on military and security issues or on equality and welfare.

Western commentators and political analysts have convinced themselves that China is choosing the former, kicking up a great fuss that Xi’s report to the CPC’s 20th Congress had opted for national security over economy – as if the purpose of the state is not to put the security of the people first!

Indeed Xi stated that the people’s security was the ultimate goal – that is, political, economic, technological, cultural, and social as well as military security. Calling for the upgrading of defence, his report also addressed issues of food, environmental and energy security; it considered both traditional and non traditional security issues and, significantly, not just national but also common security – a demonstration of China’s peaceful approach.

A peaceful external environment is seen as necessary for success, however China’s international situation is becoming ever more testing. Xi’s report finds that ‘the deficit in peace, development, security, and governance is growing’. Whilst reconfirming the commitment to world peace and development, it is necessary, he said, for China to ‘prepare for the unexpected’ and ‘be ready to withstand high winds, choppy waters, and even dangerous storms’.

The West no longer shows the world its future

China’s socialist modernisation is being honed through struggle against US imperialism and hegemonism as it has to finds ways of countering foreign sanctions, outside interference, and long-arm reach of the West’s so-called ‘rules-based order’.

To build resilience, Xi counsels: ‘We must maintain self-confidence and stand on our own feet’.

Deng Xiaoping encouraged learning from the West but in the face of challenges never seen before – pandemics, climate change – with new opportunities opening at the frontiers of technology, this advice is no longer adequate.

Finding its own direction towards modernity also, for China, involves a mental transitioning away from copying the advanced capitalist countries, looking instead to its own resources for ideas on how to do things. For Xi, this is about combining Marxist ideology with the best of China’s traditions – the Confucian approach of selecting officials on the basis of merit, and the Daoist promotion of harmony between people and nature, for example.

44 years ago, China began opening to the world with four special economic zones along its coast. Catching the globalisation wave, it was to become the ‘workshop of the world’. Now with a population greater than that of all the developed countries combined, China’s modernisation promises to open new horizons beyond the darkness cast by US wars and militarism.

But is China rising as a new imperial power, creating its own neo-colonial relations of exploitation? Unequal exchange is built in to trade between economies with different wage levels, and China, along with other emerging economies is encouraging its companies to invest overseas in the expectation of making a profit not a loss. But this does not mean the advantages are all one-sided. The point is that whereas imperialism locks in one-sided deals to establish a monopoly position, China does not interfere politically to undermine the bargaining position of its partners.

For others, there are challenges as well was opportunities. But China’s insistence that countries have the right to choose their own development path also makes a difference as it backs developing countries’ rights to special and differential treatment at the WTO, supports the common and differentiated responsibility principle at climate summits, and opposes the imposition of IMF conditionalities.

China’s vision of its own modernisation progress to 2049 may not be that of the worker democracy and participatory planning existing in the minds of some Western socialists. But if it does succeed in reducing the gap between rich and poor, creating a majority middle income society without the consolidation of a privileged middle class; if it can uphold its commitments on decarbonisation – and it is well positioned to do so[17]; if it can advance domestically without the subordination of others, rather opening up spaces for their development, this would indeed be to accomplish something world transforming. The next 27 years will tell.

[1] Xi Zhongxun was later to be rehabilitated by Deng Xiaoping, taking on leadership roles in Guangdong province.

[2] This draws on the discussion of Xi’s New Sayings from Zhejiang in Kerry Brown, Xi: a study in power, Icon Books, 2022 pp. 69-85.

[3] Xi Jinping’s Report to the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Oct. 16th, 2022 https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/zxxx_66280 ... 91908.html

[4] Li Qiao, 600m with $140 monthly income worries top, Global Times, May 29, 2020 https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1189968.shtml

[5] Michael Dunford, “The Chinese Path to Common Prosperity”, International Critical Thought Vol. 12, Issue 1, 2022 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10 ... 22.2025561

[6] Inside the Shein Machine, The Cut Channel 4, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq7bre03pZs. Xu has subsequently undertaken to improve the situation, see Katy Linsell, ‘Shein to Spend $15 Million on Factories After Labor Abuse’, Bloomberg, December 5 2022, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ify%20wall

[7] Yunxue Deng and Xiaolo Tian, “Triadic Interaction and Collective Bargaining of Autoworkers in South China”, Journal of Contemporary China, Vol. 31, No.135, May 2022

[8] Quoted from Xi’s Report to the 20th CPC Congress

[9] The Economist, “Meet China’s new tycoons: Who is winning in Xi Jinping’s economy?” August 13, 2022 https://www.economist.com/business/2022 ... ew-tycoons

[10] Dominic Dudley, “China Is Set To Become The World’s Renewable Energy Superpower, According To New Report”, Forbes Report, Jan 11, 2019 https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdud ... uperpower/

[11] John Feffer, “The Future of China’s Green Revolution”, 2002 https://fpif.org/the-future-of-chinas-green-revolution/

[12] Ma Zhenhuan, “Zhejiang details pilot zone for common prosperity”, China Daily, July 21, 2021 http://english.www.gov.cn/news/topnews/ ... dd505.html; East China’s Zhejiang unveils detailed plan to establish a common prosperity demonstration zone, Global Times July 19, 2021 https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202107/1229062.shtml

[13] https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/cha ... 01980-2021

[14] Global Times, “Middle-income population to rise to 800 million by 2035 in China: scholar”, Dec 5, 2021

[15] Xi Jinping’s Report to the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, Oct. 16th, 2022 https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/zxxx_66280 ... 91908.html

[16] Xi Jinping, Report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC

[17] China’s Transition to a Low-Carbon Economy and Climate Resilience Needs Shifts in Resources and Technologies, World Bank Oct 12, 2022 https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press ... chnologies

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/05/c ... n-command/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Jan 14, 2023 3:35 pm

The Bubble of Prejudice vs the Light of Hope in China’s COVID Fight
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on JANUARY 9, 2023

Editorial Comment: I have only praise for China’s response to Covid and their commitment to internationalism. My condemnation of Covid policies has been solely directed at Western nations (and the faux left supporting fascism and imperialism) that have exploited the pandemic to further anti-democratic agendas, extensively violate human rights, and promote dangerous escalations of military aggression on multiple fronts. Comparisons between how revolutionary, socialist nations have responded to the global crisis vs imperialist nations can be found in this archive.

However, the greatest tragedy to emerge from the pandemic was not what governments did, or failed to do, but that humanity (all of us collectively) did not perform well. We committed the following egregious errors:

*We lost our objectivity and were easily manipulated.
*We succumed to fear, psychological warfare tactics, and permitted the lowest and worst in us to triumph, including odious behaviors associated with racism, xenophobia, rage and ruthlessness directed at allies, the vulnerable and the marginalized.
*We turned on each other instead of rising up against the system that oppresses us – especially the government that actually manufactured and unleashed this pandemic in their notorious biolabs.
*We lost our moral compass and were shamefully lacking in compassion for others.
*We behaved in ways that mirrored the attitudes and actions of our oppressors.

We need to do much better if we are to survive the trials of the long struggle ahead. These collective deficits must also be addressed and erradicated if we are to advance in revolutionary consciousness.

A.V.


Xinhua

Image
People enjoy buffet at a shopping mall in north China’s Tianjin, Dec. 31, 2022, the first day of the New Year holiday. (Xinhua/Zhao Zishuo)

At present, China is still fighting an uphill COVID battle. But as it was pointed out by the Chinese leader in the 2023 New Year address, “The light of hope is right in front of us.”

In the eyes of some Westerners, the word “delicacy” represents numerous possibilities and considerable diversity: spaghetti, Kung Pao Chicken, tacos, and French fries, among others.

Yet they refuse to accept the similar possibilities and potential for diversity embedded in the word “anti-pandemic.”

Chances are, these people are the same ones who reject the fact that concepts such as “development models,” “governance modes,” “democratic paths,” and “standards of human rights protection” are also de facto “plural.”


They turn their ears away from hard truth and hide in flimsy bubbles constructed by their groundless prejudices, surmises, and self-invented myths.

Outside that blinding and deafening bubble, facts and statistics have demonstrated that China, a country with a population of 1.4 billion, has risen above waves of COVID-19 outbreaks with minimized impacts in all respects, in a targeted and science-based manner that best suits its own unique circumstances.

If only these Westerners could abandon their fault-finding mentality and take a closer look at China’s COVID fight with what the Chinese would call a “seek-truth-from-facts” attitude, they would certainly arrive at a fairer conclusion.

Light of hope

If winter comes, can spring be far behind?

After three years of an assiduous and efficacious fight against the pandemic, China has recently announced that the priority of its COVID response is shifting from preventing infections to medical treatment. A series of optimization and adjustment measures were rolled out, with the objectives of protecting people’s health and preventing severe cases.

The majority of Chinese have never had to face the pandemic head-on before, and after a few weeks of staying at home and convalescing indoors, they have managed to restore normalcy and return to the hustle and bustle of their daily lives.

Cities such as Beijing are regaining their pulse of vitality. In the metropolises, the once-empty subway trains are again crowded with mask-wearing commuters. Travel plans that had been shelved are now back on people’s agendas, and a range of business opportunities and activities are gaining momentum.

More than 80 percent of movie theaters in China have reopened. Hollywood blockbuster “Avatar: The Way of Water,” released in mid-December 2022, had garnered cumulative earnings of over 1 billion yuan (about $144.65 million) by the first day of 2023.

But people don’t get to read about the promising side of China in some of the Western media, which are now drawing a sketch of devastation in the world’s second-largest economy, and hyping their “concerns” for “a dark COVID winter.”

If their reporters had paid any real attention to China and were truly concerned about its people, they would have noticed that the Chinese are getting help and warmth from all sides.

China does not shy away from acknowledging the challenges it faces, and is ramping up vaccination efforts among the elderly and increasing the capacity of intensive care units (ICU).

The Chinese government and the people are striving together to flatten the curve of COVID-19 infections, shorten the queues outside hospital emergency rooms, and reduce heart-wrenching toll inflicted by the virus.

It is in no way an easy job. Fortunately, the people’s courage and sense of responsibility have given them the faith and determination to carry on, despite fears and obstacles – and such sentiments abound in China.

Authorities have been continually fine-tuning the allocation of medical resources and ensuring sufficient supplies of medicines to the public. Machines are humming around the clock in the workshops of Chinese pharmaceutical companies.

In less than a month, the daily output of ibuprofen and paracetamol, key drugs for fighting pain and fevers, has expanded more than four times, while the daily production capacity of COVID-19 antigen test kits has grown from about 60 million to some 110 million during this period.

China, a country that upholds the tradition of prioritizing and respecting the elderly, has demonstrated its attentive consideration and care for the gray-haired. Healthcare workers go door-to-door to help vaccinate the elderly. The average occupancy rate of hospital beds for severe cases across the country has not yet reached the 80 percent mark.

Chinese people share advice from prestigious epidemiologists via their social media accounts, while communities hand out care kits, packed with medicines and other pandemic prevention materials, distributed by local governments.

In a number of cities, nucleic acid testing booths were transformed into one-stop fever clinics, with the whole process from diagnosis to the dispensing of medications taking just 10 minutes.

Special attention is being directed to the medical situation in rural areas, where clinicians and drugs are relatively inadequate. Inequalities based on ethnic groups, family backgrounds, or economic status, which generated negative multiplier effects on the transmissibility and lethality of the virus in some other countries, have no room in China.

The “tide of COVID deaths” has not appeared in the world’s most populous country. Thanks to its arduous efforts over the past three years since the COVID-19 outbreak, China has managed to keep its severe cases and death rates among the lowest in the world.

A government that has saved millions of lives and safeguarded people’s health should not be misunderstood and discredited in the way that has been seen in some Western media reporting on this topic.

People always make an analogy between the pandemic and a mirror, as the strengths and capacities of governments in various countries are reflected and exposed thoroughly.

At present, China is still fighting an uphill COVID battle. But as it was pointed out by the Chinese leader in the 2023 New Year address, “The light of hope is right in front of us.”

The 7th slice of cake

When China late last month announced the downgrading of the management of COVID-19 starting from Jan. 8, 2023, putting it on a par with HIV and viral hepatitis rather than the more serious infections such as bubonic plague and cholera, some did wonder about the timing of the policy shift. “Why now?”

Such speculation, together with the rise in the number of infections in some Chinese cities following the policy shift, seemed to have given some Western media and politicians more ammunition to continue their attack on China’s COVID response.

Just as they had been doing over the past three years, they tried to paint China’s latest policy optimization and adjustment – in their words, “a U-turn” – as yet another mistake.

They claimed China’s decision was based “on impulse” and made “with no preparation.” They argued that it would “cause economic disruption” and “push up global inflation,” posing risks to the whole world.

Oddly enough, however, when other countries eased their COVID restrictions back in 2021, at a time when the pathogenicity of the virus posed a much greater danger and uncertainty to the world than it does now, those who are now crying crocodile tears for the Chinese people were far less nit-picking.

You can’t wake a person who is pretending to be asleep, can you? The monotonous negative depiction of China’s COVID responses by those biased minds can be precisely summarized as “Wrong! Wrong! Still wrong!” The “only constant” is their blind criticism of China’s COVID policies. Maybe it is not about COVID policies after all. Maybe it is just about having a go at China.

In May last year, an article published by Fortune quoted an expert as saying that China’s strict COVID policy would result in “disruption to economic activity.” Last month, however, it was the same author who questioned China’s adjustment of its COVID response, claiming the “inevitable COVID outbreak” to follow would likely “cause further economic disruption.”

To the naysayers, strict prevention and control measures are wrong. Adjustments and optimizations are wrong. To them, no matter when or how China optimizes or adjusts its COVID policy, China is still doing it wrong.

Contrary to their self-invented surmises, China’s latest COVID policy shift was a result of the country’s scientific assessment of the pandemic and based on prudent planning, as well as a timely response to the yearnings of the people. It’s all about the right time, the right place, and with the right people, as the Chinese would put it.

It is based on the plain facts of the weakening pathogenicity of the virus, a rather solid immunity barrier, and the increasing accumulative experience in the pandemic response.

Over the past three years, China has equipped itself with technologies and drugs that are proven to be effective in COVID-19 diagnosis and treatment, and has also made continuous progress in terms of pathogen detection and epidemiological investigation.

Over 90 percent of the population has been fully vaccinated thanks to China’s unceasing efforts in vaccine research and development, while people’s health awareness has also been greatly enhanced.

In other words, while the virus is becoming weaker, the Chinese people are becoming better equipped to fight it. You do not need to be an epidemiologist to come to the obvious conclusion.

So, when China was presented with a critical “window of opportunity,” it took the initiative to refine its COVID response measures.

Despite a short period of quickly rising infection levels, the impact of the pandemic on China’s economy and society has remained within an expected, manageable range. In that sense, the latest COVID policy shift is without doubt science-based, proactive, and in line with China’s own realities.

One key hallmark of China’s fight against the pandemic, aside from being pragmatic all along, is the delicate balance it has struck between protection and the prevention of over-protection. Achieving such a balance is almost natural and instinctive for a country that has long believed in the golden mean – or not going to the extreme of one or the other.

Following a science-based and targeted approach, China has adapted its COVID response in light of the evolving situation to meet the most pressing needs of the people.

Since 2020, Chinese health authorities have issued nine editions of prevention and control plans, and diagnosis and treatment plans, to guide the fight against COVID-19.

It issued 20 measures in November 2022 and 10 more in early December to further optimize its response, before the latest downgrade of COVID management, opposing both “lying flat” and “one-size-fits-all” philosophies.

Now, some in the West are questioning why China is choosing to open its borders at this point in time, and why the country refrained from asking people to be the “first person responsible” for their own health at an earlier stage.

The truth is, in the earlier stage of the pandemic, as COVID and its Delta variant wreaked havoc all over the world, the majority of people worldwide, particularly the elderly and other marginalized and vulnerable population groups, were ill-equipped to be the “first person responsible” for his or her own health.

The Communist Party of China and the Chinese government played a key “empowering” role during that stage, by leveraging its strong leadership and strength in grassroots mobilization, organization, and governance – part of the competitive edge of its system which can “concentrate power to accomplish big things” – to help people arm themselves against deadly viruses as quickly as possible.

Those three years of daunting combat with various virus strains from Delta to Omicron have laid the foundation for China’s adjusting and optimizing of its COVID policies. The country would not have been able to enter a new phase of COVID response had it not been for the hard work of the past three years.

There is a joke that you might have heard. A hungry fool ate seven slices of cake and was finally full. He said to himself, “Why didn’t I eat the seventh slice sooner and be full already? The first six were such a waste.”

Anyone who thinks of China’s latest COVID policy shift as a complete negation of the country’s daunting fight against the pandemic over the past three years is that fool.

People first philosophy

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a series of tests for the world, and different countries have delivered different answers based on their own philosophies. Some prioritize individual freedom over life, while some others place economic considerations above human casualties.

In a sense – there is no simple way to identify the best option – but the multiple options can be analyzed from the perspective of whether they have been suitable for a country’s own national conditions and have had the optimal impact.

Judging other countries’ COVID responses using one’s own standards will only lead to misunderstanding, estrangement, and even hostility.

Three years on, China’s COVID battle has been deliberately portrayed by certain Western media outlets as a tale of flux and self-contradiction.

— When the unprecedented pandemic initially broke out, China was framed as a fictitious “virus maker.”

— When certain Western countries hoarded vaccines, and Chinese vaccines became the only ones that some developing countries could count on, China was falsely accused of engaging in “vaccine diplomacy.”

— When China curbed dozens of sporadic outbreaks, the accomplishments were jealously described as “too good to be true.”

Recently, when China took stock of the pandemic situation and rolled out its optimized and adjusted measures, those supporters of “lying flat” who proposed herd immunity when little was known about COVID-19’s pathogenicity during the initial stage of the outbreak, seemed to have forgotten their own rashness at that time and started to find and harp on faults in the “disorder” of others.

This was a brazen smear that defied facts, science, and morality. Such a narrative misrepresented China, with some Western media outlets turning a selective blind eye to China’s consistent philosophy and strategy in fighting COVID-19.

To cope with the pandemic, China applied a down-to-earth approach. It put the people and their lives above all else during its pandemic battle. This is the true meaning behind the government’s solemn commitment to ensure people’s right to life and right to health.

Life is the most valuable. Without life, no other values can be meaningfully discussed. As a Chinese saying goes – “With the skin gone, to what can the hair attach itself?”

China, the world’s largest developing country, prioritizes the right to life as a fundamental human right. In the past three years, it has never given up on protecting its people from the threats posed by the virus, regardless of whether these people are newborns or centenarians.

The country has always “put the people first” instead of “put pandemic prevention and control first.” Some measures do bring inconvenience to daily life, but their purpose is to bring social life back to normal as soon as possible and in a step-by-step way.

China’s COVID policy is a science-based one. In China, there is no room for being derailed from the scientific track due to partisan strife, resulting in an upside-down anti-pandemic policy, or anti-intellectualist nonsense such as injecting disinfectant into a man to kill a virus.

By contrast, in some Western countries where individual freedom is overemphasized, vulnerable groups have become more vulnerable during COVID-19 outbreaks. The inflation and unemployment seen during the pandemic have crippled their governments’ agenda of trading economic opportunities with people’s health.

Such anti-pandemic approaches have nothing to do with freedom, equality, or fraternity, but result only in a severe deviation from such values which Western countries have taken pride in.

Behind the West’s apparent state of “normality” is a real “abnormality,” the loss of lives and the breaking of hearts within families. Beyond the so-called freedom and the carnival atmosphere, a painful price is being paid.

The latest COVID-19 data from Johns Hopkins reveals that the United States, boasting the most cutting-edge medical techniques, is among those countries that have suffered the worst outbreaks, with over one million deaths.

Such data makes some Western media’s remarks, such as “China’s COVID Success Story is Also a Human Rights Tragedy,” look ridiculous.

China succeeded in saving people’s lives but this led to a human rights tragedy? What is this? Oxymorons in Shakespeare’s plays?

Shared destiny

One can easily imagine that, in the foreseeable future, Chinese tourists will be seen once more posing for selfies in front of the pyramids of Egypt, at the Acropolis Museum in Greece, and on the beaches of Thailand’s Phuket island.

At the same time, more foreigners will arrive in China, hiking the Great Wall and marveling at ancient artworks such as the cave frescoes on the northwestern edge of China’s Gobi Desert.

As the world’s largest outbound tourism market before the pandemic, China’s recent policy shift to facilitate safe and orderly cross-border travel has been heartening news for the world – embassies and tourism authorities of various countries posting messages on social media platforms to welcome Chinese tourists.

Certain countries’ newly imposed restrictions on travelers from China were widely criticized.

As the world’s second-largest economy, a global manufacturing powerhouse, and the largest trader of goods, China’s response to COVID-19 has far-reaching implications for the whole world.

What would life be like if the world was without the products of Apple, Tesla, Huawei, OPPO, and DJI, or the toys, shoes and socks, jerseys, batteries, luggage and bags, and fertilizers from China?

Had it not been for China’s proactive COVID containment strategy and the quick resumption of production in Chinese factories, shortages of goods would probably have nudged up retail prices in Walmart and Tesco stores across the world, and those suffering from global inflation would have been in a worse situation.

China’s steady development, in and of itself, has been a major contributor to the world in the shadow of COVID-19.

Those who accuse China of “disrupting” the global supply chains with its pandemic prevention and control policies are clearly confusing right and wrong. Had it not been for China playing a stabilizing role, the global industrial and supply chains would have been under greater pressure.

Avoiding the Chinese market is an unrealistic idea. China registered an average annual economic growth of around 4.5 percent over the past three years – significantly higher than the global average.

During the first three quarters of 2022, foreign direct investment (FDI) in the Chinese mainland, in actual use, exceeded 1 trillion yuan, equaling that of the entire 2020.

These eye-catching figures reflect the close connection between the Chinese economy and the global economy during the pandemic, as well as the confidence of profit-driven international capital in China’s economic resilience and market potential.

What has also been closely binding China to the rest of the world are life-saving COVID-19 vaccines.

Calling its home-grown vaccines “people’s vaccines,” China is the first country to propose COVID-19 vaccines as a global public good, the first to support vaccine intellectual property rights exemption, and the first to carry out cooperation on vaccine production with developing countries.

So far, China has sent teams of medical experts to 34 countries to fight the pandemic, and offered over 120 nations and international organizations 2.2 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines, in pursuit of closing the fatal vaccination gap.

In his new book about China, a Spanish reporter wrote that one out of every two doses of vaccines that Latin America received was made in China. While the United States and Europe supplied 45 million doses of vaccines, China sent 245 million doses to Latin America, according to this book.

China has never created any kind of “information black hole” in decoding COVID-19. Ever since the pandemic broke out in Wuhan three years ago, the country has been sharing the virus gene sequence with other countries, in order to achieve a better understanding of this cunning and elusive virus.

Today, as China shows strong signs of recovery, the world is excited. China’s economic rebound, as widely predicted by investment institutions, will act as a “counterweight” to a potential global recession.

A report by German media outlet FOCUS Online said Germany will benefit from China’s recent adjustments of anti-virus measures in three respects: products like cars are likely to become cheaper in Germany; German companies and investors will earn more profits as more customers flock to their stores in China; and jobs in German companies will become more stable.

Ever since ancient times, Chinese people have pursued the ideal of “great harmony in the world.”

Today, China is promoting the building of a community with a shared future for humanity. As we face a common enemy in the form of the pandemic, perhaps more people can really gain an understanding of the meaning of this proposal.

Yardstick and consensus

When future historians retell the story of this unprecedented pandemic, it will not merely be a story of havoc, death, and despair for sure.

It will be a story concerned with science and exploration, a story about how societies struggled with the havoc caused by the infectious virus, a story balancing personal freedom with respect for the views of others, a story that guides us in how to think calmly, make bold choices, and put them into action decisively, despite chaotic circumstances.

Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize-winning economist, said countries have manifested “marked differences” in managing the pandemic, in terms of safeguarding the health of their citizens, maintaining the economy, and handling inequalities.

But if we are lucky and hardworking enough to break from the bubbles of blind prejudice, we can certainly find some insights and see light beyond the “marked differences” mentioned by Stiglitz.

When coping with a pandemic that poses a common challenge for all mankind, it is worth discussing how to evaluate a nation’s performance in the face of such a test.

China offers its own yardstick: how well the lives and health of its citizens have been protected, as well as the extent of its economic and social progress during this process.

Moreover, unlike some countries, China has never regarded these two essential components as a pair of irreconcilable contradictions, nor has it played a zero-sum game regardless of the consequences.

In a world as big as ours, it is only natural that people hold different views on the same issue, but upholding a basic yardstick and the underlying logic is a course worth pursuing.

Hopefully, the fight against the pandemic will turn out to be a difficult and sustained consensus-building process.

With such a heavy price already paid, countries will certainly reflect on what they have done, and what they have not – and thus, if a similar pandemic is to strike again, future generations across the world will share greater consensus in their joint fight against it.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2023/01/ ... vid-fight/

**********

COVID downgrade 'appropriate', expert says
By Li Hongyang | chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2023-01-08 20:00

Image
Inbound travelers go through the immigration check upon arrival at Beijing Capital International Airport, Beijing, Jan 8, 2023. [Photo/Xinhua]


The timing of the decision to downgrade COVID-19 management to Class B was appropriate and met scientific standards, a top expert said in response to concern that winter was not a good moment especially with the Spring Festival approaching.

Starting Sunday, China has changed COVID-19 management measures from Class A to B, according to the National Health Commission.

Liang Wannian, head of the commission's COVID-19 response expert panel, told China Central Television on Sunday that although the current subtype of the Omicron variant spread more easily, it is less likely to result in severe illness.

Liang was quoted as saying that most people in China have immunity through vaccinations and the country is in a good position with more than 90 percent its population inoculated.

He added that the adjustment does not mean the removal of prevention and control measures including the need to report cases, or provide treatment and necessary intervention measures for public health purposes. Rather, it means that health services will be enhanced.

"We will prioritize the treatment of those with severe symptoms and strengthen the protection of vulnerable groups such as the elderly. Vaccination rates needs to increase and medical capacity in rural areas has to be boosted," he said.

Liang told CCTV that China did not make the changes passively.

"Over the three years of fighting the epidemic, we have been doing in-depth research on the virus and preparing by bolstering capabilities before downgrading," he said.

For example, emergency containment was the most important strategy adopted during the onset of epidemic between January and April 2020.

After May 2020, China normalized epidemic prevention and control measures and continued to adjust measures for the public good and health.

"For example, when determining different areas at risk, at first we divided by province, then by prefecture, then by city and finally, we corrected that to neighborhoods. We had continued to adjust measures based on the situation and immunity," he said, adding that the national epidemic prevention and control measures were successful, but the situation remains critical and people should hold on until everything returns to normal.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... a8536.html

Timeline: China's COVID response adjustments

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/spe ... c47eba91bc

So-called 'debt trap' in Africa is narrative trap: FM
chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2023-01-13 15:22

Image

Foreign Minister Qin Gang on Wednesday refuted the groundless allegation that China is creating a "debt trap" in Africa, saying the so-called "debt trap" is a narrative trap imposed on China and Africa.

Qin made the remarks in a joint press conference with the chairperson of the African Union (AU) Commission Moussa Faki Mahamat.

Image

Image

Image

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... 753_1.html

***************

Image

Summit links biodiversity with culture
The following article, published in China Daily, summarizes the proceedings of a Nature and Culture summit held during the 15th meeting of the United Nations’ Conference of the Parties (COP15) to the Convention on Biological Diversity, held in Montreal on 11-12 December 2022. The article is particularly interesting for the points it makes regarding the role of minority groups in protecting the environment and promoting a harmonious coexistence between humanity and nature.

Huang Runqiu, China’s Minister of Ecology and Environment, and the president of COP15, “stressed the importance of cultural diversity, especially the experience and knowledge from minority groups.” Huang also highlighted the importance of fully respecting and protecting traditional cultures around the world, appreciating and making use of their understanding of biodiversity protection and encouraging the transmission of this understanding from generation to generation.

The article contrasts this approach with the colonial powers’ record of land grabs, intellectual property restrictions and profiteering. Indigenous Canadian activist and academic Priscilla Settee, professor emeritus at the University of Saskatchewan, told the meeting that “we need to get our history right. We need to acknowledge the centuries of colonialism … based in global imperialism through land grabs. We need to take a critical look at international free trade agreements that I call bills of rights for the rich and powerful.”
A global dialogue on strengthening the links between nature and cultures to achieve a sustainable and ecological civilization also highlighted the achievements and actions taken by China.

Officials, experts and nongovernmental organization (NGO) members gathered at a Nature and Culture summit during the 15th meeting of the United Nations’ Conference of the Parties (COP15) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Dec 11-12, in support of the implementation of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).

In his opening remarks, Huang Runqiu, the Chinese minister of ecology and environment and the president of COP15, stressed the importance of cultural diversity, especially the experience and knowledge from minority groups.

The relationship between nature and culture is vibrant, said Huang. Culture is deeply intertwined with the natural world. Chinese culture contains a clear concept of harmonious coexistence between humanity and nature, he said.

For example, Yunnan province, where the first phase of the COP15 meeting was held, is home to 26 traditional ethnic groups and 15 unique minority groups, forming a series of traditional ecological cultures such as the Hani Terrace Culture, Naxi Dongba Culture, Dai Long Mountain Culture, and Tibetan Holy Land Culture.

Their worldviews, cultural values and identities are closely connected to nature, as per their saying, “Humans and nature are half-brothers”.

Huang urged protecting biodiversity by proposing to “fully respect and protect” the traditional cultures in various places and let the cultural awareness of biodiversity protection be passed on “from generation to generation”.

He also called for strengthening mutual learning and communication between different cultures.

“We need to promote equal exchanges and dialogues between different civilizations and cultures, learn from each other and actively promote the process of global biodiversity governance,” Huang told the summit.

Pei Shengji, a professor at the Kunming Institute of Botany and Chinese Academy of Sciences, explained how Yunnan is a prime example of how biological and cultural diversity are linked.

Situated in the Eastern Himalayas with a land area of 394,000 square kilometers, Yunnan’s ecosystem ranges from low tropical forests to alpine pastures as one of 36 global biodiversity hot spots.

Today, there are 20,000 hectares of traditional tea forest with millions of 100-year-old tea trees maintained by local communities. The area’s tea-production value is much higher than modern tea gardens, according to Pei.

Xishuangbanna is another tropical lowland area in Yunnan, inhabited by 1.2 million people of different cultural ethnic groups.

“They establish a culture of sacred nature sites, locally known as ‘long forests’, where some traditional cultures believe the forest water can rescue the men, leading to the establishment of distinctive cultural landscapes in the area, contributing to the conservation of the tropical rainforest ecosystem,” Pei told the summit via video.

Ma Jun, a founding director of the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs who has led the development and launch of China’s first environmental public database, discussed action to raise awareness across all sectors on the links between biological and cultural diversity.

Through launching the China Pollution Map, as well as the Blue Map, a mobile app that helps the public file “micro reports” against factories violating environmental laws, the NGOs’ Green Choice supply chain program and public supervision have motivated more than 20,000 companies to enhance their pollution controls and climate actions.

“During the process, we have witnessed the historic progress made on China’s environmental transparency, the rapid improvement of air and water quality and the restoration of forest grasslands and wetlands. All of these have provided more and better habitats for species,” Ma said.

The summit also provided roundtable discussions focusing on a new joint program of the links between biological and cultural diversity in support of the implementation of the post-2020 GBF.

Priscilla Settee, professor emeritus at the University of Saskatchewan, noted thar there are major battles around intellectual property rights on seed-saving and methods of production and distribution, which cause much human suffering and hunger throughout the world.

“So we need to get our history right. We need to acknowledge the centuries of colonialism … based in global imperialism through land grabs. We need to take a critical look at international free trade agreements that I call bills of rights for the rich and powerful,” said Settee, whose parents attended a residential school during a dark period in Canada’s history.

LVMH, a luxury goods company, told the summit that along with the Circular Bioeconomy Alliance, action will be taken to restore forest cover in the southern Ecuadorian Amazon and the northern Peruvian Amazon, while supporting and strengthening the development of a regenerative economy in Amazonian communities.

“We need a stronger signal to unite all parties, as the protection of biodiversity is not simply a plus but a subject that must transform our way of producing. I hope that we can build alliances between nature and humans without one dominating the other,” Hélène Valade, the environmental development director of LVMH told the summit.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/09/s ... h-culture/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Mon Jan 16, 2023 2:32 pm

Chinese mainland reports 59,938 COVID-19 related deaths at hospitals from Dec 8 to Jan 12
By Wang Xiaoyu | chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2023-01-14 18:04

Image
Jiao Yahui, head of the National Health Commission's medical administration bureau, attends a news conference, Jan 14, 2023. [Photo/china.com.cn]

Chinese mainland reported 59,938 COVID-19 related deaths at hospitals from Dec 8 to Thursday, a health official said on Saturday.

Jiao Yahui, head of the National Health Commission's medical administration bureau, said that 5,503 fatalities were caused by respiratory failure induced by the infection, and the other 54,435 cases had died with preexisting illnesses.

The average age of deaths during said period is 80.3, and over 90 percent of them had suffered from chronic illnesses, she said.

"Winter is also the peak season for respiratory and cardiovascular diseases among the elderly. With the spread of the COVID-19 disease, the number of elderly deaths is relatively large and we are attaching greater significance to protecting elderly patients and saving their lives," she said.

Jiao said that China has established a reporting platform aimed at collecting and analyzing COVID-19 related deaths in a scientific and fact-based manner. The platform was put into use on Dec 31.

In addition, medical institutions across the country were asked to gather and report information on deaths recorded between Dec 8 to 29.

She said it took some time for experts to analyze the massive amount of data so as to present a science-based and objective account of the COVID-19 death toll in the country.

China has been counting deaths with a positive COVID-19 nucleic acid test as COVID-19 related fatalities since the initial phase of the epidemic, Jiao said. The criteria, she said, is in alignment with standards adopted by the World Health Organization and most countries.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... a99fe.html

***********

China Reports 60,000 COVID-19 Related Deaths

Image
These data show that the peak of national emergency has passed. Jan. 14, 2023. | Photo: Axios

Published 14 January 2023

[A total of 59,938 deaths due to Covid-19 was recorded in China's hospitals from Dec. 8, 2022 to Jan. 12, 2023.

A total of 59,938 deaths due to Covid-19 was registered in China's hospitals from December 8, 2022 to January 12, 2023, a health official from the Asian country reported on Saturday.

RELATED:

China Reopens Borders After Three Years of 'Zero COVID Policy'

Among the total deaths, 5,503 people died from respiratory failure caused by Covid-19, and 54,435 died from underlying problems complicated by the infection, Jiao Yahui said.

The director of the Medical Administration Bureau, subordinate to the National Health Commission, gave a press conference held by the joint prevention and control mechanism against Covid-19 of the State Council.


The age of the dead averaged 80.3 years, about 90.1 percent were 65 years or older, and about 56.5 percent were 80 years or older, Jiao said.

The peak of the latest wave of infections appears to have passed in view of the decline in the number of patients going to fever clinics, Jiao said.

The number of daily visits to such centers peaked at 2.9 million people on Dec. 23, and by Thursday had dropped 83% to just 477,000, Jiao added.

"These data show that the peak of national emergency has passed," Jiao said.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Chi ... -0002.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Thu Jan 19, 2023 3:00 pm

West's false COVID narratives hold no water
By Qi Sheng | China Daily Global | Updated: 2023-01-18 09:20

Image
A woman receives a booster dose in Chaoyang district of Beijing on July 13, 2022. [Photo/Xinhua]
In recent weeks, the Western media's coverage of China has been dominated by news of its adjusting of COVID-19 policies. Expectedly, it turned into a China-bashing carnival.

Some said the country has lost its fight against the pandemic, and others said the adjustment is a failure of China's political system, while boasting of the superiority of "democracy". How do we make sense of China's efforts and sacrifices over the past three years? Let us investigate some of the prevailing false narratives.

First, some say that China's COVID-19 death toll does not include those who died as a result of delayed or denied medical treatment because of strict COVID-19 control measures. A plausible way to test the validity of such speculation is to compare the country's total deaths during the pandemic and estimated deaths had there been no pandemic. The difference between the two would be the country's excess mortality.

According to the World Health Organization, between Jan 1, 2020, and Dec 31, 2021, excess mortality in the United States and India was 930,000 and 4.74 million, respectively. However, China's excess mortality during the pandemic was a negative number, which means China's COVID-19 policy didn't result in excess deaths.

On the contrary, fewer Chinese people died because strict disease prevention and control measures slowed the spread of the novel coronavirus and also reduced deaths from such things as traffic accidents.

Because of China's large and aging population, it is inevitable that the virus will lead to more deaths. However, the prevailing Omicron variant is significantly less lethal than the original virus and the Delta variant. More than 90 percent of the Chinese population has been vaccinated, thus putting in place an immunity barrier against the virus.

The variety of drugs and rich therapeutic experience now available have significantly reduced the risk of death from COVID-19.Therefore, the fact that China is adjusting its COVID-19 policy now instead of one or two years ago is what helped save millions of lives.

The second false narrative is that COVID-19 has been fought at the expense of the economy. In the short term, China's COVID prevention and control measures have had an impact on economic growth in some localities. But thanks to its committed policy, China has delivered better economic performance than those countries that were swinging between COVID-19 control and laissez-faire.

Because China brought the pandemic under control early, the country was the first major economy in the world to register positive economic growth in 2020, and it realized GDP growth of 8.4 percent year-on-year in 2021, contributing to one-fourth of global economic growth and one-fifth of the world's trade. In the first quarter of 2022, China's economy saw 4.8 percent year-on-year growth, faster than the global average. With the optimized COVID-19 measures, according to Morgan Stanley and Nomura Securities, China's economy is expected to grow by more than 5 percent in 2023, which means that China will remain a major force supporting global economic growth and the stability of the capital market.

Under the third false narrative, when talking about people's lives during the pandemic, some paint a bleak picture as if the Chinese people have been forced to stay indoors or quarantined for the entire past three years. But the truth is, the Chinese people were able to travel around the country freely most of the time — 2.88 billion domestic trips were made in 2020, 3.25 billion in 2021 and 2.09 billion in the first three quarters of 2022. In 2020 and 2021, very few COVID-19 nucleic acid tests were administered in China. It was not until 2022, when the highly infectious Omicron variant hit the country, that the Chinese government began to conduct regular testing and require negative test results for those entering public places.

These were not novel measures, as many other countries including the US also introduced compulsory measures such as curfews, quarantines, nucleic acid testing and travel restrictions when infections were peaking.

The fourth false narrative suggests that the recent policy adjustment was a result of failure. In recent years, some Western media outlets and politicians have taken to criticizing China's dynamic zero-COVID policy. However, now that China has refined some of the measures, some critics are saying that the fact that cases surged in China after the new measures were brought in indicates that there had been many unreported cases earlier, and that China lifted the restrictions because it was finding it difficult to implement its dynamic zero-COVID policy.

However, the fact remains that prior to the "10 new measures" (a major COVID policy adjustment), China had already begun to refine its COVID-19 control and prevention measures step by step. For instance, the"20 new measures "introduced in November lifted many restrictions, and the consequent rise in infection cases was within expectation.

The gradual lifting of COVID-control measures is a vivid demonstration of the fact that China's policy adjustment is planned and proactive, based on facts and science.

Some countries never made any effort to stop community transmission of COVID-19 and lifted all restrictive measures when the virus was still very lethal, resulting in the loss of millions of lives. In contrast, the Chinese government chose to lift the restrictions in an orderly manner, and with good reason. We are now fully aware of Omicron's high infection rate but low mortality rate, and protecting people's health and promoting socioeconomic development are now the government's twin priorities. In fact, the government has shifted its focus from disease control to medical treatment to respond to the new realities.

The fight against COVID-19 is now a valuable part of the Chinese people's collective memory. No one can change it. Over the past three years, the Chinese government put people and people's lives first, and it adjusted COVID-19 control policy in light of the evolving situation. By implementing strong initiatives in the fight against the virus, people's lives and health, as well as social and economic development and people's freedom, were protected to the maximum extent possible.

China's COVID-19 policy adjustment is a rational decision that is essentially and consequentially different from those of other places, where beyond a point the authorities were forced to "let it go". It is an undeniable fact that China has achieved the best result at the least cost.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... aa458.html

China's overall population falls in 2022
By Wang Xiaoyu | chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2023-01-17 10:51

Image

A family pose for a photo at the Central University of Finance and Economics in Beijing. [Photo provided to China Daily]
China's overall population declined by 850,000 people year-on-year to 1.4118 billion in 2022, putting the natural growth rate at negative 0.6 per 1,000 people, the National Bureau of Statistics said on Tuesday.

The country registered about 9.56 million newborns last year, down from 10.62 million in 2021.

Its birthrate stood at 6.77 births per 1,000 people in 2022, down from 7.52 in 2021.

The death rate nationwide was 7.37 per 1,000 people last year, putting the natural growth rate at negative 0.6 per 1,000 people.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... aa14d.html

Just as with Covid whatever happens in China is bad and must be blamed on the Party so the decline in population growth is another disaster to be laid at communism's door. Growth in productivity will more than cover the slackening in population growth but don't let that get in the way of propaganda...

The West's propaganda war will fail to contain China
By Shakeel Ahmad Ramay | China Daily Global | Updated: 2023-01-19 09:40

Image
Uploaded containers are seen at Qingdao Port in Shandong province on Jan 9, 2023. [Photo/VCG]
Although the world has entered 2023 with multiple challenges, Western hegemonic powers seem incessant in their propaganda war against China, intensifying it with objectives of undermining and containing China, by hook or by crook.

The hegemonic powers have deigned to use multiple traditional and nontraditional tools like trade, technology, cultural invasion and ideology to strengthen their malicious propaganda campaigns.

With a widened scope and more aggressive applications, these powers cling to the presumption that a well designed, well explained and well communicated lie is worth more than 1,000 facts. Following this philosophy, they have coined terminologies like "debt trap", "violation of human rights", "curbs on freedom of speech" and many others, applying them even to China's partners.

For example, the United States has allocated $200 million in the name of democracy and gender equality for Pakistan on an annual basis. This is one example from one country. The real target can be the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative.

The corridor project is subject to sabotaging efforts to deprive Pakistan of an economic development opportunity and turn the corridor into a sign of Chinese failure to help its iron brother. Therefore, forces are trying to push and pressure Pakistan into default.

However, despite such instruments, the hegemonic moves will not be able to contain China due to certain facts.

First of all, China has an entirely different philosophy of international relations, economic links and security cooperation. The guiding principles and values of the Chinese philosophy are mutual respect and win-win cooperation. China practices a relation-based ideology for building international relations, which is the opposite of the Western ideology of interest-based relations. China also believes in and practices the sharing of prosperity for meaningful international engagement. Programs such as the Global Development Initiative are good examples on this front, providing space for China to rise in a peaceful way.

Second, China is deeply integrated in the global system. China is a major trading partner of more than 100 countries. China has also signed multiple free trade and economic partnership agreements with many countries and regions. The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership is the world's largest free trade agreement, and China and the European Union are negotiating a comprehensive agreement on investment. China is also emerging as a new technology powerhouse.

Third, China has the ability to ignore provocations and observe patience. The world has witnessed this ability in the past. For example, Beijing exercised much patience on outside provocation regarding Hong Kong and Taiwan.

Fourth, China has put forth global initiatives in the fields of economy, development, security and diplomacy. On the economic front, the BRI is contributing to global economic growth and development. Thanks to openness and inclusiveness in decision-making and implementation, the BRI has become the largest economic, trade, connectivity and investment program in history.

In addition, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank was established to create a people-centered financial system and strive for a financial system that keeps the environment and the needs of the future at the center of decision-making and implementation. It has become the second-largest global bank, with 105 members, after the World Bank.

Furthermore, the annual China International Import Expo was launched in 2018 to show the world how China has opened its market to the world. The CIIE confirms that China believes in practical steps and not merely slogans. The expo has been designed in such a way that it will promote rules-based, win-win cooperation and will create opportunities for the world.

In terms of security, President Xi Jinping proposed a new vision of achieving holistic security while focusing on dialogue and development. He launched the Global Security Initiative for common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security. The initiative will help the world to combat new security challenges and secure sustainable peace, and it offers an alternative to the model of security based on alliances, Cold War mentality and hegemonic aspirations.

The propaganda war against China will not be successful because China is deeply integrated in the global system. Any attempt to destabilize China is an attempt to destabilize the global system, which no country wants. Further pursuit of such a propaganda war will put its designers on the losing end.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... aa8b3.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 20, 2023 4:10 pm

Image

Roland Boer: Stepping out of the pandemic, Chinese style
In this article for Global Times, Roland Boer – Professor of Marxist Philosophy at Dalian University of Technology, China, and member of the Friends of Socialist China advisory group – analyses the most recent updates to China’s diagnosis and treatment protocol for Covid-19.

Roland opines that, to a significant degree, China has set the ‘gold standard’ in terms of dealing with the pandemic. For three years, while more virulent mutations of the virus were circulating, China adopted extreme measures in order to protect people’s lives – an expression of the CPC-led government’s philosophy that “people come first, and life comes first.” These measures prevented literally millions of deaths, with the result that China’s rate of Covid-related deaths is among the lowest in the world.

Now, however, extensive and continuing investigation by China’s scientists – in coordination with their counterparts around the world – indicates that conditions exist for moving the coronavirus to endemic status. Thus it is now considered as seasonal and non-threatening, given the relatively low virulence of the dominant Omicron strains, China’s high level of vaccination, and the growing pool of treatment options.

Roland also notes that the government and health authorities have carefully learned the lessons of the last three years and that “China’s health system has seen impressive improvement” in response.
On January 6, 2023, China’s National Health Commission (NHC) and National Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine issued China’s 10th edition of its diagnosis and treatment protocol for novel coronavirus infection. This is the NHC’s first national guiding protocol after China announced to downgrade management of COVID from Class A to Class B from January 8. Two items are worth noting here: the definition has changed from “novel coronavirus pneumonia” to “novel coronavirus infection” and its classification is now at a “B” level. The classification has significant implications for the measures taken to deal with the virus, but a question arises: Has China “lain down” before the virus, has it given up on dealing with it? The answer is a resounding no. Instead, China is the first country in the world to move from the coronavirus being a pandemic to it being endemic. This point needs some explanation.

First, for a little over three years I have been closely following China’s approach in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic. The results have been nothing less than stunning: the number of per capita infections and deaths are at the lowest level in the world, life expectancy has increased during this time, and the dialectic of economic development and public health has been managed very well.

The health of the population has not been significantly compromised – as has happened in some other countries – by the earlier and more toxic mutations of the virus, and the level of full vaccinations among the population above 3 years old is over 90 percent. In many respects, China has set a new “gold standard” for dealing with a pandemic. As one example, I have noted the huge amount of discussion with each revision of the measures for dealing with the pandemic, seeing how medical specialists and scientists were dealing daily with the many questions people had. The specialists were always “on message,” seeking to explain the content, connotations, implications, and reasons behind each revision of the measures. Friends and colleagues in China gave me regular updates concerning the experiences with their own families, their workplaces, their concerns, and – most importantly – their hopes.

This leads to the second point: the “people-centered approach,” or “taking the people as the center.” While this has been a core position of the CPC, a people-centered approach has seen renewed emphasis in the new era since the CPC’s 18th National Congress in 2012, when Xi Jinping was elected general secretary of CPC Central Committee. During the pandemic, this approach became absolutely central, expressed in “people come first, and life comes first,” which has been the commitment of the CPC to the whole Chinese people since the first days of the pandemic. Without the health of the people, development and a moderately well-off society is not comprehensive, or is not complete is all respects.

Third, an international observer cannot avoid noticing how all of the policy measures are based on rigorous and comprehensive science. For example, on December 15, 2022, I listened to a two-hour lecture by Zhong Nanshan, the “hero of SARS” and recipient of the Medal of the Republic, China’s highest state honor, for his services in fighting the COVID pandemic. The lecture has been watched by tens of millions of people across China, since it explains the immense amount of science that is behind China’s huge success in dealing with the pandemic. Zhong Nanshan’s lecture summarised much of the science, but this requires an immense amount of evidence, research, and collaboration between scientists, in China and across the world. For example, it is precisely because China has undertaken such comprehensive testing that we know now that 90 percent of Omicron infections are asymptomatic and that those who are symptomatic are mostly mild. Only rigorous science produces such results. Zhong Nanshan’s message was very clear: Do not get infected but do not be afraid of the virus in its Omicron form.

Fourth is the comprehensive approach. As we well know, departmentalism is typical of the few Western societies, with their individualism and liberalism. The result has been that their “single solution” approach to the pandemic was an obvious failure. By contrast, one finds again and again that China takes a comprehensive approach: Health and economic development; all effective measures for ensuring a healthy population, and so on. For example, one’s risk of infection or reinfection is very low with mixed vaccines (especially deactivated and adenovirus-based vaccines), Traditional Chinese Medicine, wearing quality face-masks, opening windows regularly, focusing on the elderly and children, and maintaining a high level of attention with disinfected surfaces. Clearly, this is a comprehensive approach, considering all aspects of what is effective. It is in this sense that we can see how China is the first country in the world where the coronavirus is moving from a pandemic to an endemic – and thus seasonal and non-threatening – status. Yes, China is stepping out of the pandemic, with 1.4 billion people. This is a momentous achievement and I am waiting eagerly to see how 2023 unfolds.

Fifth, I am struck by the way that China has identified where and how the health system can be improved. This feature always impresses me about China: no matter how good a practice may be, there is always room for improvement. This is also true with the all-important health system. It goes without saying that the improvements are comprehensive, leveraging the strengths of grassroots health services through to the highest research hospitals. As others have observed, with the lessons learned from the last three years, China’s health system has seen impressive improvement.

By now it should be obvious why China is stepping out of the pandemic, and why the coronavirus has become endemic. I would like to conclude on a note of hope. As I have been engaging with friends and colleagues in China, I have seen a distinct hope and eagerness as 2023 begins. People are very much looking forward to returning to their home towns for the Spring Festival, which for many will be the first time in three years. All of this has also given me hope and put me in a very good mood, since I know that in 2023 I will finally be able to return to China.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/20/r ... ese-style/

Image

Demonizing China’s Covid policies is fearmongering
In this insightful article for Global Times, Friends of Socialist China advisory group member Ken Hammond provides an overview of China’s evolving strategy for dealing with the Covid-19 pandemic – a strategy that has saved literally millions of lives to date.

Ken also discusses the extraordinary hypocrisy of the Western media’s portrayal of this strategy. For almost three years of Dynamic Zero Covid, “terms like ‘draconian’ were constantly used to criticize China’s measures to control and contain the virus”. Now restrictions have been loosened and “China is denounced for recklessly endangering its people and the rest of the world” – in spite of the fact that “governments in America and Europe have effectively abandoned any efforts to deal with the pandemic over the past year.”

The author makes the important point that this hypocritical reporting is part of a broader campaign of demonization – a reflection of rising anger among the US ruling class as all hopes fade away that China might be subjected to a ‘color revolution’ and become “a compliant, subordinate component of the American-dominated global capitalist order.” Ken opines that the relentless China-bashing is the product of a social class that has come to fear “the loss of the power and privileges they have so long enjoyed based on the extraction of wealth from working people around the planet.”

This demonization campaign creates a dangerous situation, fomenting conflict and standing in the way of the development of cooperation and understanding. People who support peace and progress should firmly oppose the propaganda war on China.
China’s COVID policies have saved millions of lives over the past three years. Yet those policies were attacked by some Western politicians, media pundits, and academics every day. Terms like “draconian” were constantly used to criticize China’s measures to control and contain the virus. China’s achievements in managing the epidemic were unmatched anywhere in the world, yet an ordinary citizen of a Western country can have very little idea of that given the relentless demonization of China to which they are regularly exposed.

Now, in the context of new scientific understandings of the latest variants of the virus, and in an effort to balance the ongoing need to protect the lives of the Chinese people with the goal of carrying forward the development of their economy, a new set of policies and practices is being implemented, relaxing many of the restrictions and controls which have been used over the last three years. One might expect that this would be welcomed in the West, yet quite the opposite has been the case.

China is now denounced for recklessly endangering its people and the rest of the world, even as governments in America and Europe have effectively abandoned any efforts to deal with the pandemic over the past year. Well over 1.1 million people have died in the US. The same media voices, like the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, or The Guardian, which railed against China’s so-called “oppressive” COVID policies, now spout a steady stream of condemnation of China’s efforts to pursue a more flexible, adaptive COVID policy package.

This kind of China-bashing is of course not limited to the topic of COVID policies. From the White House and Congress, the print and electronic media, and even many of the halls of academia, the consistent message being sent to the American people is that everything China does is bad. China is portrayed as “a land of oppression,” where people live in fear and dare not speak a word critical of the government. We are told that China is aggressive and expansionist. Recent pronouncement by the head of NASA even suggested China plans to take over the moon!

Sadly, for most Americans or other Westerners the pronouncements of politicians and pundits are their only sources of information about China. Few ordinary people in the West read or speak Chinese, and even fewer have any regular access to Chinese publications or have contact with people in China.

The US government has been pursuing several efforts to further restrict any flow of information about China not under its control. The Confucius Institutes which had brought opportunities for Chinese language study to tens of thousands of young people across the country have almost all been forced to close by pressure on their host universities from the Department of Defense and the State Department. The Department of Justice has been launching high-profile investigations of both Chinese scholars working at American research universities and at other American scholars and scientists who have research contacts or connections with Chinese academic institutions. Many of these cases fall apart before they reach the courts, but they generate scare headlines and serve to intimidate the broader academic community.

Both the demonization of China, the relentless criticism of China’s policies and behavior regardless of their actual content and results, and the suppression of information and knowledge about the realities of life in China, are reflections of the fear and anger among American elites which has characterized their response to China’s reemergence as a significant participant in global affairs. As China’s economy has grown and its people have achieved a modest degree of prosperity while pursuing the long-term goals of socialist construction, the economic and political elites of the US and its closest allies have been frustrated in their hopes that China would undergo a kind of “color revolution” in which it would change the nature of its system and become a compliant, subordinate component of the American-dominated global capitalist order.

As it has become clear that China is following its own path, and that it refuses to be integrated into that order or to allow the interests of private capital to override those of its people, these elites have come to fear the loss of the power and privileges they have so long enjoyed based on the extraction of wealth from working people around the planet. This is the motive behind their actions, and creates a dangerous situation for ordinary people in China, in America, and around the world.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/17/d ... mongering/

Image

Has China succumbed to the pandemic or not?
We are pleased to publish below the English version of an article by Adnan Akfirat, Chairman of the Turkish Chinese Business Development and Friendship Association (and member of the Friends of Socialist China advisory group), countering Western propaganda about China’s evolving strategy against the Covid-19 pandemic.

Having lived through 63 days of quarantine in Shanghai in 2022, and then contracted Covid for the first time upon travelling to Türkiye, the author has witnessed at close quarters the accomplishments of China’s Dynamic Zero Covid policy, which saved many millions of lives while China bought time to develop and deploy vaccines and treatments, and to bolster its healthcare system. He notes that China’s extraordinary mobilization of resources for the protection of human life against Covid is testament to the superiority of the socialist system.

Adnan further observes that there has been a positive side-effect of the Covid-19 pandemic in China, in that it has accelerated the improvement of the public healthcare system and stimulated a return to the development of comprehensive, state-funded, high-quality healthcare for all.

The article was originally published in Aydınlık and has been translated into English for us by the author. A shorter version has also appeared in Global Times.
The People’s Republic of China’s policies against the Covid-19 pandemic have been a major concern for US governments. The strict controls and quarantines required by China’s Dynamic Zero Covid policy were denounced as human rights violations. Towards the end of 2022, China determined that the virus was no longer so lethal and adopted a strategy of loosening restrictions. This time, the Atlantic camp accused China of “endangering humanity” and began to impose restrictions on Chinese tourists.

In his New Year’s speech at the start of 2023, President Xi Jinping emphasized that “since the COVID 19 pandemic, we have always put people and life first.” Xi said China has entered a new phase in its fight against the epidemic and “we have adapted our COVID 19 response in light of the evolving situation to protect the lives and health of the people to the greatest extent possible.”

For the last two months, US and European leaders and Western media have been accusing China of spreading disease and making the Chinese people miserable. Unfortunately, the Turkish media has also joined this campaign without questioning it. If you look at Turkish newspapers and TV channels, especially on social media, you will see that “China is collapsing from the disease!”

China’s policies saved lives
I write as someone who lived through 63 days of quarantine in Shanghai in 2022: since the beginning of the pandemic, the Chinese government has effectively mobilized the population and all resources on an unprecedented scale. As a result, China has managed to keep the virus at bay and to keep the loss of life at a surprisingly low level compared to many Western countries.

With 1.4 billion inhabitants and still a developing country, China has bought time with tight control, anticipating that if millions of people were to fall ill at the same time, its healthcare system would collapse.

By the end of 2021, China’s population aged 60 and over had reached 267 million, while the child population exceeded 250 million. If China had followed the same policy as the US, based on Singapore’s estimated infection mortality rates, the number of deaths in China for those aged 60 and over alone would have been around 600,000.

The numbers of patients dying are not just mere numbers; each one is a heavy burden for the families and friends of the lives lost. Can we stand by and accept the loss of the elderly and children around us? We say with Asian consciousness, this is absolutely unacceptable!

China’s social system, history and culture, values and social conscience do not allow us to stand by and watch the generation of parents and grandparents and babies being squeezed by the threat of death. In the UK, hundreds of people have died in just one nursing home due to the epidemic. If this happened in China, there would certainly be riots.

An article published in the prestigious medical journal The Lancet states that 18.2 million have died worldwide during the pandemic, with 120.3 deaths for every 100 thousand people. In the US, the death rate is 179.3 deaths per 100,000 people, while in China the death rate is only 0.6 deaths per 100,000 people.

The superiority of socialism
Strict prevention of the spread of the disease has enabled China to weather difficult times and withstand multiple waves of epidemics. China’s stringent measures have freed up precious time for research, development and implementation of vaccines and treatments, as well as for making medical supplies readily available. This has minimized the number of serious cases and deaths, and as a result, the health and safety of the population has been greatly protected.

This achievement is an important testament to China’s respect for human rights. Because the most important human right, that neoliberalism has made us forget, is the right to life! And the primary duty of governments is to protect the lives of the people. The most severe virus outbreak of the last 100 years proved the superiority of socialism over capitalism.

The World Health Organization-China Joint Task Force, in its report published on February 28, 2020, records as follows: “China’s response to the Covid-19 epidemic is the most ambitious, agile and aggressive disease prevention effort in history.” Moreover, “China’s exceptional nationwide implementation and strict adherence to these containment measures was only possible because of the Chinese people’s deep commitment to collective action in the face of a common threat.”

For most of the past three years, most Chinese have not been infected with Covid despite strict precautions and long quarantines. As a matter of fact, I first contracted Covid when I arrived in Turkey in July 2022.

Why did it change?
Why did China move to a liberalization phase when it was successfully pursuing a Dynamic Zero Covid strategy? The answer is simple. Because nowadays, the virus has significantly changed its nature. With the lethality of the Omicron variant declining and the speed of its spread increasing, China has taken the initiative to defeat the disease by changing the way it fights the epidemic. The strict measures taken over the past three years and the improvement of its capacity to fight the disease have been decisive in shifting to the new policy. China has shifted the focus of its response from “stopping infection” to “protecting health and preventing serious cases”.

The Chinese government assesses that “this change is science-based, timely and necessary”.

China will continue to work to make its Covid response measures more science-based, targeted and responsive to the evolving situation, and to better facilitate safe and orderly cross-border travel of Chinese and foreign nationals.

China has devoted its efforts to research and development of vaccines, rapid test kits and medicines, launched the largest vaccination campaign in the world, and promoted the use of both traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine. Omicron, which has become the dominant strain of the virus globally, is transmitted very quickly, but serious cases and mortality remain low.

China announced that it has administered more than 3.4 billion doses of Covid vaccines nationwide. The vaccination rate has exceeded 92 percent in the total populatio. It was announced that the measures taken have significantly improved the health and personal protection capacity of the Chinese people.

With the easing of restrictions, the number of people infected with the virus in China has increased dramatically. However, the situation is progressing as predicted and is under control. The capital Beijing was the first major city to reach the peak of infection. But life is slowly returning to normal.

China is confident that it can protect the public’s health and prevent serious cases, while accelerating the normalization of economic and social life to achieve a complete and final victory over the pandemic.

The bill that China pays
As the pandemic continues, as the virus continues to mutate, what the public needs is to raise awareness of the protective measures against the virus, to promote vaccination, and thereby defeat its ability to take lives. China has done this. But China’s Zero Covid strategy has come at a huge cost. According to the 2021 health development data released by China’s National Bureau of Statistics and the National Health Commission, total health expenditure in 2020 and 2021 reached 14.7 trillion yuan ($2.2 trillion), the same as the total health expenditure in the three years between 2016 and 2018. Moreover, in April 2022, the National Health Insurance Bureau announced that 3.2 billion doses of COVID 19-19 vaccines were administered nationwide, amounting to more than 120 billion yuan ($18 billion).

Improving the public health system
As if to prove the saying “there is good in every evil”, the epidemic accelerated the improvement of China’s public healthcare system. The fight against the epidemic has led to a rapid return to the socialist policy of free healthcare for all that was abandoned during the Reform and Opening Up era.

The events in China since 2020 have raised issues about weaknesses in China’s healthcare system, including the inadequacy of healthcare facilities and the health insurance program. The Chinese government has stepped up efforts to improve its state-funded health insurance program.

In 2009, the government announced a health reform plan that aimed to provide affordable, basic care for all by 2020, with a particular focus on rural populations. By 2011, state-funded health insurance covered more than 95 percent of China’s population in some form. By 2017, the number of health workers per capita had almost doubled (increased by more than 85 percent) and the number of hospital beds had increased nearly one and a half times. According to the 2019 “Healthy China” report by the World Health Organization, the World Bank and the Chinese government, thanks to a large increase in government spending on health care since 2012, out-of-pocket payments for health care have fallen from about 60 percent to 30 percent of household health expenditure.

Previously, community health centers or clinics at the lowest level often had less trained doctors and substandard equipment. The national plan for health service development called for health centers to have 3.5 health workers per 1,000 people served by 2020. The government’s last health reform plan, published in 2016, spent billions of dollars to build an effective primary health care system. As Covid-19 cases increased, local governments accelerated the construction of health centers.

New Chinese miracle coming in 2023
Most of those infected with the Omicron strain recover within a few days. China has been very prudent in changing its policy. The CPC is now preparing for a new economic miracle. The Chinese government is flexing its muscles to normalize the economy and quickly recover the losses of the past years. It is anticipated that China’s growth rate in 2023 will exceed IMF and World Bank forecasts. The Asia Times newspaper is sounding alarm bells for the Western world with the headline “China’s explosive rise in 2023 debunks US soft landing thesis.”

How beautifully said by our ancestors: “What dawns before sunrise!”

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/15/h ... ic-or-not/

Image

Islamic scholars impressed by development and religious freedom in Xinjiang
The following Global Times article is based on an interview with Emirati scholar Ali Rashid Al Nuaimi, chairman of the World Muslim Communities Council, following a recent delegation he led of more than 30 Islamic figures and scholars from 14 countries to Xinjiang Province.

Outlining the motivation for the visit, Al Nuaimi points out that there is gross misrepresentation of Xinjiang – and of the situation of Muslims in China generally – in the mainstream media. “I thought it’s very important for the Muslim world to understand what is happening in the Xinjiang region, as seeing is believing.”

Al Nuaimi stated that Muslims in China enjoy freedom of religion, and noted that a Muslim and Chinese identity coexist comfortably. He also spoke highly of the constantly improving standard of living in Xinjiang.

Countering the narrative of Chinese “concentration camps”, Al Nuaimi talks about his visits to technical colleges on this trip and on a previous trip in 2019. He speaks favorably of these colleges, saying they play an essential role teaching training and preparation for the job market. “I am an academician. I visited most of the universities in North America and Europe and their colleges and technical centers. They don’t have this for their youth. I wish that what we have seen today was available in all countries.”

He concludes by urging the people of Xinjiang to ignore the slanders hurled by Western politicians and journalists. “They criticize China because they want to slow or undermine your achievements and your development.”
Led by Ali Rashid Al Nuaimi, chairman of The World Muslim Communities Council from the UAE, a delegation including more than 30 Islamic figures and scholars from 14 countries visited Northwest China’s Xinjiang region starting on January 8. They went to mosques, the Xinjiang Islamic Institute, bazaars and many other places to communicate with local residents and religious groups in Urumqi, Altay and Kashi and to get a better understanding of the region’s development and protection of religious freedom.

On the last day of their visit in Kashi, Al Nuaimi was interviewed by Global Times reporters Liu Xin and Fan Lingzhi (GT). He shared his views on the current situation in Xinjiang and the smearing campaign led by a small group of countries to attack China on Xinjiang-related issues.

GT: We’ve noticed that this is not your first visit to Xinjiang. Are there any specific reasons for you to make this trip?

Al Nuaimi: When I visited this region in 2019, I was with a small delegation from the UAE only. I thought it’s very important for the Muslim world to understand what is happening in the Xinjiang region, as seeing is believing. This is why I invited many colleagues from different countries to come and join the visit. I can see the difference and the development that’s happening here.

Yesterday we visited the old town in Kashi. We saw the market, we saw the people on the street, we engaged with them. We saw how people are enjoying a lifestyle, enjoying the development and you can see their happiness and their smiles.

Things are improving. It is very important for the Muslim world and the world to understand that the people here are Chinese and they are part of China. And the government is taking good care of them. You wish that the citizens in Europe and other countries would have the same care and the same services.

We live in a small world. Because of globalization, because of the internet, because of the challenges that we face as humanity, the world has become like a small village. We should take care of each other. And we should work together. And everyone should understand that the world needs a secure, stable and developing China, because of the role that China has played in the world and the influence of what the Chinese are doing on the world economy, especially in underdeveloped countries. It is crucial for all of us to understand this.

And this is why it’s very important to get the right message to the world. Engaging with people will create bridges of trust, of respect, and also later on of cooperation – this is in the best interests of the world.

We need to put our political differences aside and work together. Because in the end, we have to live together. We face so many challenges that we have to come together to face these challenges. We should work together to make sure that the world enjoys security, stability and peace. We cannot do it unless we come together.

It’s very important for the elites in every nation, those wise people to come forward and speak up. We need to work as a family, as human beings, for the best interests of us all.

GT: Which word or phrase would you use to describe your trip or your impression of the Xinjiang region? How will you describe your trip after returning to your country?

Al Nuaimi: I will describe the region with the words “developing” and “harmony.” There is harmony between the people in terms of different ethnic groups and also the coexistence of different values. You can see that in the streets. This is the most impressive part for me.

GT: The delegation visited mosques, Islamic institutes and many other places in the region during the trip. What’s your comment on the local government’s efforts in protecting residents’ freedom of religion?

Al Nuaimi: First of all, many members of the delegation were not aware that the Chinese constitution calls for freedom of religion. Now they know it.

They started to understand the importance of the integration of Muslims in China within the whole system, within the nation. This is in the best interests of Muslims, to be integrated with the community, to interact with them, to share the responsibility as a citizen about the nation and play their role in the development of China.

You need to respect your religion, practice your religion. But at the same time, you have to respect the country’s constitution, you have to respect the laws and play your role. Practicing your religion is something of your own choice. You can’t impose it on others. You have to respect the choice of others and you have to live as a Chinese citizen and be proud as a Chinese citizen.

I think it’s very important to understand that Muslims – not only in China, but also in many other countries – should be part of these countries. The sovereignty of these nations should be respected according to the international law. And Muslims in China are Chinese citizens. We should respect that.

China is moving in the right direction in development. We need to understand it. We need to respect the choice of the Chinese people on their system and to engage with them.

GT: Some countries are using topics related to religion to attack China. What is their real purpose?

Al Nuaimi: There are things that we should not solve with political differences or with political agendas, such as religion, terrorism, climate change or poverty. These are challenges that we are facing everywhere. The problem is that when politicians are engaged with religion, they spoil it.

Terrorism is not a threat to a single nation or a single region; it is a threat to the world. We will not be able to counter terrorism unless we are together. Because especially with the internet and with social media, terrorism is moving from one continent to another. Terrorists don’t respect international law.

If you can’t have development, you can’t have security. You can’t have stability unless you counter terrorism. And this is what you have to understand. If China didn’t enjoy security, stability and prosperity, the world would suffer.

GT: What do you think about the Xinjiang region’s deradicalization efforts?

Al Nuaimi: You always measure the quality of any program by the outcome. If you want to know how effective the program is, look at the outcome.

Since 2016, there have been no terrorist attacks in the Xinjiang region. That is a great achievement and that proves what has been done here actually led to the right result and the right outcome.

You do whatever is needed to protect your national security, to protect your people. It’s your priority to protect your national security and your people with respect to the rule of law. And this is what’s happening here.

GT: The delegation visited a technical college in Kashi. Some Western media reports alleged that such technical schools in the Xinjiang region are “camps.” What’s your comment on this?

Al Nuaimi: I visited some technical centers in 2019. I am an academician. I visited most of the universities in North America and Europe and their colleges and technical centers. They don’t have this for their youth. I wish that what we have seen today was available in all countries.

Because here you see how you are taking care of the youth by first providing them with the right education, with the right training, and preparing them for the job market.

It’s a great achievement. What’s happening here is something that the world needs to learn from. And I encourage you to share it, not only with those who criticize China now but also to share it with your friends in Africa, in Latin America and in Central Asia. They need these things to solve many challenges that they are facing in their society.

GT: But the US and some Western countries do not see these as achievements and have criticized China for these centers.

Al Nuaimi: Don’t listen to those who criticize you. If you listen to this criticism, you will be misguided. You will spend some of your resources to deal with this criticism. No. Focus on your national priority. Make sure all your resources are in the right place to develop your country, to invest in your citizens and to do the right thing for your nation.

GT: We have noticed after the delegation’s visit was reported in recent days, some people in the West are criticizing you and the delegation. What do you think about this criticism?

Al Nuaimi: We have to do what we are doing. We should have the courage to speak loudly of what we believe.

GT: How about criticism from Western countries?

Al Nuaimi: We don’t have a political agenda by being here. We are here to do the right thing, to build bridges between the Muslim world and China and to do the right thing that will serve the common interests of Muslims all over the world and China.

GT: Is there anything you want to say to Xinjiang residents and Chinese people and the outside world?

Al Nuaimi: I want to say to Xinjiang is congratulations on your achievement. The world needs you to focus on serving your national security, national prosperity, so make sure that you don’t engage or listen to those who want to undermine the development of China or those who criticize China. It’s not because of what China is doing; they criticize China because they want to slow or undermine your achievements and your development.

We need China. We need a secure, stable, and prosperous China. This is in the best interests of us all.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/17/i ... -xinjiang/

China tops world in key green areas, report says
By Hou Liqiang | chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2023-01-20 00:26


Image
A wind farm generates power for grids in Zhoushan, Zhejiang province, on Aug 6. [Photo by Yao Feng/For China Daily]

With intensified efforts to promote green transitions, China has topped the world in many fields concerning environmental conservation and low-carbon development, according to a white paper released on Thursday by the State Council Information Office.

In 2021, the country's forest coverage ratio reached 24 percent, and its forest stock volume grew to about 19.5 billion cubic meters, said the document titled China's Green Development in the New Era.

"Both figures represented 30 consecutive years of growth, making China the country with the highest growth in forest resources and the largest area of man-made forest," it said.

With land areas that have desertification and sandification both shrinking, China is the first country that has realized zero net land degradation, it added.

The average density of PM 2.5 particulate matter in the country's cities of prefecture level and above dropped from 46 micrograms per cubic meter in 2015 to 30 mcg / cubic m in 2021. "China is making the fastest progress in air quality improvement," it said.

With booming energy conservation and environmental protection industries, the white paper said, the country has been making consistent, remarkable progress in new energy development. In 2021, the output value of China's energy conservation and environmental protection industries exceeded 8 trillion yuan ($1.2 trillion), it said.

Image
This photo taken on Jan 19, 2023 shows the Chinese and English version of a white paper titled "China's Green Development in the New Era" issued by China's State Council Information Office. The white paper aims to present a full picture of China's ideas, actions, and achievements in green development in the new era, and to share with the world its experience in this regard. [Photo/Xinhua]

By the end of 2021, the installed capacity of renewable energy across the country was more than 1 billion kilowatts, accounting for 44.8 percent of China's overall installed capacity, it noted. The installed capacity of hydropower, wind power and photovoltaic power each exceeded 300 million kilowatts, all ranking the highest in the world.

Zhao Chenxin, deputy director of the National Development and Reform Commission, said the output value of the energy conservation and environmental protection industries have kept expanding by over 10 percent annually on average in recent years. "We now have the world's largest production scale for clean energy equipment," he said.

Zhao Yingmin, vice-minister of ecology and environment, said these achievements happened thanks to a systematic institutional system China established in the past 10 years to construct an ecological civilization, a concept promoted by President Xi Jinping for balanced and sustainable development that features harmonious coexistence between mankind and nature.

While ecological civilization has been inscribed into the country's Constitution, the number of laws on environmental protection in China is more than 30. "The law and regulation system for environmental and ecological protection has essentially come into form," Zhao said.

The vice-minister also noted a series of mechanisms China introduced to enhance environmental protection. High-profile central environmental inspection, for instance, has "effectively addressed a lot of prominent environmental problems".

A series of market mechanisms were introduced to motivate companies to promote green transition, he said, citing the national carbon trading program and tax cuts for environmentally friendly operations as examples.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... aab58.html

Well. the 'carbon trading' is a scam whoever does it...I expect some of these bogus 'green capitalism' measures will be brought to heel even as China does same to it's capitalist sector in general. But overall Chinese measures beat the hell out of what the West actually does(not what they promise to do, a pack of lies), as China actually delivers.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Tue Jan 24, 2023 4:02 pm

Is China really ill-prepared for its new phase of COVID response?
Xinhua | Updated: 2023-01-21 08:38


Image
Passenger flows via rail in Guangdong province have ballooned since the Spring Festival travel rush began on Jan 7. [Photo provided to chinadaily.com.cn]

Has any battle ever been fought globally under risk-free, fully prepared conditions? Even the most erudite historian will struggle to find such an example.

The same is true of the fight against the novel coronavirus. In this battle against the elusive enemy, the only certainty is that you can never be "100 percent" prepared for it.

China decided at the end of last year to shift the focus of its COVID response from preventing new infections to medical treatment and moved to further downgrade response measures earlier this month after three years of stringent prevention and control measures.

Not surprisingly, some "know-it-all" Western media and politicians, blinded by their prejudices, impatiently heaped their accusations on China's policy shift -- "bad timing," "no clear exit plan," "a loss of faith," and "policy U-turn."

"China is ill-prepared for the policy shift." They tried to prove the assumption using their groundless analysis and modeling.

The fact is, China's policy shift is a choice shrewdly yet resolutely made during what it sees as a "window period" earned after three years of painstaking yet effective fight against COVID-19.

Why now?

In general, China's policy shift is based on several facts:

First, the Omicron variant is much less deadly. Warding off the much more dangerous virus strains with its prevention and control measures, China has chosen a less costly time to lift its COVID restrictions.

Second, the country has launched the world's largest vaccination campaign in scale to build a relatively strong immunity barrier among its citizens. More than 90 percent of the Chinese population is now fully vaccinated against COVID-19, and over 86 percent of people aged 60 or above are fully vaccinated.

Explaining why China has not chosen the summer of 2022 to lift the restrictions, a senior health expert advising the Chinese government said the elderly population was not adequately vaccinated at the time, without enough booster shots administered.

Third, the improvements in the medical treatment, prevention, and control capabilities in China's healthcare system and properly exercised public health measures across the society.

To use an expression popular among the Chinese: "The virus is weaker, but we are stronger."

China has been fine-tuning its response measures in light of the evolving situation, adhering to the principle of "seeking truth from facts" in its fight against the virus. The "dynamic zero-COVID approach," the "optimization of response measures," and "Class B management" are all decisions made after scientific analysis and shrewd calculation based on the evolving nature of the virus and to respond to people's demands. They are by no means impulsive decisions.

The past three years of prevention and control efforts have laid a solid foundation for China to make such a major policy shift and serve as a precondition for China to optimize its response measures more.

