3 ms·
Sorry I have to say that the cited writeup is disappointingly shallow. For example it doesn't explain why other countries with equal or better access to the Wes
by fspeech 1y ago
Sorry I have to say that the cited writeup is disappointingly shallow. For example it doesn't explain why other countries with equal or better access to the Western markets didn't all industrialize, so globalization may be necessary but is clearly not sufficient. Also its narrative on Chinese agriculture ignores the fact that Chinese agriculture also developed rapidly both in production and in value of output. It became the largest importer of food because the consumption of protein skyrocketed outpacing almost every other country.
- sigmoid10 1y agoPerhaps you missed the part where the US saw China as an opportunity to curb Russian influence in Asia? The Sino-Soviet split [1] was definitely a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for the west to slither in. Other countries like India wanted to keep a more neutral stance while China not just denounced the new Russian interpretation of Marxism/Leninism, they embraced the prospect of capitalism once it was presented to them. They were opening up the country at the exact right moment in the cold war and benefited enormously from the post-WWII boom and ensuing rise of globalisation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_split https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_split