Comments by "Alan Friesen" (@alanfriesen9837) on "Think School"
channel.
-
Some of China's success dates back to Mao's policies, though not necessarily in a good way. One of the results of the Chinese Revolution was the total liquidation of the landed class. Because of this, most of the people capable of corrupting the system to benefit themselves and their families personally during the Mao years were either killed, exiled, or politically emasculated. I like to say that Mao burned down the forest so that a new generation of seedlings could grow.
Deng's policies of liberalization certainly were key to bringing in international economic stimulation, but there was always a balance maintained between free market and state-owned industry, in part to make sure that no class of tycoons would ever become powerful enough to control the political narrative. It was during Deng's time that embezzlers and other economic corruptors were routinely executed.
The party maintains its grip on power, and its control of the media narrative means that the government can make decisions without having to compromise with the rich. Taxes can be effectively collected and resources properly targeted to meet what the government thinks are the true needs of the country and the people. And access to government power is predicated on performance from small jurisdictions to jurisdictions of ever increasing size if and only if ambitious targets are met and exceeded. Politicians do not have to stand for election and effective governors are far less likely to be dethroned through media smear jobs.
China does have problems, but China's determination, structure, and timing have all been extremely fortuitous. I wish India the best of luck going forward towards their own superpower station, but I don't think India has the proper ingredients to do it like China did, and in some ways that's a good thing. I don't know how likely China's model was to work as it did, but I think India's road is going to be much slower, assuming that it arrives at all.
2