Leveraging its strong grassroots mobilization, organization, and governance capabilities, China has made strenuous efforts to prepare for its policy shift.

To address a temporary shortage of drug supply caused by a spike in infections and hoarding, the Chinese government has given support to pharmaceutical manufacturers to produce drugs or medical equipment at full steam to make sure the daily output of COVID test kits expand from 60 million to 110 million in a month. The daily output of painkillers such as ibuprofen has expanded over four times.

When the hospitals faced an influx of severely-ill COVID patients, China managed to increase its ICU beds by 20 percent.

The government has also made arrangements to swiftly increase the accessibility of medical services in rural areas, where fewer doctors and drugs make people more vulnerable during outbreaks.

There is no such thing as perfect timing, but there is good timing. China has chosen the time when it believes the situation can be controlled.

"To be fully prepared" is a mere pseudo-proposition. No one can claim to be fully prepared in the face of a virulent strain that is severely transmissible and mutable.

Of course, China does not deny that it is under pressure to tame the outbreak. The country has been upgrading its response plan while seeking to remedy the shortcomings.

The Chinese government and people are working together to "flatten the curve" to shorten the lines outside hospital emergency rooms and reduce the number of heartbreaking deaths.

Now, let's look at the question of "Is China prepared?" in another dimension: the results of China lifting restrictions.

It is not to use the ends to justify the means as Machiavellianism does. But before accusing China of being "ill-prepared," one should first check if the "dark COVID winter" and "COVID nightmare" predicted by the critics actually exist.

If you visit a Chinese metropolis now, you will see that masked commuters are packing subway trains, postponed travel plans are back on the agenda. And the lines at Disneyland are getting long.

Under the protection of the country, many Chinese people were exposed to the virus for the first time three years after the initial outbreak. After weeks of recuperating and social distancing during the first infection wave, life is gradually returning to normal for Chinese people.

Businessmen across the world have undoubtedly been "well-prepared." Many sectors in China are seeing a rebound. "What we can be sure of now is that the policy is going in the right direction," said Wang Dan, chief economist of Hang Seng Bank (China) Limited.

If China, as some Western media claimed, had chosen to optimize its COVID policies only because it had no alternative but to be forced to do so, the country of 1.4 billion people would not have been able to get back on track in such a short time and send such strong signals of economic recovery.

The ease of COVID policies will result in an exponential spike in infections, as has happened in any other country. But China has passed the infection peak, and its medical resources, including hospitals, hospital beds, medical workers and drug supply, are sufficient. The occupancy of ICU beds has not yet reached the critical mark of 80 percent.

China's transition to the new phase of the COVID response has been generally smooth. Is the "ill-prepared" accusation against China substantiated?

But for those China bashers, no matter when China chooses to optimize its COVID policies, it will always be a "bad choice," and China will always be "ill-prepared." It has nothing to do with facts and science. To them, China is a sin in itself, a "threat" -- no matter what.

However, the opposite is true. At the moment, hundreds of millions of Chinese are preparing for the Spring Festival holiday. It has been predicted that China will see over 2 billion journeys made during the holiday travel rush, up 99.5 percent from last year.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... aaf42.html

************

Image
Passengers walk out of Haikou Meilan International Airport on December 9, 2022. Photo: VCG

Stepping out of the pandemic, Chinese style
Originally published: Global Times on January 13, 2023 by Roland Boer (more by Global Times) | (Posted Jan 24, 2023)

On January 6, 2023, China’s National Health Commission (NHC) and National Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine issued China’s 10th edition of its diagnosis and treatment protocol for novel coronavirus infection. This is the NHC’s first national guiding protocol after China announced to downgrade management of COVID from Class A to Class B from January 8. Two items are worth noting here: the definition has changed from “novel coronavirus pneumonia” to “novel coronavirus infection” and its classification is now at a “B” level. The classification has significant implications for the measures taken to deal with the virus, but a question arises: Has China “lain down” before the virus, has it given up on dealing with it? The answer is a resounding no. Instead, China is the first country in the world to move from the coronavirus being a pandemic to it being endemic. This point needs some explanation.

First, for a little over three years I have been closely following China’s approach in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic. The results have been nothing less than stunning: the number of per capita infections and deaths are at the lowest level in the world, life expectancy has increased during this time, and the dialectic of economic development and public health has been managed very well.

The health of the population has not been significantly compromised – as has happened in some other countries–by the earlier and more toxic mutations of the virus, and the level of full vaccinations among the population above 3 years old is over 90 percent. In many respects, China has set a new “gold standard” for dealing with a pandemic. As one example, I have noted the huge amount of discussion with each revision of the measures for dealing with the pandemic, seeing how medical specialists and scientists were dealing daily with the many questions people had. The specialists were always “on message,” seeking to explain the content, connotations, implications, and reasons behind each revision of the measures. Friends and colleagues in China gave me regular updates concerning the experiences with their own families, their workplaces, their concerns, and – most importantly – their hopes.

This leads to the second point: the “people-centered approach,” or “taking the people as the center.” While this has been a core position of the CPC, a people-centered approach has seen renewed emphasis in the new era since the CPC’s 18th National Congress in 2012, when Xi Jinping was elected general secretary of CPC Central Committee. During the pandemic, this approach became absolutely central, expressed in “people come first, and life comes first,” which has been the commitment of the CPC to the whole Chinese people since the first days of the pandemic. Without the health of the people, development and a moderately well-off society is not comprehensive, or is not complete is all respects.

Third, an international observer cannot avoid noticing how all of the policy measures are based on rigorous and comprehensive science. For example, on December 15, 2022, I listened to a two-hour lecture by Zhong Nanshan, the “hero of SARS” and recipient of the Medal of the Republic, China’s highest state honor, for his services in fighting the COVID pandemic. The lecture has been watched by tens of millions of people across China, since it explains the immense amount of science that is behind China’s huge success in dealing with the pandemic. Zhong Nanshan’s lecture summarised much of the science, but this requires an immense amount of evidence, research, and collaboration between scientists, in China and across the world. For example, it is precisely because China has undertaken such comprehensive testing that we know now that 90 percent of Omicron infections are asymptomatic and that those who are symptomatic are mostly mild. Only rigorous science produces such results. Zhong Nanshan’s message was very clear: Do not get infected but do not be afraid of the virus in its Omicron form.

Fourth is the comprehensive approach. As we well know, departmentalism is typical of the few Western societies, with their individualism and liberalism. The result has been that their “single solution” approach to the pandemic was an obvious failure. By contrast, one finds again and again that China takes a comprehensive approach: Health and economic development; all effective measures for ensuring a healthy population, and so on. For example, one’s risk of infection or reinfection is very low with mixed vaccines (especially deactivated and adenovirus-based vaccines), Traditional Chinese Medicine, wearing quality face-masks, opening windows regularly, focusing on the elderly and children, and maintaining a high level of attention with disinfected surfaces. Clearly, this is a comprehensive approach, considering all aspects of what is effective. It is in this sense that we can see how China is the first country in the world where the coronavirus is moving from a pandemic to an endemic – and thus seasonal and non-threatening – status. Yes, China is stepping out of the pandemic, with 1.4 billion people. This is a momentous achievement and I am waiting eagerly to see how 2023 unfolds.

Fifth, I am struck by the way that China has identified where and how the health system can be improved. This feature always impresses me about China: no matter how good a practice may be, there is always room for improvement. This is also true with the all-important health system. It goes without saying that the improvements are comprehensive, leveraging the strengths of grassroots health services through to the highest research hospitals. As others have observed, with the lessons learned from the last three years, China’s health system has seen impressive improvement.

By now it should be obvious why China is stepping out of the pandemic, and why the coronavirus has become endemic. I would like to conclude on a note of hope. As I have been engaging with friends and colleagues in China, I have seen a distinct hope and eagerness as 2023 begins. People are very much looking forward to returning to their home towns for the Spring Festival, which for many will be the first time in three years. All of this has also given me hope and put me in a very good mood, since I know that in 2023 I will finally be able to return to China.

https://mronline.org/2023/01/24/steppin ... ese-style/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Wed Jan 25, 2023 4:18 pm

Report analyzes trends in COVID-19 infection
chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2023-01-25 20:33

Image
A medical staff administers a second booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine for a resident through nose at a temporary vaccination site in Haidian district, Beijing, capital of China, Dec 17, 2022. [Photo/Xinhua]

The number of COVID-19 infections in China reached its peak around Dec 22, with a maximum of nearly 7 million new cases per day, the official website of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention announced in a report on the national epidemic situation published on Wednesday. Fever clinic visits reached a peak of 2.87 million on Dec 23.

The number of deaths from COVID-19 infections in hospitals reached a daily peak of 4,273 on Jan 4, and then continued to decline, falling to 896 on Jan 23, a drop of 79 percent, the center said.

The number of people hospitalized with COVID-19 infections nationwide reached a peak of 1.63 million on Jan 5 and then continued to decline, falling to 248,000 on Jan 23. Among them, the number of critically ill patients increased by nearly 10,000 per day from Dec 27 to Jan 3. The total fell to 36,000 on Jan 23.

Monitoring results from the report showed the epidemic strains of this round were BA.5.2 and BF.7, and no new mutant strains have yet been found in the country.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... ab38b.html

************

XIONGAN, THE CHINESE CITY OF THE FUTURE
24 Jan 2023 , 4:30 p.m.

Image

It is a city of 1 thousand 50 square meters and 3 million inhabitants built from scratch in which China has already spent 400 billion yuan. According to the French businessman Arnaud Bertrand , based in that Asian country, "it is far from complete".

Xiongan is designed as "three cities":

1.On the floor.
2.Underground, with utility corridors and automated logistics delivery.
3.The so-called "cloud city", for algorithm-based management of traffic and other urban systems, as well as better maintenance of infrastructure and technological systems.

This "Cloud City" will enable 5G-enabled autonomous vehicles throughout the city, both above and below ground, for automated logistics delivery. In Xiongan, everything will be automated.

Xiongan is designed as "5-minute blocks", allowing residents to access child and elderly care facilities, and a variety of one-stop services within a 5-minute walk. The idea is that wherever you live in the city is a small town unto itself, limiting the need to move.

Xiongan's design is infused with "elements of traditional Chinese culture in modern architecture" with "three non-buildings in Xiongan: no high-rise buildings, no concrete forests, no glass curtain walls," according to a paper of Foreign Policy on the city.

For example, the city's brain data center floats on a body of water, surrounded by greenery that will cool the servers and moderate the power required. A recent CCTV documentary described the construction as " shan shui city style , integrating practical use and aesthetics".

There is a strong emphasis on sustainability: the energy that will power Xiongan will come entirely from various renewable sources and "public transport is expected to take over 90% of traffic."

Image
TITLETEXT:
Public transport is expected to take over 90% of traffic in Xiongan
CREDITS: Archive

Xiongan seeks to "implement new models of affordable and subsidized housing" with "a mix of housing types, including subsidized rental units and homes to buy," says the article in the US media. Until now most of the inhabitants are villagers who were relocated to make way for the construction of the city.

Lastly, an interesting feature is that Xiongan is also "a testing ground for China's efforts to establish a new digital renminbi" with "construction workers in Xiongan [receiving their] salaries via the digital blockchain currency", describes Foreign Policy .

Bertrand states that "the development of Xiongan, this is rare, is under the direct supervision of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, a sign that they take this experiment very seriously and that it could be a first step for what could be the China's future."

https://misionverdad.com/xiongan-la-ciu ... del-futuro

Google Translator

**************

“Chinese Aggression” Sure Looks An Awful Lot Like US Aggression

Image

Punchbowl News reports that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy is planning a trip to Taiwan, which will be yet another incendiary provocation against Beijing if it occurs. The previous House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, sparked a significant escalation in hostilities with her visit last year, the consequences of which are still reverberating today.

Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp explains:

Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan was viewed in Beijing as a major provocation, and it sparked the largest-ever Chinese military drills around the island. The exercises included China firing missiles over Taiwan and simulating a blockade of the island, both unprecedented actions.

China has kept up the military pressure on Taiwan since Pelosi’s visit, and its warplanes regularly now cross the median line, an informal barrier that divides the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. Before Pelosi’s trip, China barely crossed the line. Now, it’s an almost-daily occurrence.



Beijing views the US House speaker visiting Taiwan as an affront to the one-China policy and the understanding the US and China reached in 1979, when Washington severed formal relations with Taipei.


US-led provocations and escalations against China are becoming a regular occurrence, both from the US itself and from its imperial assets like Australia and Taiwan. Yet according to the western political/media class, the urgent threat of our day is “Chinese aggression”.

After the House of Representatives voted to approve the new Select Committee on China — a Republican initiative designed to increase internal pressure in the US government to ramp up the new cold war — the committee’s chairman Mike Gallagher put out a statement saying that it is “time to push back against the Chinese Communist Party’s aggression in bipartisan fashion.”

Gallagher is a particularly noxious warmonger who says urgent efforts must be made to stop China from “destroying the capitalist system led by the United States in order to make way for the triumph of world socialism with Chinese characteristics.” He advocates the “selective decoupling” from specific sectors of the Chinese economy and says the US is in “the early stages of a new cold war” against China. He advocates pouring weapons into Taiwan in much the same way the US did in the lead-up to its proxy war in Ukraine, and asserts that the US needs to be preparing for a direct hot war with China in the near future.

Gallagher’s hawkishness on China is quickly becoming the mainstream consensus position in the western political/media class as the US-centralized empire ramps up aggressions while continually complaining about Chinese aggression.


The US empire has been increasingly positioning its war machinery around China since the Obama administration’s “Pivot to Asia” in ways that would have led to an immediate third world war if the roles were reversed, and its aggressions have escalated with each subsequent administration. Just in the last couple of months we’ve had news that the US is planning on returning to its Subic Bay base in the Philippines as part of its encirclement campaign against China, and also intends to station missile-armed marines along Japan’s Okinawa islands. The US is also reportedly working on building a network of missile systems on a chain of islands near the Chinese mainland, explicitly for the goal of countering China. The US and its allies have dramatically increased their naval presence in disputed waters near China, viewed as acts of aggression by Beijing.

None of this would be tolerated by the United States if China were openly moving its war machinery into adjacent areas with the stated goal of “countering the US”. If China were doing this, it would be a near-unanimous consensus throughout the western world that China was engaged in hostile provocations and was clearly the aggressor. Nobody would listen to China if it claimed it was militarily encircling the US for defensive purposes.

But that’s exactly what happens with US aggressions against China. It’s just taken as matter of fact when the US says it’s moving more and more war machinery into the waters around China as a defensive precaution to deter Chinese aggression. Because the narrative is coming from the most effective propaganda machine ever devised, we hear “No bro, the US is militarily encircling its number one geopolitical rival on the other side of the planet defensively. Because like what if China tries to do something aggressive?”


In a surprisingly decent Foreign Affairs article titled “The Problem With Primacy,” Van Jackson argues that the US is behaving in such a transparently aggressive manner toward China that it can’t possibly claim to be acting in the interests of preserving peace and stability in the region.

“This is not the rationale of a country that is simply balancing Chinese power or trying to stop Beijing from creating a sphere of influence,” writes Jackson of the recent US semiconductor export ban against China. “It is not the strategy of a state trying to decouple from the Chinese economy. It is containment in all but name.”

“The Pentagon has promised that 2023 will be ‘the most transformative year in US force posture in the region in a generation,’ a line likely meant to be reassuring but that comes off as ominous,” Jackson writes. “The Department of Defense is making good on this promise by modernizing its large traditional presence in Northeast Asia while increasing its footprint in the Pacific Islands and Australia—areas that the Chinese military cannot seriously contest.”

Jackson argues that Washington’s efforts to halt China’s rise will likely achieve nothing besides provoking China into militarizing against it, saying, “There is no reason to believe that spending over a trillion dollars modernizing the U.S. nuclear arsenal or selling submarines to Australia will cause China to do anything but continue arming itself as quickly as possible.”

This aligns with the warnings of an anonymous US official cited in a November article by Bloomberg, who said that “the hawkish tone in DC has contributed to a cycle where the US makes the first move, interprets Chinese reactions as a provocation, and then escalates further.”

It’s the US making the first move every time.


Taiwan is an odd case because empire apologists will openly tell you that Beijing must never control the island as it’s a geostrategically crucial location with essential semiconductor manufacturing, and then turn around and still try to tell you that Washington’s interest in Taiwan is because it wants to protect freedom and democracy. It’s even more transparent than when they were pretending to yearn for the liberation of nations that just so happened to sit on a lot of oil.

I don’t know if Beijing will ever launch an attack on Taiwan or some other future flashpoint, but if it does it seems a safe bet that it will be because the US empire kept ramping up aggressions and provocations until it got to the point that China felt it was losing more from inaction than it would from action. And then empire apologists will spend all day shrieking at anyone who tries to talk about those provocations.

Because that’s the rule now, if you weren’t aware. As of February 2022 we’re all meant to pretend that the concept of provocation is not a commonplace idea that everyone understands and learns about as children, but that “provocation” is rather a nonsensical propaganda word that was invented by Vladimir Putin last year. It is now no longer permissible for you to talk about the aggressions that led up to a nation going to war; we must all pretend that history began the day their troops crossed the border.

History is being re-written with Ukraine, and if war erupts over Taiwan it will probably be re-written there as well. But note to the future: the road to war was paved by mountains of US aggression.

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2023/01/24 ... ggression/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sun Jan 29, 2023 2:53 pm

Image

Why is China’s battle against corruption grave and complex?
In this original article, Keith Lamb explains that, whilst China has scored enormous achievements in the battle against corruption, it still faces an uphill task in preventing new cases and rooting out existing ones.

Because the CPC is a Marxist party, Keith explains, with the historic mission to usher in socialism, it has to hold itself to higher standards than those political parties which operate within the framework of capitalism. However, when working towards socialism, utopian action will fail. Therefore, China took the pragmatic road by adopting a socialist market economy, which has advanced the forces of production and technology necessary for socialist development. However, this also creates a series of class and material contradictions that need to be navigated.

Achieving China’s goal of becoming a prosperous and modern socialist country by 2049, the author notes, not only requires a constant battle against corruption, but also provides part of the remedy for corruption.
Recently at the second plenary session of the 20th CPC Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (CCDI) it was noted that the corruption situation, in China remains grave and complex. The Communist Party of China (CPC) faces an uphill task in preventing new cases of corruption and rooting out existing ones.

In recent years, there have been enormous achievements in the battle against corruption at all levels of officialdom, which is encapsulated in the slogan “striking tigers and swatting flies.” In 2018, Lai Xiaomin the former state asset manager was executed for taking $277 million in bribes, and Sun Zhengcai, the former Chongqing Party Chief, was given life imprisonment for taking $27 million in bribes.

As of June 2022, a total of 4,516,000 corruption cases were handled by disciplinary authorities, and 4,439,000 people were punished for violating discipline. Just over a month after the closing of the 20th CPC National Congress, more than 10 officials who were suspected of severe violations of discipline and laws had turned themselves in.

Considering such successes, one may ask why the corruption situation still remains grave and complex. First, the massive anti-corruption campaign launched after the 18th National Congress was unprecedented in size, due to corruption becoming so deep-rooted. Consequently, considering the magnitude of the problem, no matter the achievements already accumulated, there is still much to do.

Corruption remains the greatest threat to the CPC as it leads to resentment by citizens, who are represented by the Party and who the Party derives support from. It leads to inefficient and undemocratic governance as officials work for their own interests, which in turn goes against the goals of the CPC to guide China towards socialism characterized by increased equality.

Because the CPC is a Marxist party, with the aforementioned historic mission to usher in socialism, it has to hold itself to higher standards than most foreign political parties which operate within the framework of capitalism. For example, lobbying in the U.S., which places the power of capital above that of U.S. governing organs, is legal because it works within accepting the status quo, where what is good for capital is deemed as good for all.

In China this relationship is inverted. What is good for capital may not always be good for all. Often the narrow interests of capital are antithetical to the needs of society and even capital itself from a long-term perspective.

Speaking of the complex situation of corruption in China, conditioned by capital, one may wish to do away with this social force! However, when working towards socialism, utopian action will fail. One must work within the boundaries of the existing contradictions of material reality and social forces to achieve “utopian” destinations.

With this in mind, China took the pragmatic road by adopting a Socialist Market Economy, which has advanced the forces of production and technology necessary for socialist destinations. However, it also brings a corresponding series of material and class contradictions to be navigated through.

First, money is power, and market forces accumulate this power to those who, constrained by their world outlook, act undemocratically. The U.S. open political nature allows individual capitalists to wield this power freely. But, in China, this potentiality of capital, to personally affect politics, is wielded through bribery which cannot be tolerated.

The problem is there must be a close connection between governing systems and economic forces, in which capital plays a major role. How does one keep these forces together yet separated?

The CPC advocates for zero tolerance and harsh discipline which leads to officials not daring to be corrupt. In addition, the increased systematization of processes and oversight leads to officials not being able to be corrupt. For the purpose of ensuring the implementation of the plans made at the 20th CPC National Congress the CCDI will strengthen its political oversight

A second contradiction of unleashing market forces is that they can also corrupt ideologically and spiritually. Consumption “ideally” requires constant refreshment and reinforcement of “insatiable desires.” The greater these desires the more capital is needed to fulfil them which can strengthen the power of capital to corrupt.

Consequently, strict ideological discipline within the party is needed. Here, officials must be cognisant of not being swayed by unbridled hedonism and money worship, which the CPC is battling against, but be conscious of the Party’s mission to bring greater equality, prosperity, and harmony to all.

Achieving China’s structural goal of becoming a prosperous socialist country by 2049, not only requires a constant battle against corruption and ideological reinforcement to navigate the various contradictions, but it also provides part of the remedy for corruption.

Structural forces guiding corruption, on one extreme, is unfettered greed, which we see with the imprisonment and execution of the “tigers”. On the other extreme, there is the fear of scarcity, both now and in the future, which conditions petty corruption by the “flies”. These fears may be influenced by the market apportioning basics like housing, healthcare, and education unequally.

With China defeating absolute poverty, these structural inequalities are now in focus. Future successes in achieving greater equality will contribute to officials having no desire to become corrupt and further strengthen widespread support for China’s clean governing system which acts for the democratic interests of all.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/23/w ... d-complex/

Image

Decoupling from China, Russia suicidal for Europe
This article by Friends of Socialist China co-editor Carlos Martinez, originally published in Global Times, discusses the record of the Biden administration in ramping up Cold War hostilities against China and Russia, and its attempts to get Europe on board with its strategy for protecting US hegemony. Carlos points out that “Anti-Russia and anti-China positions are harming the people of Europe”: sanctions on China’s semiconductor and solar energy industries are utterly self-defeating, and sanctions on Russian energy are feeding directly into a very serious cost of living crisis. He concludes that “the countries of Europe would be well advised to exercise foreign policy independence and to make decisions based on the needs of their own populations, which are calling out for peace, prosperity and a sustainable future.”
When Joe Biden was elected in November 2020, many around the world were hoping for a change of course in the US’ reckless new Cold War.

US-China relations have always been complex and difficult; yet from the early 1970s onward, the trajectory had been toward deepening economic cooperation and a nuanced handling of the contradictions immanent in the relationship. Even with the Obama-Clinton “Pivot to Asia,” which signaled the US’ shift in geostrategic focus toward China containment, there was still significant and productive cooperation between the two countries – most notably in the drafting of the Paris Agreement.

Donald Trump came to power with a promise to stop China “raping” the US economy. Blaming China soon became the new magic wand for explaining away the problems of US capitalism without having to deal with any of the real underlying causes of American decline. Singaporean academic and former diplomat Kishore Mahbubani noted that, rather than blaming China for everything, living standards in the US might improve if America stopped fighting unnecessary foreign wars and used its resources to improve the well-being of its people.

The Trump team initiated a trade war, imposed a ban on Huawei, and sought to ban TikTok and WeChat. They aimed to generate mass anti-China sentiment by engaging in flagrant racism, most infamously blaming the coronavirus pandemic on China. They introduced sanctions and issued disgraceful slanders. So it was assumed that surely, things would only get better under Biden.

Two years after his inauguration, any hopes that peace-loving humanity may have had in Biden have long since been dashed. The Biden administration has continued the trade war, repeating Trump’s talking points about China’s alleged “coercive and unfair” trade practices and its “abuses of the international system.” Biden has deepened sanctions, undermined the one-China principle, and doubled down on unwarranted slanders regarding China’s human rights record.

US House passed defense bill with billions in military financial assistance to the island of Taiwan each year. The Biden administration has launched the AUKUS pact with Australia and Britain, and has been encouraging Japan’s rearmament.

One of the current US administration’s first priorities was to undermine the historic investment deal agreed by China and the European Union in December 2020. The deal is currently in a state of limbo – unable to be ratified by the European Parliament.

Meanwhile, the US has massively ramped up its aggressiveness against Russia. In the months leading up to the launch of Russia’s special military operation against Ukraine in February last year, the US and NATO doggedly refused to discuss Russia’s legitimate security concerns. Indeed, in December 2021, Biden assured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that Kiev’s bid to join the NATO military alliance was in its own hands.

The US has consistently stood in the way of peace over the last year, providing Ukraine with vast quantities of heavy weaponry and discouraging it from engaging in meaningful dialogue with Russia. Meanwhile it has imposed unprecedented sanctions on Russia, attempting to cut it out of SWIFT — the global messaging network for international payments — and frozen $30 billion of Russia’s sanctioned assets with its allies. The G7 countries have imposed a price cap of $60 a barrel for Russian oil, more or less equal to the cost of production. Germany has been cajoled into suspending the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

Anti-Russia and anti-China positions are harming the people of Europe. Once ratified, the EU-China investment deal, or Comprehensive Agreement on Investment, will provide a substantial boost to the European economy, creating jobs and profits. Sanctions against China’s semiconductor and solar energy industries are utterly self-defeating. Meanwhile the sanctions on Russian energy are feeding directly into a very serious cost of living crisis. Energy and food prices have gone through the roof. Britain’s inflation is running at over 10 percent, which means that wages are declining rapidly in real terms.

The Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins described sanctions against Russia as “the most ill-conceived and counterproductive policy in recent international history.” Europe’s so-called decoupling from China and Russia amounts to economic suicide — which is why Germany is already starting to roll back on its commitment to a new Cold War, and why Olaf Scholz was the first G7 leader to visit Beijing since 2020.

During the Cold War, following the US’ lead in foreign policy became a habit for European countries. The collective “West” shared a great deal in terms of culture and ideology, and its commitment to defeating the socialist world outweighed the natural rivalry that exists between capitalist powers. But the world has changed, and a multipolar world has become an inescapable reality. As Professor Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, wrote recently, “We have already entered a multipolar world, in which each region has its own issues and role in global politics. No country and no single region can any longer determine the fate of others.”

The countries of Europe would be well advised to exercise foreign policy independence and to make decisions based on the needs of their own populations, which are calling out for peace, prosperity and a sustainable future.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/24/d ... or-europe/

Image

Event: Socialist solutions to the climate crisis

Date Thursday 2 February

Time
7pm Britain / 2pm US Eastern / 11am US Pacific

Venue
Marx Memorial Library
London EC1R 0DU
And Zoom

Organisers
Friends of Socialist China
Morning Star
Marx Memorial Library
Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign Action Group
Cuba Solidarity Campaign

REGISTER ON EVENTBRITE https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/online-o ... 1527461407

At this event, we will describe the evolving and diverse strategies being pursued in socialist and progressive countries (with a specific focus on Nicaragua, Cuba and China) in relation to preventing climate breakdown, the collapse of biodiversity, and other key ecological challenges. The speakers will compare these efforts with the alarmingly slow progress being made in the neoliberal West, which has been touting its ‘market-based solutions’ to humanity’s environmental crisis for the last three decades.

This will be a hybrid event, in-person at the Marx Memorial Library in London and online. If you register on Eventbrite, you will have the option to attend via Zoom and participate in the discussion. We will also be streaming on YouTube.

Participants
Dan Kovalik is a US-based lawyer, activist and teacher. He is the author of several books, the most recent of which is Nicaragua: A History of US Intervention and Resistance.

Guisell Morales Echaverry is Ambassador of the Republic of Nicaragua to the United Kingdom, Ireland and Iceland.

Lauren Collins is an honorary research fellow at the University of Nottingham and a member of the executive committee of the Cuba Solidarity Campaign.

Paul Atkin is a retired teacher and NEU activist, involved in setting up the NEU Climate Change Network. He is part of the Greener Jobs Alliance Steering Group and is active with No Cold War Britain.

Ben Chacko (chair) is editor of the Morning Star.

Please register and spread the word! https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/online-o ... 1527461407

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/23/e ... te-crisis/

Image

China’s economy is on a rebound
The following analysis from Indian researcher and former diplomat MK Bhadrakumar reviews China’s economic data from 2022 and assesses its prospects for the coming year. GDP growth for 2022 was down to 3 percent – its lowest since the late 1970s. Does this mean, as some Western politicians are (gleefully) predicting, that China’s dramatic rise is coming to an end? And is India, which recorded 7 percent growth last year, poised to catch up?

Bhadrakumar adds some much-needed context to these data points. First, China’s economy is over five times the size of India’s, and therefore its relatively slower growth in 2022 makes very little difference to the overall comparison between the two countries. Second, China’s pursuit of Dynamic Zero Covid, as well as the impact of fluctuations in the US market, had a significant impact on China’s economic performance over the last year, yet China’s 3 percent growth compares favourably with the less than 2 percent recorded by the US and Japan. The author writes that China is expected to record over 5 percent GDP growth in 2023, while US GDP is expected to increase by just 0.5 percent.

In summary, China’s economy is likely to perform far better in 2023 than the other major economies. One geopolitical implication is that European countries would be well advised to keep their distance from US-led efforts at decoupling: “Suffice it to say that the European countries will be inclined to view the Chinese market as holding the key to an early economic recovery. Recasting the global supply chains by decoupling from China is going to be easier said than done.”

This article was first published on Indian Punchline.
China’s economic data for the year 2022 has been released in Beijing on Tuesday. The striking part is that China’s GDP growth slowed down to 3 percent.

From an Indian perspective, it may seem momentarily that China’s economy is slowing while India’s expanded by nearly 7 percent (per World Bank predictions.) Can India catch up with China in a medium term scenario?

This is where the devil lies in the fine print. The heart of the matter is that China’s GDP growth of 3 percent translates as a year-on-year expansion of its economy touching a whopping $18 trillion.

To put matters in perspective, China has an economy that is five and a half times the size of India’s economy (GDP: $3.5 trillion). (Emphasis added.)

Yet, this is being regarded as a lacklustre economic performance, attributed to headwinds stemming from a combination of adverse circumstances characteristic of 2022 — ranging from the coronavirus and geopolitical tensions to repeated US interest rate hikes and the waning overseas demand due to the world economy tiptoeing toward recession.

The sporadic outbreaks of Covid in manufacturing bases including Shanghai and South China’s Guangdong Province disrupted production in local factories and logistics, which combined with a property market slump.

To be sure, “Zero-covid” has been a well-documented drag on the Chinese economy over the past year; factories suffered when workers were locked down, and consumers reined in their spending as they lost pay checks and jobs.

Externally, the escalating geopolitical tensions due to the western sanctions against Russia drove up bulk commodity prices, subjecting China to imported inflation pressure. Second, the historical reality is that as the Chinese economy and the US economy grew closer and closer during the decades since 1980, the extent and depth of the Chinese economy affected by the US monetary policy also grew stronger and stronger.

That is to say, the US interest rates and the Chinese economy are inversely related, especially in import, export, and China-US exchange rate. 2022 witnessed extraordinary fluctuations in the US financial market, which was bad news for China.

Nonetheless, China’s 3% GDP growth compares by far favourably with those of the US and Japan — “the peer competitors” — whose GDP grew by less than 2% (per IMF projections.) Analysts expect a much better performance in the year 2023, exceeding 5% in GDP growth. (In comparison, the World Bank estimates that global growth will slow from 2.9 percent in 2022 to 1.7 percent in 2023, and the US’ GDP is expected to increase by just about 0.5 percent in 2023, the weakest forecast in three decades.)

This has geopolitical ramifications, as China is well-placed to make a far more significant contribution to global growth than any other major economic power, which would inevitably translate as increased prestige in the world community and create greater opportunity to leverage foreign policy objectives.

China’s consumer-led rebound to buttress global growth implies that its vast market potential will be seen as a locomotive of growth by other economies, especially in the ASEAN region, Africa and Latin America.

Contrary to doomsday predictions, China’s transition away from the “zero-Covid” policy has been relatively smooth. The new regime aims to cope with the Covid mutants that are highly contagious, but less potent and dangerous. In retrospect, hundreds of thousands of human lives were saved in China, unlike in India or America.

Interestingly, the latest economic data from China also showed that notwithstanding the 3% growth rate last year, the country’s GDP per capita has stayed above the $12,000-mark, which is close to the high-income countries defined by the World Bank.

Equally, the Chinese stock markets remain bullish indicative of the optimism. In political terms, this sets the stage for China’s most important annual political gatherings ahead in March, which are expected to unleash the economy once more.

What Indian analysts in their schadenfreude tend to overlook is that an attitude toward China predicated on that country’s misfortunes and setbacks is a road to nowhere. There are some profound conclusions to be drawn from the data on the Chinese economy.

Clearly, with global economic growth likely to decline sharply and global inflation still hovering at high levels in 2023, the economies of major developed economies are likely to show stagflation. Suffice it to say that the European countries will be inclined to view the Chinese market as holding the key to an early economic recovery. Recasting the global supply chains by decoupling from China is going to be easier said than done.

Second, the US simply cannot compete with China anymore as a manufacturing country. In infrastructure, the gap is so patently wide. Ukraine has shown that the US lacks the capability to fight Russia and needs a coalition. It is no different when it comes to China.

Surely, the economic data on the Chinese economy will be taken very seriously in Washington. The US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen was due to meet with Chinese Vice Premier (“economic czar”) Liu He in Zurich on Wednesday on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos with view to “expand communication” between the two largest economies in the world.

According to Politico, Secretary of State Antony Blinken will visit Beijing on Feb. 5-6. Blinken’s talks will show whether the dialogue between President Biden and President Xi Jinping at Bali has led to more productive bilateral relations. A serious rapprochement seems difficult to achieve after the US House of Representatives created a committee on strategic competition with China recently.

However, both powers want to put the deterioration of relations on pause or at least keep it under control. They will try to avoid crises, although that is not guaranteed. Typically, it has been Washington who invariably initiated any deterioration of relations.

Addressing the CSIS in Washington last week, Biden’s advisor on China, Kurt Campbell described the Bali summit meeting as “an effort to build a foundation for a new relationship with China.” He said 2023 will be the year “to build some guardrails,” although the dominant feature of US-China relationship will continue to be competitive.

Campbell messaged that the US wants it to be “a productive, peaceful competition” that can be channelled for the betterment of life of the two peoples.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/01/21/c ... a-rebound/

*********************

Image

Exaggerating China’s military spending, St. Louis Fed breaks all statistical rules with misleading graph
By Ben Norton (Posted Jan 25, 2023)

Originally published: Multipolarista on January 23, 2023 (more by Multipolarista)

In an attempt to grossly exaggerate China’s defense spending, and simultaneously downplay the U.S. military budget, the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis published a jaw-droppingly deceptive graph.

If a student presented this in a statistics 101 class, the teacher would likely give them an F. But because it involves Washington’s public enemy number one, Beijing, the U.S. regional reserve bank was awarded a Golden Star for exemplary service in the New Cold War.

The St. Louis Fed listed the world’s top six countries by military expenditures, but used two separate axes: the spending of China, Russia, Britain, India, and Saudi Arabia was depicted on the left axis, which went from $0 to $300 billion; but a separate right axis was created just for the United States, which went from $400 billion to $1 trillion.

Image

This extremely misleading graph made it look as though China spends more on its military than the United States.

But in reality, China’s defense budget in 2021 was $270 billion, whereas that of the U.S. was $767.8 billion—nearly three times larger (in constant 2020 U.S. dollars).

The Pentagon budget subsequently ballooned to $782 billion in 2022 (in 2022 dollars), and $858 billion in 2023 (in 2023 dollars).

Image

If the graph were edited to put all of the countries on the same axis, one can see how massive U.S. military expenditure is compared to other top spenders:

When the St. Louis Fed published the deceptive graph on Twitter, it went viral, garnering hundreds of negative responses.

Michael P. McDonald, a professor of political science at the University of Florida, quipped,

If they’re willing to put this out, just imagine the internal analyses the Fed conducts to manage the economy.

Image

In an accompanying report, the St. Louis Fed admitted that China’s 2021 defense spending was just 1.7% of GDP,

which was the lowest share among the six nations in the figure.

Moreover, Beijing’s military expenditure as a percentage of GDP has stayed very consistent since the early 1990s, with no increases.

But the U.S. Department of Defense has dubbed China its top “threat”, and major media outlets like Foreign Policy have acknowledged that the Pentagon is preparing for war with Beijing.

This new cold war hysteria is reflected in shockingly unprofessional displays from supposed economic and political experts.

A much more accurate graphic created by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation shows how, as of 2022, the United States spent more on its military than the next nine largest spenders combined—including China, India, the UK, Russia, France, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and South Korea (and several of these countries are close U.S. allies).

https://mronline.org/2023/01/25/exagger ... ing-graph/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Wed Feb 01, 2023 4:14 pm

China’s Cultural Revolution and the Fall of Lin Biao
February 1, 2023 Struggle - La Lucha

Sam Marcy, a leading Marxist thinker and fighter of the second half of the 20th century, died 25 years ago on Feb. 1, 1998. To mark the occasion, Struggle-La Lucha is publishing a selection of Marcy’s articles that demonstrate the breadth and depth of his analysis and strategic thought on behalf of the workers and oppressed, while also providing insight into today’s struggles.

Editor’s introduction from ‘China 1977: End of the Revolutionary Mao Era’

“The Cultural Revolution and the Fall of Lin Biao” was written by Sam Marcy in August, 1972, after the appearance of the official version of the death and purge of Lin Biao. This event signaled a struggle over policy in the highest levels of the Chinese leadership, particularly over the Nixon visit and the rapprochement with U.S. imperialism.

The suppression of the Left in China begins with the fall of Lin Biao and Chen Boda. These articles offer a broad historical overview of the Cultural Revolution — the blocking of capitalist restoration and the safeguarding of the new social relations established by the Chinese Revolution of 1949 and deepened by the Great Leap Forward and the Commune movement of 1958-59.

