4 ms·
This seems to ignore the main objection. It's not that Chinese companies are investing in European economies, it's that these companies are run by the Chinese s
by stupidcar 10y ago
This seems to ignore the main objection. It's not that Chinese companies are investing in European economies, it's that these companies are run by the Chinese state, and that China is not providing reciprocal access to its own market to Western companies. This is not natural free-market activity, it is a state-sponsored effort to take technology and expertise from European companies and feed it into state-owned Chinese ones.
For all the fears raised recently about rising Western nationalism and protectionism, the Chinese regime is blatantly and unashamedly nationalist and protectionist as a matter of course. The state decides who wins and who loses, and they will simply not allow foreign companies to gain a dominant market position in any significant sector. All market activity, including foreign investment, is tolerated only so long as it is subservient to the nationalist goal of Chinese hegemony.
For years, Western politicians and businesses have turned a blind eye to China's flagrant disregard for the basic rules of free global trade. Partly out of greed for Chinese money and market access, and partly due to an entirely wishful assumption that this is only a phase, and that China will eventually start playing by the rules and acting like a "normal" free market economy.
This delusion demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how autocratic regimes like China operate. Just as they cannot, and will not, tolerate any significant internal competition to their own authority, they will, in the long term, not tolerate any external competition either, either political, military or economic. The Chinese state will never be satisfied being one powerful economic actor amongst others, all playing by the rules of a global market. They will never accept being checked by laws of trade or other country's interests, any more than they will tolerate being checked by democratic accountability or rule of law.
- Roritharr 10y ago> The Chinese state will never be satisfied being one powerful economic actor amongst others, all playing by the rules of a global market. They will never accept being checked by laws of trade or other country's interests, any more than they will tolerate being checked by democratic accountability or rule of law. The same could be said about the US i guess. It's the EU that looks like a naive child on the World Stage...
- varjag 10y agoThere are very few practical problems for foreign companies to establish, operate, and sometimes dominate in the U.S. market.
- Roritharr 10y agoSure, but good luck trying to sue the USG for war crimes at the ICC in Den Haag.
- varjag 10y agoAs opposed to "naive child" of EU? Was anyone from the UK tried at the ICC for Iraq war? Anyone from Belgium held responsible for Congo yet? I mean, they have Hague real close, shouldn't be a problem..
- GunboatDiplomat 10y agoThat seems, at best, orthogonal to the issue of foreign investment and business.
- ryuker16 10y agoLess than China but we still have tricks up out sleeves. Western firms love removing European money from their pockets.
- rahrahrah 10y ago> The same could be said about the US i guess. It's the EU that looks like a naive child on the World Stage... Sad but true. As a European I feel embarassed seeing that American, Russian, and Chinese leaders are all carefully protecting their practical interests whereas European leaders seem more concerned with pushing their idealogical dream.
- cgvgffyv 10y ago> World Stage Come again? Try switching off the news for a while. The world doesn't need an elite to run, the plebes run it just fine. There isn't a "World Stage".
- noir-york 10y agoExcellent points! It is not a question of capitalism playing out, its state directed (and funded) economic expansion to further the national interest of China (more specifically, Communist Party). You can see this in the "investments" made by China in Africa, and the Chinese string of pearls in the Indian Ocean, among others.
- quickben 10y agoBut it is capitalism playing out. Global democracy isn't, but that's disconnected from capitalism lately in certain countries. If the owners of a shop sell it, they can't complain they are forbidden to open a shop on a private land somewhere, whether or not the buyer happens to be the same. Same happens on a larger scale too. Sure, you can complain is not ethical, but capitalistic? This is capitalism itself in its final amalgamated state where countries and big multinationals control large swat of resources. Who will stop them? It was all fun and games when corporations were small and countries not experienced in the game, capitalism seems natural in that environment. Nowadays, this is the new reality.
- Retric 10y agoChina is capitalist only on the small scale. Huge chunks of the economy are directed by the government and it selects winners and losers all the time. The goal was capitalist efficiency gains without loss of control. So, yea plenty of people competing to sell lunch, nobody competing supply electricity.
- simonh 10y agoI think you're absolutely right, but most of the harm China's policies cause is inflicted in China. They get less foreign investment, less foreign expertise and their distorted local market increases costs for Chinese consumers and companies. Of course the Chinese government is fine with that as long as it helps them maintain political and economic control. In contrast, we get a pretty good deal. We get Chinese investment and better access to Chinese markets. Win-win.
- eternalban 10y ago> a state-sponsored effort to take technology and expertise from European companies and feed it into state-owned Chinese ones. These were the terms of the deal between Western and Chinese governing "elite". The West's gamble was that the Chinese would not (could not) maintain their ideological stance when exposed to Western societal norms. The Chinese gamble was that they would catch up and reach technological parity while maintaining their hold on the Chinese nation. No use complaining about it now.
- trinkgeld 10y ago[deleted]
- noir-york 10y agoWhat a ridiculous comment. The Chinese Communist Party has not found an "equilibrium" - it imposes it at gunpoint. Freedom of speech does not interfere with economic growth, it underpins it!
- trinkgeld 10y ago[deleted]
- noir-york 10y agoThere is a difference between stability, which is bottoms up and inherent to the system, and order which is imposed top down. The population already revolts - hundreds of times a year around China. The economy is obviously not efficient; entire ghost cities are a sad example, as is the stock market volatility and extraordinary market interventions by the state of a few months ago. You come across as a apologist for the current regime.
- inimino 10y agoBased on a few decades of catch-up growth, I think it's a little early to claim that China has outsmarted the West.
- vbtemp 10y agoThanks for this comment, incredibly well put.
- SticksAndBreaks 10y agoMay i point out, that this is a excellent moment to completely and utterly trust the holy st. market to fix itself. After all its a state controlled market economy, attacking a free market economy, it can not win. Be strong in your faith in the market brother. Your doubts times of tests of prevents salvation.
- ryuker16 10y agoIt's not an autocratic thing. Protectionism is not uncommon among poor countries or in the region. When I lived in Asia, I noticed this Bullshit and locals believed it was OK because they see it as a David versus Goliath battle. Too be fair, in a free market, GE or Philips and other big western firms would have crushed or bought out their Asian competitors decades ago.