3 ms·

> This looks great but I honestly wonder - if China is under heavy communism oppression and noone can make enough fuzz about their lifestyle before eventually d

by _jgdh 10y ago

> This looks great but I honestly wonder - if China is under heavy communism oppression and noone can make enough fuzz about their lifestyle before eventually disappearing... why would Chinese government care about spending money and time building such vast (and beautiful!) network? Serious question... China isn't under heavy communist oppression, not the kind that you're thinking. Their style of oppression is different. The Social Contract that the Party offers the People is this - you will not get political choice, you will always be ruled by us; in return you will not have to worry about money because this economy will grow at 7.5%pa. That rising tide will lift all boats, including yours. When all your material needs are taken care of, do you really care who is in charge? Projects such as high speed rail help the Party deliver on its promise. The Economist points out the ways in which this boosts economic growth, as well as other bonus effects, like allowing people to buy affordable housing in smaller cities that are short commutes away from Beijing/Shaghai and other major cities. If the Party doesn't hold its end of the Contract up, it risks mass unrest, similar to the Tiananmen Square protests. That ought to answer your question. The interesting question is whether their Social Contract will survive. So far, the people are generally satisfied with the Party's performance but in the years to come growth will inevitably slow, if only because their economy is so massive that compounded growth is difficult. I think the strategy is that by then the Party will have a much more efficient way of enforcing control over individuals than they did in 1989 when the Tiananmen protests took place Rather than crude measures like locking people up or beating them, the Party will use the social score [1] to subtly control the People. If you know that your house payments will rise, or your medical care will be deprioritized, or your friends will ostracize you, or you'll face harassment from strangers or you won't be able to apply to good schools for your children, or all of the above... will you still have the courage to show up to protest, much less stand in front of a column of tanks? [2] [1] - http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21711904-worrying-experiments-new-form-social-control-chinas-digital-dictatorship http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21711904-worrying-expe... [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man

joering2 10y ago
+1 - but: > The Social Contract that the Party offers the People is this - you will not get political choice then > Projects such as high speed rail help the Party deliver on its promise. Ain't that contradiction? Why do they need to deliver on that promise? In other words -- if they don't, what will happen, if as you say "you will not get political choice, you will always be ruled by us". Further you describe China like some sort of wonderland. In such case, why is it so that the reality is far different? Or is it just american propaganda I'm being fed, and I should immediately abandon my always "bills gotta get paid" worries and migrate to PRC?
- _jgdh 10y ago
  > if they don't [deliver on their promise], what will happen Revolution, Tiananmen Square style. > you describe China like some sort of wonderland Do I? China is rich, will continue to grow richer but it is hardly a wonderland. In fact, my last paragraph about subtle and overt social control should have made it clear that it is far from a wonderland.
spangry 10y ago
The interesting question is whether their Social Contract will survive. So far, the people are generally satisfied with the Party's performance but in the years to come growth will inevitably slow, if only because their economy is so massive that compounded growth is difficult. I think the strategy is that by then the Party will have a much more efficient way of enforcing control over individuals than they did in 1989... This is the question that keeps me up at night. Their rate of growth should naturally slow as their economy reaches capital saturation. And there are a lot of worrying structural features of the Chinese economy. For instance, they hit their 2030 metropolitan housing target a few years ago due to their stimulus packages driving a massive residential construction boom. So technically they should cease all residential housing construction for the next 15 years or so... They're also going to have a harder and harder time maintaining their capital controls (e.g. pegged exchange rates) as their foreign currency reserves run down. All hell could break loose if they can't defend their peg against speculative attacks. If it's a slow melt scenario, maybe there will be enough time for the CCP to re-negotiate the social contract. But if any of a number of possible economic shocks hits China, and they're suddenly staring down the barrel of recession or a Japanese-style lost decade or two, I can't help but think the only way to avoid being dragged out in to the streets by angry protesters would be to declare war on another country (...Japan). Maybe start taking a more aggressive stance on the Senkaku Islands, for instance. And the vague sense I have (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that the Trump administration intends to pursue a more 'isolationist' geo-strategic policy.

by _jgdh 10y ago

joering2 10y ago

+1 - but: > The Social Contract that the Party offers the People is this - you will not get political choice then > Projects such as high speed rail help the Party deliver on its promise. Ain't that contradiction? Why do they need to deliver on that promise? In other words -- if they don't, what will happen, if as you say "you will not get political choice, you will always be ruled by us". Further you describe China like some sort of wonderland. In such case, why is it so that the reality is far different? Or is it just american propaganda I'm being fed, and I should immediately abandon my always "bills gotta get paid" worries and migrate to PRC?

_jgdh 10y ago
> if they don't [deliver on their promise], what will happen Revolution, Tiananmen Square style. > you describe China like some sort of wonderland Do I? China is rich, will continue to grow richer but it is hardly a wonderland. In fact, my last paragraph about subtle and overt social control should have made it clear that it is far from a wonderland.

spangry 10y ago

The interesting question is whether their Social Contract will survive. So far, the people are generally satisfied with the Party's performance but in the years to come growth will inevitably slow, if only because their economy is so massive that compounded growth is difficult. I think the strategy is that by then the Party will have a much more efficient way of enforcing control over individuals than they did in 1989... This is the question that keeps me up at night. Their rate of growth should naturally slow as their economy reaches capital saturation. And there are a lot of worrying structural features of the Chinese economy. For instance, they hit their 2030 metropolitan housing target a few years ago due to their stimulus packages driving a massive residential construction boom. So technically they should cease all residential housing construction for the next 15 years or so... They're also going to have a harder and harder time maintaining their capital controls (e.g. pegged exchange rates) as their foreign currency reserves run down. All hell could break loose if they can't defend their peg against speculative attacks. If it's a slow melt scenario, maybe there will be enough time for the CCP to re-negotiate the social contract. But if any of a number of possible economic shocks hits China, and they're suddenly staring down the barrel of recession or a Japanese-style lost decade or two, I can't help but think the only way to avoid being dragged out in to the streets by angry protesters would be to declare war on another country (...Japan). Maybe start taking a more aggressive stance on the Senkaku Islands, for instance. And the vague sense I have (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that the Trump administration intends to pursue a more 'isolationist' geo-strategic policy.