Sam Marcy makes extensive use of Engels’ analysis of earlier great revolutions to show how, the Cultural Revolution grew from historical necessity but that once that historical task was fulfilled in China, the base of the revolutionary left was eroded and the ideas of “storming the heavens” and creating a new Paris Commune-type of state were jettisoned. Subsequent events have confirmed this analysis.

Image
Red Guards march in Beijing, October 1966.

Part 1
August 4, 1972: The public confirmation of the tragic end of Lin Biao and some of his collaborators ends a momentous inner struggle over the future course of the Chinese Revolution and, in particular, of China’s foreign policy. The defeat of Lin Biao, Chen Boda, Huang Yongsheng, Wu Faxian and others means that the Chinese Revolution has, to a considerable degree, run its course. From now on, the word is stability at home at the expense of revolutionary policy abroad.

Lin Biao, it will be remembered, was the author of the theory of encircling the imperialist powers — the “cities” — with global guerrilla war. Whether the theory was right or wrong, it had a revolutionary perspective in foreign affairs. As has become evident in the last few years, Chairman Mao and his supporters devised a different foreign policy. Theirs is symbolized by the invitation accorded Nixon to visit Peking and the accommodation that the Chinese leaders have been developing with the U.S.

The Chinese Revolution, however, is by no means finished. It has been the longest, most protracted, and, and in many respects, the profoundest social upheaval in history. It spans well over half a century and is full of the most remarkable revolutionary feats. It is no wonder that so many of its leaders have become genuinely legendary figures.

Effect of international situation

At each stage of its development the Chinese Revolution was profoundly influenced by the nature of the international situation. The Chinese Revolution caught fire on the basis of the conflagration, which commenced with the October Revolution in 1917. The false policies of Stalin inhibited and protracted the character of the Chinese Revolution. The 1927 defeat of the Revolution and Stalin’s promotion of the theory of the block of four classes, which meant subordination to the Kuomintang, retarded the development of the Chinese Revolution. It was Mao’s resistance to Stalin’s policies that, in the long run, enabled him to save and fortify the revolution.

But again, the attempt of Japanese militarism to colonize China, in turn, served as a spur to the revolution. The preoccupation of U.S., British, and French imperialism with the struggle against Hitler for a time had a favorable effect on developments for the Chinese Revolution. Finally, the victory of the Soviet Union in the war and the defeat of the Japanese imperialists helped tremendously to pave the way for the victory of the Chinese Revolution in 1949.

Unquestionably China is again being profoundly affected by the international situation. Faced with the threat of U.S. and Japanese imperialism — a threat which daily demonstrates itself in the genocidal aggression against a socialist ally on its very doorstep — and the hostility of the Soviet bureaucracy on the other hand, Chairman Mao and his followers have decided to come to terms, in large measure, with the U.S.

Cultural Revolution blocked capitalist restoration

The ouster of the Lin-Chen grouping also signifies the end of that phase of the Chinese Revolution, which has become known to the world as the Great Cultural Revolution. The lasting significance of the Cultural Revolution is that it reversed a tidal wave of bourgeois reaction and set back a process of development that would have ended up in capitalist restoration.

The Lin-Chen grouping can, with qualification, be called the radical or left faction, which was in alliance with Chairman Mao and his supporters during the Cultural Revolution. Together they led the struggle against Liu Shaoqi, who then represented the neo-bourgeois restorationist movement. The defeat of Liu Shaoqi cleared the road for the commencement in earnest of the socialist transformation of China. Naturally, not all the claims made for the Cultural Revolution are valid. Certainly, there has been a great deal of exaggeration. But none can deny that, in essence, the Cultural Revolution marked a turning point in the historical evolution of China.

It prevented, at its barest minimum, capitalist restoration and ushered in a new stage in the building of a socialist society in China. Of course, no revolution is ever accomplished without a great deal of excess, without serious setbacks and errors. Once the Cultural Revolution was launched, it involved huge masses of people and set forces in motion that could not be controlled, even under the best of circumstances.

To some observers on this continent, the Cultural Revolution reduced itself to a mere factional dispute between Chairman Mao and his supporters, Lin, Chen, and others, against Liu Shaoqi and his formidable right-wing forces. In the view of these observers, such a dispute should have been carried out by literary and polemical methods in the classical style in which Lenin polemicized against his opponents in the Bolshevik party. Of course, winning a revolutionary victory with polemics alone is more desirable than a violent struggle.

But what if the character of the adversary and the historical context in which the struggle is opened up, both at home and abroad, makes this impossible? What if the struggle for a neo-bourgeois restorationist course has already been started and has already taken on flesh and blood in leading cadres of the party and the mass organizations? What if this grouping has, in fact, already reached such dimensions that practically all the significant political currents of the imperialist bourgeoisie are already aware of it and are, in fact, applauding and egging it on?

What if the weight of the entire Soviet Union, through its leadership, particularly in the case of Kosygin and Brezhnev, is openly supporting the neo-restorationist elements? What if, in the given historical context, there is no other way but to openly appeal to the party and to the masses to commence the struggle against the right-wing restorationists?

Class interests versus legal norms

From the point of view of pure formal procedure, the Cultural Revolution may have been a violation of democratic centralist principles, but only if we forget that the party as a whole was already shattered by the course of events: deep incursions had already been made into the body-politic of Chinese society by the Liu Shaoqi forces. Marxism teaches that where fundamental class interests are involved, class interests must not be subordinated to purely formal or legalistic norms. To make the outcome of the class struggle dependent on formal procedures at the expense of class interests is the height of folly.

Certainly, it would have been preferable to have a literary and polemical debate end in a victorious decision by a party congress. But in the case of the Cultural Revolution, the struggle had spilled over from the party ranks and from the bourgeois intelligentsia into the general mass of the population before the discussion could get under way — assuming it ever could have been done that way in the first place.

At any rate, once the struggle started, the only correct position for progressive and revolutionary workers throughout the world was to support the proponents of the Cultural Revolution. All the more so because in a revolution, just as in a workers’ strike, the first and most important element to consider is the determination of which side to support. In the course of a strike, there may be any number of formal violations of the democratic rights of those who promote crossing of the picket line, but as long as the strike is on, every worker is duty-bound to support it.

It was quite clear during the entire course of the Cultural Revolution that the bourgeoisie and the Soviet bureaucracy were openly supporting Liu Shaoqi and the restorationists. There is no question that the Soviet leadership would prefer a bourgeois restorationist regime over a revolutionary socialist regime, especially if the bourgeois restorationists would be on friendly terms with the Soviet bureaucracy and retain the governmental and party facade of “socialism.”

Belated charges

Is the elimination of Lin Biao to be regarded in the same way as the ouster of Liu Shaoqi? By no means.

The neo-restorationist tendency in China has made itself quite evident, so much so that even foreign observers could see its slow but sure development. It was a formidable force. The struggle that was fought by Chairman Mao and his supporters was an open revolutionary struggle. It is an incontestable fact that Chairman Mao openly appealed to the masses to participate in the struggle. Events soon demonstrated that the masses vigorously responded to the call and overwhelmingly supported it. It was particularly evident in the tremendous enthusiasm exhibited by the youth. This had worldwide repercussions in the movement of the youth all over the world.

The recent indictment against Lin Biao charges that he “attempted a coup d’etat and tried to assassinate Mao Zedong.” After the plot was foiled, it is said, “he fled on September 12 toward the Soviet Union in a plane which crashed over the People’s Republic of Mongolia.” It is also charged that “he undertook anti-Party activities in a planned, premeditated way with a well-determined program with the aim of taking over power, usurping the leadership of the party, the government and the army.” But, “Mao Zedong unmasked his plot and blocked his maneuver. Mao Zedong made efforts to recover him, but Lin Biao did not change his perverse nature one iota.”

So reads the first official confirmation from China of the many rumors which have circulated in the imperialist press for many months, rumors which were based on leaks from Chinese officials to the capitalist world.

The dimensions of the “plot” indicate it could scarcely have taken place in secrecy. The very fact that the Chinese leadership waited so long to divulge it lends itself to extreme incredulity. And the fact that so many rumors could be floating in many capitalist countries while the mass of the people at home was not at all informed about the “plot” completely differentiates this type of struggle from that launched in the Cultural Revolution.

During the Cultural Revolution, Chairman Mao and the leadership confined themselves to enlisting the revolutionary support of the masses. It was the restorationists who maintained contact with and gave leaks to the imperialist bourgeoisie. But in the present case, the very fact that Chairman Mao himself first gave the news to the world through Ceylonese Prime Minister Bandaranaike and French Foreign Minister Schuman, leaders of bourgeois states, speaks volumes in itself.

Accommodation with U.S. is real answer

There is no way to verify any of the allegations concerning the bizarre plot of Lin Biao. Even if we take everything at face value, the allegations in themselves are internally contradictory. The only truth that emerges from the statement issued by the Chinese Embassy in Algiers is that Lin opposed “the revolutionary foreign policy worked out by him (Mao Zedong).” But the essence of this “revolutionary foreign policy” is pointedly illustrated by the invitation to Nixon and the pursuit of an accommodation with U.S. imperialism.

The indictment against Lin and the others smacks of a police version of a great historical event. If Lin Biao was opposed to “the revolutionary foreign policy” — that is to an accommodation with the U.S. — it doesn’t necessarily follow that he is a Soviet revisionist and on such friendly terms with the Soviet Union as to be able to flee there. Rather, this opposition appears to verify the existence of a progressive opposition to the new foreign policy followed by the CPC.

If speculation about this opposition is rampant, the CPC leaders have only themselves to blame. It is not likely that the party and the state in China are so weak that they could not possibly bring the nature of this dispute to the attention of the party and the public, that is, to bring the masses into the struggle. Was it not really fear of the masses, or fear of the response the masses would have to the new foreign policy that made the CPC leaders keep everything secret so that only the bourgeoisie in the West and the revisionists in the Soviet Union knew about it?

The ouster of Lin bears a remarkable resemblance to Stalin’s purge of the Red Army general, Tukhachevsky, et al. They were executed in secret and it was only afterwards that Stalin was able to make a deal with Hitler — the Stalin-Hitler pact. But even Stalin did not tell the then-French Premier Daladier about the executions and ouster of the generals before at least informing the Soviet public.

Lin’s ouster also bears a strange resemblance to Khrushchev’s elimination of the Molotov-Kaganovich group from the Central Committee on grounds that are again similar to the hints that the CPC is making about Lin Biao. Molotov and Kaganovich, two of the oldest members of the Bolshevik party and two of Stalin’s closest supporters, were indicted by Khrushchev on grounds that they were opposed to peaceful coexistence with the West.

The Western imperialist press showed unconcealed glee at the expulsion of Molotov and Kaganovich. All those who were following events in the Soviet Union knew that Stalin, as well as Kaganovich and Molotov, who was Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union for a long time, had been preaching and practicing peaceful coexistence for years. The indictment had no basis in fact. The real issue was that Khrushchev was taking a course in foreign affairs which was so far to the right — so much further than Stalin had gone — that they, in a measure, opposed it.

The fundamental turn in foreign policy initiated by Mao is the very type of turn which Mao so vehemently and correctly fought against in Khrushchev — the turn towards peaceful coexistence, a phrase which symbolizes abandonment of the revolutionary struggle abroad, support of the nationalist bourgeoisie in underdeveloped countries, and friendship with the imperialist West, particularly with the U.S. Moreover, the turn comes at a time that could scarcely hurt the world struggle more, when the beleaguered Vietnamese people are spilling their blood to get the U.S. imperialists off their backs.

Frank appeal to masses or secrecy

The CPC was duty-bound to present its position frankly and publicly to the masses — not a year after it all happened, and not through the mouths of Bandaranaike and Schuman, but through party documents and party discussion. Lin, as well as his collaborators and allies, are not just a few accidental individuals. They constituted an entire stratum in the leadership of the party and the revolution. Lin, as everybody knows, was considered to be the successor to Mao. In fact, his succession was even put into the constitution. To remove a leader who is constitutionally destined to succeed Mao without informing the masses, let alone obtaining their approval, is a sharp break from the earlier revolutionary practice of the CPC.

We draw a sharp line between support for the Cultural Revolution and support for unverified, unfounded, and concocted fabrications against Lin Biao. Even assuming that Chairman Mao and his supporters are correct in their charges, it is also clear by now, according to Chairman Mao’s own words, that Lin opposed the turn to peaceful coexistence with the imperialist bourgeoisie.

Any attempt to apologize for the handling of the Lin Biao ouster will not hold water. Even assuming that it was not possible to openly conduct a struggle over foreign policy, it points up a tremendous weakness in the present political structure of People’s China. Even if we were to agree that it was not possible to conduct an open struggle, the Chinese Revolution is by now strong enough to call a weakness by its right name, rather than to embellish it by calling it a virtue.

At the present time, the U.S. ruling class is most eagerly seeking an accommodation with People’s China because it hopes that the CPC leadership will help it out of the abysmal military and diplomatic crisis in which it finds itself. Vietnam is, of course, at the very heart of the U.S. crisis. The capitalist media, too, is taking its cue from the needs of U.S. imperialist strategy. In contrast to the way the media handled the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution — which they maligned and misrepresented — they are very discreetly handling the Lin Biao affair.

Engels on revolution: Analogy with two tendencies in Cultural Revolution

“All revolutions of modern times,” wrote Engels, “beginning with the great English revolution of the seventeenth century, showed (certain) features which appeared inseparable from every revolutionary struggle. They appeared applicable, also, to the struggles of the proletariat for its emancipation.”

What are these features?

“As a rule,” Engels goes on, “after the first great success, the victorious minority [here Engels speaks of the bourgeoisie which is a minority in their revolution — S.M.] became divided; one half was pleased with what had been gained, the other wanted to go still further, and put forward new demands, which to a certain extent at least, were also in the real or apparent interests of the great mass of the people.

“In individual cases these more radical demands were realized, but often only for a moment; the more moderate party again gained the upper hand, and what had eventually been won was wholly or partly lost again; the vanquished shrieked of treachery, or ascribed their defeat to accident. But, in truth, the position was mainly this: the achievements of the first victory were only safeguarded by the second victory of the more radical party; this having been attained, and with it, what was necessary for the moment, the radicals and their achievements vanished once more from the stage.”

“The achievement of the first victory” in China, the ouster of Chiang Kai-Shek, and the destruction of the bourgeois-landlord state machine, “was only safeguarded,” according to Engels’ analysis, “by the second victory,” the Cultural Revolution. “This having been attained, and, with it, what was necessary for the moment, the radicals and their achievements vanished once more from the stage.” This is what happened to the left faction in the Cultural Revolution.

One part of the leadership of the Cultural Revolution was, in the words of Engels, “pleased with what had been gained,” the other section of the leadership, Lin, Chen Boda, and others, “wanted to go still further, and put forward new demands, which to a certain extent, at least, were also in the real or apparent interests of the great mass of the people.”

Many radical demands were made during the Cultural Revolution, some were wild ones, but on the whole, they were healthy. “In individual cases, these more radical demands were realized.” But, “the more moderate party again gained the upper hand and what eventually had been won was wholly or partly lost again; the vanquished,” whom Mao now calls ultra-lefts, “cry treachery or ascribe their defeat to accident, where in truth their position was mainly this: the achievements of the first victory were only safeguarded by the second victory of the more radical party.”

What does this mean? It means that the real lasting achievements of the Cultural Revolution were not the idealistic and occasionally ultra-revolutionary proposals made by the more radical elements in the Cultural Revolution, of whom there were many, especially among the youth. The real achievement was the safeguarding of the new property relations, of blocking the road to capitalist restoration. That could “only have been done with the aid of the more radical party” leaders, as Engels says. “This, however, having been attained, and with it what was necessary for the moment,” — the stabilization of the new class relations in China — ” the radicals and their achievements vanished once more from the stage.

This really explains the elimination of the Lin Biao-Chen Boda group. “Their real work was done.” Their participation and leadership in the Cultural Revolution helped block capitalist restoration and to safeguard the new property relations established by the revolution.

A proletarian revolution, however, differs, among other things, from a bourgeois revolution, in that a proletarian revolution organically tends in the direction of worldwide proletarian revolution. It also needs a revolutionary worldwide perspective for its further socialist development. A bourgeois revolution, on the other hand, is nationalistic in character and subordinates everything to the material interests of the national bourgeoisie.

Peaceful coexistence and accommodation with the West is what Mao proposed as the new foreign policy. This is what the “radical faction,” as Engels would call it, rejected and opposed. They were vanquished as earlier opponents of peaceful accommodation with the West were vanquished in the long period following Lenin’s death in the Soviet Union.

But the decay of the worldwide system of imperialism daily brings in its train economic, social, and political catastrophes for the masses as well as genocidal imperialist wars. This makes the worldwide proletarian revolution all the more imperative and inevitable, and peaceful accommodation with the West a reactionary utopia.

Source: Marxists Internet Archive

Image
Mao Zedong and Lin Biao.

Part 2
August 25, 1972: No social revolution has ever coincided with the conception entertained by the ideologists of its time or its leading participants. Probably the Russian Revolution comes closest to conceptions that were held by its principal leaders. So many misconceptions of the Chinese Revolution prevailed that years after the triumph of the Revolution and the ouster of Chiang Kai-Shek, the class character of the Chinese Revolution was still shrouded in confusion.

Just as the West European social democrats and the Mensheviks in Czarist Russia could not believe that a proletarian revolution was possible in a backward country overwhelmed by a huge preponderance of the peasantry and an ill-developed bourgeoisie, so Western scholars and Marxists to boot, went even further in the case of China and even denied that a proletarian revolution had taken place. They advanced substantially the same erroneous theories as their colleagues in the earlier era and compounded them.

The long years in which the Chinese Red Army, led by the CPC was conducting the struggle against the bourgeois-landlord regime of Chiang Kai-Shek was characterized as agrarian in its class nature. The CPC itself, regardless of its advocacy of Marxism-Leninism, they explained, was merely promoting an agrarian revolution. This view was particularly rampant in the United States and vigorously pushed by the liberal bourgeoisie, including some of the highest-ranking State Department officials, not to speak of the influential liberal publicists such as Owen Lattimore and others.

Some organizations which proclaimed themselves Marxists were particularly stubborn in promoting this view, and even the CP leaders in this country, undoubtedly getting their cue from the Soviet leaders while expressing solidarity with a fraternal party, nonetheless conveyed the impression that they, too, in a large measure, regarded it as basically an agrarian revolution successfully carried out. Whether this objectively reflected the arrogance implicit in the attitude of an imperialist ruling class toward a formerly colonial country, only history will be able to confirm. It is at least as likely that the reservations of the Western CP leaders, generally, reflected the fear of the Soviet bureaucracy of the consequences that a proletarian revolution in China would entail in the struggle for leadership over the Communist movement and of the world working class.

As we have seen, the Chinese Revolution can be divided into two great phases. The first one — we are still using the words of Engels — “displaced one definite class rule by another” — in this case the ouster of the bourgeois-landlord class from power and the establishment of what was in essence a Proletarian Dictatorship. But this victorious revolution, like all previous victorious revolutions (at least in European history), became endangered by restorationist elements. What was needed historically, was a second, supplementary revolution, in order to fortify, consolidate, and safeguard the fundamental accomplishment of the first revolution, the new class dictatorship. Hence the Cultural Revolution.

