Many people hope that China's economic development will lead to democracy, as was the case in Taiwan and South Korea. That, however, is a vain hope.
When civilization moved towards capitalism, which led to rapid economic development, the first step was both painful and cruel. In England in the 1500s, farmers were evicted from almost 10 million hectares of land. They were forced to the cities where they worked for low wages, while five-year-old children worked 10-hour-days in mines and textile factories.
That was how the "original capital accumulation" by the nobility came about.
Taiwan was far luckier. The four Asian tigers -- Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore -- started labor-intensive production for export to the US, Japan and Europe. This transferred the local contradiction between exploiter and exploited to Europe and the US. Taiwan's miraculous economic growth then allowed it to escape the excessive exploitation of domestic labor that occurred during the early stages of the industrial revolution. Despite rapid economic growth, the gap between rich and poor diminished.
China's growing economy is now copying the Asian tigers' export-oriented approach. But although China tries to export its internal contradictions, it cannot do so successfully, which led to China's US$70 billion trade surplus with the US last year, while the manufacturing industry has entered an era of "microprofits."
If China wants to turn to domestic demand, the amount of natural resources that would be consumed by 1.4 billion people is frightening, and certain to cause an explosion of raw materials.
An increase in raw materials and a decrease in finished products would lead to even smaller profits. With no colonies to plunder, the only route remaining is harsh exploitation of local labor.
The development strategy established by Deng Xiaoping (
The so-called socialist market economy was divided into two parts -- a socialist-style control of labor and a market economy where employers were free to exploit labor, allowing quick accumulation of capital.
Since this rapid economic growth is built on depriving people of democracy and freedom, it is strange to think that economic growth will bring democracy in its wake.
Income inequality in today's China is severe. The difference in average income between Guizhou and Shanghai is tenfold. There is also a big difference in legal salaries between different provinces, and the difference is even greater in illegal salaries.
There is a huge army of laborers ready to be further exploited. China has been turned into a giant camp for slave labor.
Chinese President Hu Jintao (
I cannot see any chance of changing a system that exploits the domestic "colonized," the laborers. Economic and social rights have been restricted, and democracy and freedom will be more forcefully controlled. In this area, Hu has a tighter grip than both Deng and Jiang.
If one looks to the people and to actual experience, there is a chance that the Chinese people would be able to build a democratic politics. But a look at the system, however, gives no reason for hope.
Lin Cho-shui is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS