5 ms·

It's interesting to observe how China has managed to fuse together, almost seamlessly, the major functional modules of it's government -- Communist Party commit

It's interesting to observe how China has managed to fuse together, almost seamlessly, the major functional modules of it's government -- Communist Party committees, for example -- with the tech sector. As other commentators in various publications have pointed out, this deep integration coupled with massive investments in auxiliary sectors, a culture of scientific inquiry and a heavily STEM focused primary education[0] will only keep the scale of the momentum tipped in China's favor going forward. [0] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/what-shanghai-can-teach-us-about-teaching-math/article17835021/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/what...

rayiner 9y ago
Seems like premature celebration. The Soviet Union was incredibly successful (turning a backwater into a superpower in a few decades) until it wasn’t.
- petre 9y ago
  Corruption and incompetence eventually takes over. The Brezhnev era is sort of illustrative.
  - hn0 9y ago
    The biggest plusses of representational democracies imo, open opposition and replacement of the leadership every few years.
- diego_moita 9y ago
  The first catastrophic failure of the Soviet Union was agriculture. When the West was beginning Borlaug's Green Revolution they were deep into Stalin's great famine, the Holodomor. Their inability to put bread on tables is at the root of their collapse. Most tragedies in China's recent history also have their cause on failure to produce food. I wonder how China is prepared to handle the impact Global Warming will have on agriculture.
  - smaddox 9y ago
    Easy: the party will command the food to grow, and if it doesn't grow, they will throw it in prison.
  - anoncoward111 9y ago
    >Stalin's inability to put food on tables = cause for USSR's failure I need to clarify something on this point. Stalin's famine was deliberately engineered to kill Ukrainians. It was not a failure of central economic planning, but actually, shockingly, a triumph. Stalin confiscated Ukrainian citizens' guns and land, and forced them to work 180 days per year on centrally planned crop attempts. The product of their labor- grain- was then placed on a train and sold abroad at bargain prices. This money was then directed back to Moscow only, and the Ukrainians were left to starve. I am against central planning. I am against totalitarianism. But the Holodomor was no accident of central planning. Shockingly, it was the desired outcome.
    - crdoconnor 9y ago
      This is pretty much how the Irish potato famine happened, too - they grew enough food, it was just exported - along with the wealth it generated. The English justified it by invoking the divine right of the free market. In the Soviet Union's case the money derived from exporting the grain abroad supposed to be to help industrialize - which it did. It's a bit hazy whether or not it was deliberately engineered to kill off the Ukrainians. It hit every grain producing area of the Soviet Union - it just hit Ukraine the hardest. Stalin may have simply been indifferent to their plight rather than actively trying to kill them.
      - detritus 9y ago
        'The English' were responsible, or 'Protestant Irish Landowners'? Seems like a key detail if you're going to attribute genocide to the English.
        crdoconnor 9y ago
        The English, who were ruling Ireland at the time, who gave most of that land to absentee landlords, justified perpetuating the famine by invoking the divine right of the free market: "Laissez-faire, the reigning economic orthodoxy of the day, held that there should be as little government interference with the economy as possible. Under this doctrine, stopping the export of Irish grain was an unacceptable policy alternative, and it was therefore firmly rejected in London." http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/famine_01.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/famine_01.sh... I honestly don't see much difference between Ireland and the Holodomor except size. Both famines were caused by foreign occupiers exporting food during a period of bad harvest. Whether you call it a genocide is another debate.
- crdoconnor 9y ago
  The Soviet Union was badly afflicted by dutch disease and engaged in an eye wateringly expensive arms race. China isn't. Though, because of their lack of mineral and agricultural wealth is that if they were subjected to a successful shipping blockade they would begin to starve relatively quickly. This lack of fuel/food security is why they're so domineering in the South China sea, why they're spending ridiculous amounts on the new silk road, why they're so keen to get the US and the rest of the world hooked on Chinese exports and why they're leaders in green energy.
hn0 9y ago
There’s a lot of ninja downvoting on seemingly thoughtful comments going on in this thread.
k__ 9y ago
Yes. Seems like China is the first country who got the means for centralization. They got the ideology and the tech to manage it on that scale. Also they're too big to get attacked.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- baybal2 9y ago
  >Seems like China is the first country who got the means for centralization. No, the previous grand experiment with this ended in 74 years of fail, with small upswings during NEP era, Khrushev and right before the fall.
  - candiodari 9y ago
    Let's not forget that that previous grand experiment certainly did not look like a failure for 20-30, some say 50 years. Even after that there was a never-ending chorus of people proclaiming it's success. And yes, that was because they were of a particular political bent, but still ... Some still haven't gone silent. Unless of course, you were one of it's subjects living within it's borders. Then there was no doubt. Even now, very few Russians outside of Russia are socialists. Given that most of them would only have experienced Soviet Russia as small children or through stories of family members, that's quite an accomplishment. Most Chinese outside of China seem to be, one terrified of their opinion becoming known. Two terrified of returning to China without the option to leave again (in fact quite a few seem to have changed opinion in the last few years. They seem to think that traveling there at all could result in never returning). Three they seem to be terrified of having their money anywhere near or otherwise dependent on China.
    - k__ 9y ago
      But they didn't have the technology. Maybe with help of good IT, this is manageable better?
      - 9y ago

rayiner 9y ago

Seems like premature celebration. The Soviet Union was incredibly successful (turning a backwater into a superpower in a few decades) until it wasn’t.