In the minds of its participants, it might have been conceived as an entirely new revolution, a revolution that had far loftier objectives than the mere safeguarding and securing of new property relations which had already been won more than a decade ago. But the subjective desires of the participants and the objective historical result, while not completely at variance, certainly did not conform with reality as it has unfolded.

Historical parallels

What was the historical mission of the Jacobin dictatorship? It was to clear the road for the rule of the French bourgeoisie. In France, more than anywhere else, feudalism had been extinguished, cut root and branch, by the Revolution. Yet the bourgeoisie did not, until late in the nineteenth century, hold exclusive political power. It, again and again, fell back to sharing it with other class formations. Even more so in England. The bourgeoisie there never held undivided sway.

“Even after the victory of 1832,” says Engels, “the bourgeoisie left the landed aristocracy in almost exclusive possession of the leading government offices.” It took Bismarck to unify Germany. He swept away the feudal obstructions to the development of German capitalism. He himself was, of course, a junker, and it was the junker feudal landed aristocracy that dominated Germany. Indeed the German bourgeoisie did not rule directly until the Weimar Republic (after World War I).

The basic reason why it is possible for the bourgeoisie to share power with segments of the older feudal classes, such as the aristocracy, is, of course, that they are both possessing classes, both exploiting classes, and they share a common hostility to the exploited. Their interests, nevertheless, are antagonistic.

This is equally well demonstrated by the Civil War in the United States. What was the historic mission of the North’s struggle against the South? In order to arrive at a conclusion, we ought to view the entire period of the Civil War and Reconstruction as two phases, two great historical turning points, just as in the Chinese Revolution.

What was the objective of the struggle? The Northern ruling class and the Southern ruling class, as we said, were both possessing, oppressing, and exploiting classes. But the North based itself in and had its origin and development in the modern capitalist mode of production, which is based on the private ownership of the means of production and on wage labor.

The Southern ruling class was also an exploiting, oppressing, possessing class no more avaricious than the Northern ruling class. It, too, based itself on the private ownership of the means of production but on chattel (slave) labor, not on wage labor. Slavery in the U.S. was an integral part of the bourgeois mode of production in the system of commodity production.

But whereas the North based itself on the modern capitalist industrial form of wage exploitation ( “free labor” ), the South was based wholly on slave labor. The two systems were economically incompatible. A struggle between them became inevitable because the slave system could not adequately compete with the wage system of exploitation and was doomed to destruction.

In the minds of its progressive participants, the struggle was between “freedom and slavery.” But the struggle of the Northern bourgeoisie against the slave-owning aristocracy was not out of any regard for freedom as such but was pursued because the slave system of exploitation was inhibiting the expansion of the modern capitalist system of wage slavery, capitalist production, and accumulation.

Four years of Civil War proved inadequate to firmly establish the capitalist wage system and the economic framework necessary for its functioning or to completely root out the remnants of chattel slavery which later took the form of a feudal type of peasant-landlord relationship on the land (peonage). This tended to reduce the mass of the emancipated slaves to second-degree citizenship, devoid of the rights of emancipated wage labor in the North.

The period in history known as Reconstruction was a great effort by the Radical Republicans to bring about full freedom (“free labor”), full political equality for all (all males). This was the second phase of the revolution. It was historically needed, not as it was conceived in the minds of many who participated in it, to bring about full political equality of all citizens, but merely to secure, as Engels would say, “safeguard, the achievements of the first revolution.”

The historic mission of the second revolution was to complete the destruction of chattel slavery, to destroy the power of the former slave-owning aristocracy, and to safeguard the revolution against any restoration.

Having achieved that, the conservative wing of the second revolution “was satisfied.” The other wing, the Radical Republicans, which wanted to go further and bring about complete equality in political life, “vanished from the scene.” Finally, the revolution ended in the shameless episode of the betrayal of 1877, which gave the Southern ruling class complete sway over the emancipated Black masses. The Southern ruling class was rearmed to protect its newly regained power.

Full political rights to the Black masses, as the bourgeoisie saw it, were not necessary for the functioning of their capitalist industrial system of exploitation. The maintenance of the Black masses in a subjugated and politically expropriated status served the Northern ruling class’ ability to expand capitalist accumulation but only in alliance and partnership with the Southern ruling class.

As can be seen, the Northern capitalist class made an accommodation with the Southern ruling class with whom it shared power rather than to leave them powerless by a continuation of the revolutionary struggle. To this very day, Northern capitalists share power with their Southern colleagues because of, among other reasons, the compromise that they made a century ago, which smoothed the way for capitalist expansion and accumulation and the ultimate conversion of the competitive stage of capitalism into monopoly capitalist imperialism.

Therein lies the origin of the super-exploitation of the Black masses and the reason why the Northern bourgeoisie did not fully emancipate the Black people. Only a proletarian revolution can fully emancipate all the oppressed, Black and white.

Sharing of power between hostile classes

As we have seen, the bourgeoisie as a class has not always been able to rule exclusively without sharing power in a coalition with other classes or their representative factions. It has been able to rule exclusively only since the late nineteenth century. Only the North American bourgeoisie has held exclusive power — but only because feudalism was unknown on this continent. The settlers who ventured to the shores of the new world were not confronted with an entrenched feudal social order.

How different it was with the establishment of the two great socialist states, the Soviet Union and China. In both countries, there was a huge preponderance of peasant masses, an ill-developed bourgeoisie that had not bequeathed the necessary industrial and technological framework to enable the proletariat to commence an easy transition to socialism. In both countries, the legacy that the former possessing classes left was one of backwardness in industry, in technique, in education, and practically all fields of social development.

Moreover, an imperialist bourgeoisie, which had survived numerous social catastrophes and attempted proletarian revolutions (in Europe at least), still dominated over the major portion of the human race. Its industrial, technological, and military power stood, and still stands, as the greatest threat to the socialist development of the USSR and China, other socialist countries, and the liberation movements.

Basic historical factors behind Soviet foreign policy regression

Almost a quarter of a century after the Chinese Revolution and more than half a century since the October Socialist Revolution, the factors of industrial backwardness, preponderance of a huge peasantry, and the strengthening and revival of the imperialist system after the Second World War are still the basic factors that account for the eagerness, particularly on the part of the Soviet and Chinese leadership, to make an accommodation with the imperialists and renounce revolutionary internationalism.

There are those who see the regressive policy of both the Soviet Union and China as emanating almost exclusively from treachery and conspiracy. Others attribute it solely to mistakes in policy, the victory of reactionary over revolutionary leaders and the absence of proletarian democracy. Even taking all this into account, these policies can only be understood in the light of the broader perspective of objective circumstances of which they undoubtedly are the result.

However, if we view the problem in the light of half a century of experiences and in the light of the earlier experience of the bourgeoisie in the struggle against opponent possessing classes, we see that at certain stages in its development, as a ruling class, they were forced at various times and under varying circumstances to share power with opponent possessing classes. We see now that it is also characteristic of proletarian dictatorships established in backward countries.

The same tendency toward accommodation evidenced by the bourgeoisie before it attained full, exclusive political power is also common to the governing groups representing the socialist countries. There is however a fundamental difference between the objective historical result obtained by the bourgeoisie as against that obtained by the governing leadership in the USSR and China.

The alliance that the bourgeoisie made with the older class formations, such as the landed aristocracy, had thus indubitable advantage which enabled it ultimately to conquer the feudal classes and take them completely in tow. The feudal system is a basically static system. The bourgeois system is dynamic. The bourgeoisie must constantly revolutionize its methods of production, speed development, improve technology, and adapt itself to the changing needs of the capitalist market. This is the law of life for the bourgeoisie.

The development of the productive forces in the imperialist epoch is, of course, retarded if compared with what a social system will do, but within the framework of capitalist production, the bourgeoisie continues the pursuit, with breakneck speed; of the development of technology. The feudal classes were not only static but they based their existence, as Marx pointed out as early as the Communist Manifesto, on the preservation of the old methods of production.

The bourgeoisie bases itself on constantly revolutionizing the method of production. The old mode of feudal production (or chattel slavery as it existed in the United States) having been destroyed, the bourgeoisie by the mere automatic processes of capitalist production and the blind forces of the market was ultimately able to reduce all previous social classes to its sway. Thus, elements of the landed aristocracy in Britain ultimately became bourgeois industrialists.

The bourgeoisie for a long time used a feudal monarchy and was able to convert it into a bourgeois monarchy. And the former parties of the feudal classes were absorbed into the bourgeois political system and became bulwarks of reaction on behalf of the bourgeois ruling class against revolutionary threats by the proletariat and oppressed peoples.

Difference between bourgeois and socialist systems

The socialist system, at least in its initial formative stages, does not develop automatically; by its very nature, it has to be consciously planned and organized. And in this respect, it differs vitally from the bourgeois mode of production which is regulated by blind economic forces.

Because the first two great socialist proletarian revolutions took place not in the industrialized capitalist countries, but in underdeveloped countries, they faced some of the same problems that the early bourgeoisie faced in its struggle as a nascent ruling class.

Every political upheaval at the summit of governmental leadership is a symptom of social disturbance below.

An attempted coup, such as is attributed to Lin Biao, can only be a reflection of serious instability in the social and political relations between the basic classes in contemporary Chinese society.

According to the official statement issued by the Chinese Embassy in Algiers on Lin Biao, the explanation for Lin Biao engaging in a plot to assassinate Chairman Mao and seize power through a coup can be understood in a large measure from (1) “his underhanded nature” (2) “he was a two-faced man” who in reality was opposed to the “revolutionary foreign policy of Mao,” and (3) “did not change his perverse nature one iota.”

Acceptance of such an explanation for an enormous historical event does violence to history itself, especially if one examines the array of leaders involved.

These include: Lin Biao, the Defense Minister, Politburo member, and military leader since the early Thirties; Chen Boda, a member of the standing committee of the Politburo, a leader of the Cultural Revolution and for many years Mao’s personal secretary; Huang Yongsheng, former chief of the general staff of the armed forces; Wu Faxian, commander of the air force; Li Tsopeng, deputy chief of staff and political commissar of the navy; Chiu Huitso, deputy chief of staff of the army and head of the logistics department; Yeh Chun, a member of the party Politburo and director of the administrative office of the party military affairs committee; and Lin Liguo, Lin Biao’s son who was deputy director of the air force operations department.

Such a conception brings us back to pre-Marxist notions of history where good men and evil fought plots and counterplots and where the reign of the arbitrary was the supreme rule of history.

But Marx’s development of the materialist conception of history demonstrates conclusively that all political phenomena have a class base. It is especially true of political events of such enormous historical import as this elimination of an entire stratum of leadership. They not only were most prominent during the Cultural Revolution, but some of them spent their entire lifetime in the midst of the leadership of the CPC throughout the course of the Chinese Revolution.

Lenin wrote on December 24, 1922, in one of his last letters, regarding “grave differences in our party” which might cause a split. He went on to say: “Our party relies on two classes (workers and peasants) and therefore its instability would be possible and its downfall inevitable if there were no agreement between those two classes. In that event this or that measure, and generally all talk about the stability of our Central Committee, would be futile. No measures of any kind could prevent a split in such a case. But I hope that this is too remote a future and too improbable an event to talk about.”

Collectivization in China and the Soviet Union

Lenin wrote this, of course, before collectivization in the Soviet Union took place. But even a collectivized peasantry is by no means a proletarian class. Collectivization sets the framework, and the socialist future depends on a multitude of factors in which a thoroughgoing industrialization and rationalization based on the most modern technique is most essential. The gap between rural life and life in the city is a great factor. It cannot be easily overcome even under the best of conditions.

The political denouement of the Lin-Chen grouping is the objective result of the instability of class relations in China, following upon the heels of the Cultural Revolution. Of course, they are immeasurably more stable than the relations in any of the bourgeois countries. The political crisis resulting in the Lin-Chen ouster reflects the true dimensions of this instability, and of Chairman Mao’s quest for a resolution of it by fundamental changes in the foreign policy.

The extraordinary degree to which the Chinese peasantry was receptive to the revolutionary propaganda of the CPC and the PLA is often attributed solely to the tactics and strategy pursued by the leadership. This, of course, was very important and decisive.

But what is often lost sight of are the objective conditions that enabled the masses to respond to a revolutionary call to arms from a Marxist-Leninist party.

The Chinese peasantry, unlike peasants in Western Europe or in other semicolonial countries, had a great deal more in common with the Chinese proletariat. As Engels says in The Peasant Wars in Germany, concerning events more than four hundred years ago, “the German peasant of that time had this in common with the modern proletariat: that his share in products of the work was limited to a subsistence minimum necessary for his maintenance.” (International Publishers, 1926)

The protracted character of the Chinese Revolution and the ruthless war upon the Chinese people conducted by the Japanese imperialists, which had caused such unspeakable havoc, economic dislocation, ruination and destruction of lives and property, reduced the bulk of the Chinese peasantry, not only to the level of subsistence of the Chinese proletariat, but way below it, making the peasant far more susceptible to the revolutionary overthrow of the bourgeois landlord regime.

The dictatorship of the proletariat has the economic and political problem of how to share, not only the work of socialist construction, but the distribution of the income between the classes, the workers, the peasants and all intermediate strata of the population.

Moreover, there is still the bourgeois intelligentsia, which, although shorn of its power, has not been destroyed but in the process of being reeducated, necessarily plays a key, if not central role in the economic, industrial, scientific and other phases of life.

More than in any other socialist country, the gap between the privileged and the ordinary worker or peasant has been narrowed and material inequality reduced, certainly by comparison with the Soviet Union. But the social contradictions continue, and are exacerbated, among other things, by the ever-increasing need of scientific and technological resources diverted for defense needs, which consume no small portion of the fruits of socialist construction.

Collectivization in China has made truly remarkable accomplishments. This is accounted for particularly by the participation of the masses, and the enthusiasm it evoked in the course of such a radical transformation. It took place without pushing, in fact avoiding, the type of material incentives which break up the solidarity of the masses, which was the practice in the Soviet Union. Nevertheless, the peasantry as a class is distinguished from the urban proletariat.

Both China and the Soviet Union have had to resort to huge purchases of wheat from the imperialist countries. This is only one aspect of an internal contradiction in socialist countries which manifests itself in the form of some dependence on the West. Some of the more sophisticated technology developed in the capitalist countries is needed for socialist construction both in the USSR and in China. This is another aspect of dependency.

Finally, the productive forces, which are restricted by the character of having national states in the socialist bloc, with just bare economic ties between the countries, and lacking the necessary comradely economic cooperation, is another drawback.

The socialist camp, economically speaking so far as China and the Soviet Union go, is merely a potential. Great power chauvinism shown by the Soviet leaders since the death of Lenin in relation to the other socialist countries has alienated them, forced each to seek its “own” road to socialist construction, which, from the point of view of Marxism, is a reversion to anachronistic national self-sufficiency in the socialist camp.

COMECON and socialist cooperation

Although the Soviet Union has somewhat relaxed its rigid dominant economic control over COMECON (which is the USSR’s answer to the imperialist Common Market) in Eastern Europe, it is nothing like the necessary socialist cooperation between socialist countries which respect each other’s sovereignty and are all pledged to socialist construction for the common good of all.

Romania is a classic example of a small socialist country that ordinarily has everything to gain by economic cooperation with the Soviet Union and other socialist countries in a common bloc or socialist federation. Ceaucescu’s half-turn to the West can only be explained on the basis of the Soviet leaders’ shabby treatment of the People’s Republic of Romania. What the Soviet Union tried to do or force upon Romania was the kind of division of labor in COMECON which would leave Romania underdeveloped, economically deformed, and an appendage to Soviet needs rather than on the basis of the common needs of all the socialist countries.

The PRR has no fundamental political differences with the Soviet leaders and its overtures to the West are based strictly on economic considerations.

Lin Biao case flows from combination of historical forces

These then are some of the fundamental factors that lie behind the latest phase of developments in both China and the Soviet Union.

The Lin Biao affair must be seen in that historical perspective, as China’s and the Soviet Union’s eagerness to make an accommodation, some sort of more or less stable detente, with the imperialist West at the expense of the Vietnamese people and the world revolution flows from the constellation of historical forces.

Any number of erroneous conclusions can be drawn from this, especially in this land of classic rabid anticommunism. In a recent issue of the New York Review of Books, the well-known liberal publicist I.F. Stone, writing about the capitulation of both China and the USSR on the Haiphong crisis, said, “Brezhnev and Zhou Enlai have become the running dogs of the U.S. imperialists.”

Certainly, the conduct of the Chinese and Soviet leaders in the Haiphong crisis can evoke an easy protest and utter disgust. I.F. Stone is angry at the Nixon administration for its imperialist brinkmanship and is frustrated, as are millions of others throughout the world, that neither the Soviet nor the Chinese leaders should pick up the challenge (not necessarily in a nuclear confrontation). Stone’s characterization of the leadership of China and the Soviet Union cannot, however, be taken for a serious appraisal. Stone will take comfort from his frustration in joining the McGovern campaign.

Revolutionary Marxists cannot for long afford the luxury of pessimism. The need is to chart a course for the revolutionary struggle against imperialism based upon an accurate appraisal of the position and orientation of the Soviet and Chinese leaders as well as the domestic situation.

Two types of accommodation

The Soviet leaders (and the Chinese leaders to a lesser extent) have renounced the perspective of world revolution and have abandoned the liberation struggle. But by no means have they galloped into the arms of imperialist policy and stabilized their relations with the U.S. on the basis of carrying out Washington’s orders.

Such mistaken conclusions have been made with regard to the Soviet Union in the late thirties during the Stalin-Hitler pact period which swung an entire generation back into the camp of social democracy.

Regardless of any and all attempts at accommodation, the two social systems — that of the imperialist system and the socialist system prevalent in the Soviet Union and China — are diametrically opposed to each other and are based on antagonistic class structures.

Any accommodation, any secret arrangements that have been made can only be of a temporary character. They will, of course, hurt the world movement. They are not however like the accommodations and alliances made between the bourgeoisie and the feudal classes or between the North and the South in the United States.

The accommodations made between those classes were viable accommodations because the bourgeoisie, by virtue of the automatic processes of capitalist production, was able to assimilate whatever class fragments of the feudal classes were left into the bourgeois order of society and actually strengthen the system against the exploited classes. There was a common denominator between those classes. They were both possessing, exploiting social formations and had a common hostility to the oppressed.

It is otherwise with the socialist states. The class differences between them and the bourgeoisie are of an utterly irreconcilable character. Neither system can long endure, as Lenin so well said in 1921, without there being a funeral for one or the other.

The fundamental basis for the revival of the capitalist system of exploitation, as particularly evidenced following the Second World War, lies in the fact that contrary to Marx’s original prognosis, the socialist revolution came first not where conditions were most favorable for the development of socialist society, but where the imperialist system was weakest. The failure to overthrow the capitalist system in Western Europe, aside from fundamentally false policies, indicates that the task of proletarian revolution is an immeasurably more difficult one than had been conceived prior to World War I.

On the other hand, the imperialist system in the epoch of its general decline cannot go on without enormous economic crises, political catastrophes, counter-revolutionary coups, subversion of socialist countries, and the prosecution of imperialist wars. This alone makes the proletarian revolution necessary and inevitable.

Source: Marxists Internet Archive

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2023/ ... -lin-biao/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply