Views: 2526|Replies: 2

The Beijing consensus is to keep quiet [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 4

Post time 2010-5-13 20:45:35 |Display all floors
May 6th 2010 | BEIJING | From The Economist print edition

In the West people worry that developing countries want to copy “the China model”. Such talk makes people in China uncomfortable

CHINESE officials said the opening of the World Expo in Shanghai on April 30th would be simple and frugal. It wasn’t. The display of fireworks, laser beams, fountains and dancers rivalled the extravagance of Beijing’s Olympic ceremonies in 2008. The government’s urge to show off Chinese dynamism proved irresistible. For many, the razzmatazz lit up the China model for all the world to admire.


The multi-billion-dollar expo embodies this supposed model, which has won China many admirers in developing countries and beyond. A survey by the Pew Research Centre, an American polling organisation, found that 85% of Nigerians viewed China favourably last year (compared with 79% in 2008), as did 50% of Americans (up from 39% in 2008) and 26% of Japanese (up from 14%, see chart). China’s ability to organise the largest ever World Expo, including a massive upgrade to Shanghai’s infrastructure, with an apparent minimum of the bickering that plagues democracies, is part of what dazzles.

Scholars and officials in China itself, however, are divided over whether there is a China model (or “Beijing consensus” as it was dubbed in 2004 by Joshua Cooper Ramo, an American consultant, playing on the idea of a declining “Washington consensus”), and if so what the model is and whether it is wise to talk about it. The Communist Party is diffident about laying claim to any development model that other countries might copy. Official websites widely noted a report by a pro-Party newspaper in Hong Kong, Ta Kung Pao, calling the expo “a display platform for the China model”. But Chinese leaders avoid using the term and in public describe the expo in less China-centred language.

Not so China’s publishing industry, which in recent months has been cashing in on an upsurge of debate in China about the notion of a China model (one-party rule, an eclectic approach to free markets and a big role for state enterprise being among its commonly identified ingredients). In November a prominent Party-run publisher produced a 630-page tome titled “China Model: A New Development Model from the Sixty Years of the People’s Republic”. In January came the more modest “China Model: Experiences and Difficulties”. Another China-model book was launched in April and debated at an expo-related forum in Shanghai. Its enthusiastic authors include Zhao Qizheng, a former top Party propaganda official, and John Naisbitt, an American futurologist.

Western publishers have been no less enthused by China’s continued rapid growth. The most recent entry in the field is “The Beijing Consensus, How China’s Authoritarian Model Will Dominate the Twenty-First Century” by Stefan Halper, an American academic. Mr Halper, who has served as an official in various Republican administrations, argues that “just as globalisation is shrinking the world, China is shrinking the West” by quietly limiting the projection of its values.

But despite China’s status as “the world’s largest billboard advertisement for the new alternative” of going capitalist and staying autocratic, Party leaders are, as Mr Halper describes it, gripped by a fear of losing control and of China descending into chaos. It is this fear, he says, that is a driving force behind China’s worrying external behaviour. Party rule, the argument runs, depends on economic growth, which in turn depends on resources supplied by unsavoury countries. Politicians in Africa in fact rarely talk about following a “Beijing consensus”. But they love the flow of aid from China that comes without Western lectures about governance and human rights.

The same fear makes Chinese leaders reluctant to wax lyrical about a China model. They are acutely aware of American sensitivity to any talk suggesting the emergence of a rival power and ideology—and conflict with America could wreck China’s economic growth.

In 2003 Chinese officials began talking of the country’s “peaceful rise”, only to drop the term a few months later amid worries that even the word “rise” would upset the flighty Americans. Zhao Qizheng, the former propaganda official, writes that he prefers “China case” to “China model”. Li Junru, a senior Party theorist, said in December that talk of a China model was “very dangerous” because complacency might set in that would sap enthusiasm for further reforms.

Some Chinese lament that this is already happening. Political reform, which the late architect of China’s developmental model, Deng Xiaoping, once argued was essential for economic liberalisation, has barely progressed since he crushed the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989. Liu Yawei of the Carter Centre, an American human-rights group wrote last month that efforts by Chinese scholars to promote the idea of a China model have become “so intense and effective” that political reform has been “swept aside”.

Chinese leaders’ fear of chaos suggests they themselves are not convinced that they have found the right path. Talk of a model is made all the harder by the stability-threatening problems that breakneck growth engenders, from environmental destruction to rampant corruption and a growing gap between rich and poor. One of China’s more outspoken media organisations, Caixin, this week published an article by Joseph Nye, an American academic. In it Mr Nye writes of the risks posed by China’s uncertain political trajectory. “Generations change, power often creates hubris and appetites sometimes grow with eating,” he says.

One Western diplomat, using the term made famous by Mr Nye, describes the expo as a “competition between soft powers”. But if China’s soft power is in the ascendant and America’s declining—as many Chinese commentators write—the event, which is due to end on October 31st, hardly shows it. True, China succeeded in persuading a record number of countries to take part. But visitor turnout has been far lower than organisers had anticipated. And queues outside America’s dour pavilion have been among the longest.


WHAT DO YOU THINK?
201019asd001.jpg

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2010-5-14 13:18:34 |Display all floors

Catching up with benefit of hindsight is always advantageous!

China has the benefit of studying the various model,methods, success, failures of many nations far more ahead of them in the development curve!

It can CHERRY PICK on the best the world could offer!
Just like the Japanese during their phase of catch up after Meiji Restoration, with hiccups of militarism in the early 20th century, and benefit of American Protection post world war 2! The copied the German in industrial harmony, engineering, apprenticeship; American quality control, language; French culture on food, cloths, luxury, designs, Japanese culture, solldarity in pursuing world markets beyond the American Dollar Zone & the British Commonwealth Free Market system!

CHINA on the other hand, is not an American Protectorate, with it's own independent policy due to it's NUCLEAR WEAPON detterence + history of winning to proxy battles with the Americans. So, China can CHERRY PICK, but must be AWARE of the machinations of global big power games!

MODEL? hmmmm!
really depends on your own nation's conditions and burdens!

ha ha ha

Green DRagon
Game Master

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2010-5-14 13:29:20 |Display all floors

People use models, ideology.....

....to garner people to systematically march to the same beat!

Small states maybe, but GIANT EMPIRE like China,
A quarter of humanity!
What we are seeing, is a lot of LOCAL INITIATIVE, instead of central planning.
More like Central Government guidelines, and targets!

Industrial policy is a mix match of STATE initiative (Military industrial policy in Sichuan-Central Plains, Guangxi, Shenyang, Iron-Steel minereal commodity in Northern Plains, Financial markets in Shanghai), FREE MARKET development (Hypermarket guild in Hong Kong, OEM manufacturing originating in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore), GEOGRAPHIC conditions (Fruits in Central Plain, Hydroelectricity, Tobacco, Rubber in Southwest)!
  
If there is a China Model, it's a Professional Central Government, with it's SOE + autonomy of Local Governments with their SOE, Free markets, Foreign Investment mix and match!

ha ha ha

Green DRagon
Game Master

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.