petre 9y ago
Corruption and incompetence eventually takes over. The Brezhnev era is sort of illustrative.
- hn0 9y ago
  The biggest plusses of representational democracies imo, open opposition and replacement of the leadership every few years.
diego_moita 9y ago
The first catastrophic failure of the Soviet Union was agriculture. When the West was beginning Borlaug's Green Revolution they were deep into Stalin's great famine, the Holodomor. Their inability to put bread on tables is at the root of their collapse. Most tragedies in China's recent history also have their cause on failure to produce food. I wonder how China is prepared to handle the impact Global Warming will have on agriculture.
- smaddox 9y ago
  Easy: the party will command the food to grow, and if it doesn't grow, they will throw it in prison.
- anoncoward111 9y ago
  >Stalin's inability to put food on tables = cause for USSR's failure I need to clarify something on this point. Stalin's famine was deliberately engineered to kill Ukrainians. It was not a failure of central economic planning, but actually, shockingly, a triumph. Stalin confiscated Ukrainian citizens' guns and land, and forced them to work 180 days per year on centrally planned crop attempts. The product of their labor- grain- was then placed on a train and sold abroad at bargain prices. This money was then directed back to Moscow only, and the Ukrainians were left to starve. I am against central planning. I am against totalitarianism. But the Holodomor was no accident of central planning. Shockingly, it was the desired outcome.
  - crdoconnor 9y ago
    This is pretty much how the Irish potato famine happened, too - they grew enough food, it was just exported - along with the wealth it generated. The English justified it by invoking the divine right of the free market. In the Soviet Union's case the money derived from exporting the grain abroad supposed to be to help industrialize - which it did. It's a bit hazy whether or not it was deliberately engineered to kill off the Ukrainians. It hit every grain producing area of the Soviet Union - it just hit Ukraine the hardest. Stalin may have simply been indifferent to their plight rather than actively trying to kill them.
    - detritus 9y ago
      'The English' were responsible, or 'Protestant Irish Landowners'? Seems like a key detail if you're going to attribute genocide to the English.
      - crdoconnor 9y ago
        The English, who were ruling Ireland at the time, who gave most of that land to absentee landlords, justified perpetuating the famine by invoking the divine right of the free market: "Laissez-faire, the reigning economic orthodoxy of the day, held that there should be as little government interference with the economy as possible. Under this doctrine, stopping the export of Irish grain was an unacceptable policy alternative, and it was therefore firmly rejected in London." http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/famine_01.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/famine_01.sh... I honestly don't see much difference between Ireland and the Holodomor except size. Both famines were caused by foreign occupiers exporting food during a period of bad harvest. Whether you call it a genocide is another debate.
crdoconnor 9y ago
The Soviet Union was badly afflicted by dutch disease and engaged in an eye wateringly expensive arms race. China isn't. Though, because of their lack of mineral and agricultural wealth is that if they were subjected to a successful shipping blockade they would begin to starve relatively quickly. This lack of fuel/food security is why they're so domineering in the South China sea, why they're spending ridiculous amounts on the new silk road, why they're so keen to get the US and the rest of the world hooked on Chinese exports and why they're leaders in green energy.

hn0 9y ago

There’s a lot of ninja downvoting on seemingly thoughtful comments going on in this thread.

k__ 9y ago

Yes. Seems like China is the first country who got the means for centralization. They got the ideology and the tech to manage it on that scale. Also they're too big to get attacked.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
baybal2 9y ago
>Seems like China is the first country who got the means for centralization. No, the previous grand experiment with this ended in 74 years of fail, with small upswings during NEP era, Khrushev and right before the fall.
- candiodari 9y ago
  Let's not forget that that previous grand experiment certainly did not look like a failure for 20-30, some say 50 years. Even after that there was a never-ending chorus of people proclaiming it's success. And yes, that was because they were of a particular political bent, but still ... Some still haven't gone silent. Unless of course, you were one of it's subjects living within it's borders. Then there was no doubt. Even now, very few Russians outside of Russia are socialists. Given that most of them would only have experienced Soviet Russia as small children or through stories of family members, that's quite an accomplishment. Most Chinese outside of China seem to be, one terrified of their opinion becoming known. Two terrified of returning to China without the option to leave again (in fact quite a few seem to have changed opinion in the last few years. They seem to think that traveling there at all could result in never returning). Three they seem to be terrified of having their money anywhere near or otherwise dependent on China.
  - k__ 9y ago
    But they didn't have the technology. Maybe with help of good IT, this is manageable better?
    - 9y ago