It seems everything old is new again. Wikipedia on Kremlinology[1]:
During the Cold War, lack of reliable information about the country forced Western analysts to "read between the lines" and to use the tiniest tidbits, such as the removal of portraits, the rearranging of chairs, positions at the reviewing stand for parades in Red Square, the choice of capital or small initial letters in phrases such as "First Secretary", the arrangement of articles on the pages of the party newspaper Pravda and other indirect signs to try to understand what was happening in internal Soviet politics.
[...]
In the German language, such attempts acquired the somewhat derisive name "Kreml-Astrologie" (Kremlin Astrology), hinting at the fact that its results were often vague and inconclusive, if not outright wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RYAN The East could be just as mental - e.g. they were apparently convinced the first strike was coming because the lights were on in Whitehall later than usual (As you may have already guessed it was the cleaners)
And to anybody moderately knowledgeable of how the Union worked, and I mean people who lived there, it sounds more that RYAN was Andropow selling his political clientele the idea than it being purely a delusion, but who knows.
The few hawks (the army was probably the most pacifist part of the system, ironically) in the Union's army were more happy to hear that a war, and demise are coming, and be reassured of their continued usefulness to the regime, than being stated the obvious fact that the country is more likely go belly up because of Union's permanent economic crisis getting ever more severe.
To such people starting a war, and a collective suicide was preferable, and a more comfortable thing to think about, than to face the reality of the need to replace the political leadership, and this is the real insanity.
Which, is basically what you would expect a CEO of a western country if the business deal they spent years on failed. China is at fault for it failing, but this reaction is common anywhere.
> "Not only is a company responsible to do what the party demands, but they also can't admit to doing that if they're asked."
>
> But others have suggested it is unfair to judge China's tech giants on the same basis as those from developed countries.
I found the ending of the article delightful. First, because the US has secret warrants for IT companies too, so hearing this out loud wouldn't really be a big surprise. Second, because China still pretends to be an "undeveloped" country? Come on! How long can this card be played.
> Second, because China still pretends to be an "undeveloped" country? Come on! How long can this card be played.
Well it is. I dare you to go to China to places where most Chinese wouldn't go.
Half of the country still lives in places you can't twist your tongue to call cities.
China's biggest cities are a prime case of fancy Potemkin villages. It's a state policy to maintain "the face of the country" at any expense, which may includes things as ridiculous as banning motorcycles to not reveal that people don't have money for cars, fining people for using cloth lines if their windows face major streets, or tourists having their photo film confiscated because they shot photos in less than sightly places.
This is much akin to how USSR ran a showy semblance of a civilized life in Moscow, at an enormous expense to its economy, to rather successfully fool the West into believing in USSR's relative prosperity.
If you think that ideology talks is what sets off thin skinned Chinese political establishment, then you haven't seen their reaction when somebody evokes the gravest insult of calling them poor.
I'd be quite afraid to go in many US places. And many US places experience some poverty that's the stuff of nightmares.
I think it's about time to stop calling the #1 world economy, #1 world manufacturer, a country that's expanding it's sphere of influence across the globe (see Africa) plus having a growing in well equipped military as 'underdeveloped'.
This is a weird way to look at it. China's high-tech cities are what they appear to be, there's nothing Potemkin about them. But it's a country with massive wealth inequalities between classes and between rural and urban areas.
the average annual income in China is something around $12K. I would not say it is developed, just because the top percentile of the population seem to live lavish lives.
the country of China is as big as the USA but hosts 4 times the population
the median salary in US is $ 36k/year[1]
in China is $ 13.5k, but cost of living in China is more than 50% cheaper than in US on average and education is basically free
Kentucky has the same population of Switzerland but less than half average income (27k vs 62k)
14% of the population in USA relys on food stamps
OP said I would not say it is developed, just because the top percentile of the population seem to live lavish lives, does that apply to US as well? (or Italy, where I come from and similar patterns are observable)
there is more than the average and the median when 1.2 billion people live in the same country
development is not homogeneous anywhere
[1] The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported a median personal income of $865 weekly for all full-time workers in 2017. The U.S. Census Bureau lists the annual real median personal income at $35,977 in 2019 with a base year of 2019.
> How is China not part of the 'developed' countries?
Because China falls within the definition of a developing country, and because China itself argues that it should be considered a developing country
> While China’s economic might makes it a superpower alongside the United States, it still faces many of the major challenges of a typical developing country, such as widespread energy poverty, including 400 million people without access to clean cooking, significant air pollution, and dependence on increasing energy use to fuel future economic growth. Its modest income per capita qualifies it as a middle-income developing country.
> Chinese authorities remind visiting delegations that China is still a developing country. Indeed, the country ranks a mere 86th on the Human Development Index(HDI) established by the United Nations Development Programme(UNDP), and its income per capita qualifies it as a middle-income country eligible for World Bank loans. The country is also big and diverse: while Beijing and Shanghai are modern and largely affluent, many regions in China still face the burdens of underdevelopment. Given this backdrop, China’s officials argue it should remain in the developing country category used by multilateral development banks and other international organizations—and should continue to enjoy the leniency regarding international commitments that comes with that status, despite its economic might. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic’s impacts will inevitably slow China’s development.
Are there any good news sources for following/understanding what's going on in China? Reading the state media has obvious issues but reading defector media also isn't going to represent how most people in China actually think.
Charlie Munger summarized capitalism in China at the Daily Journal annual meeting last month--
"A lot of people assume that since England led the industrial revolution and it always had free speech that free speech is required to have a booming economy as prescribed by Adam Smith. But the Chinese have proved you don't need free speech to have a wonderful economy. They just copied Adam Smith and left out the free speech and it worked fine for them."
Perhaps England had some form of free speech but it certainly was not the 'American standard'. There has always been limits - and fairly extensive when it comes to topics posing a threat to the establishment, such as Ireland and the colonies.
It seems to work within an individual business as well. For Coinbase to come out and say, no political speech unless it's the sort of politics we agree with, and to still be thriving, means it can be curtailed at least somewhat without serious repercussions.
So why did he disappear? We don’t know. Let’s ask some people who don’t know either. Maybe they can speculate. Let’s hear what they want to say: He wanted some time off. Communism is bad.
I actually did a small search for long (~3500 km) backpacking trails in China but didn't find anything useful. "Great Wall" would have been a good choice.
China hasn't been communist for a long time, though it is still ruled by a party that calls itself communist. Under communism the state owns the means of production and distribution, there aren't private citizen billionaires in charge of major sectors. The current system is closer to fascism than communism, where a single party and its corporate cronies run the show.
My informal observation suggests that description matches most authoritarian regimes I'm aware of. Possibly also including contemporary Russia. Similar political ideology might explain the outer space co-operation between China and Russia.
This shows how wrong people can get about China. It's easy to label a country with things like "communism" or "socialism" or what not, but it's not the reality. Can people own private property in China? Check. Can people start a company under the rule of law? Check. Do private enterprises compete with state-owned? Check. Do private enterprises win in market? Check. Do companies resolve their conflicts via rules of law? Check. Does government, to a large degree (how large is arguable), rely on market to allocate resources? Check. Does government enforce ration? Nope. Does the government plan all the economic activities in a centralized fashion? Not any more. Does the government mandate a specific way of allocating wealth? Not any more. Does the government insist that the state or the people own everything? Nope. Does the government limit the freedom of its citizens to move around? Yes and no. One can choose where to live and work, but those with a Hukou will have much better benefits. Is China a totalitarian state? Most likely. Is it a communist country NOW? You've gotta be joking.
The Communist Party hasn't been communist since Deng Xiaoping was in charge and started the transition to capitalism. It's now a crony capitalist one-party dictatorship.
Sounds exactly like communism. Or do you have any examples of communist countries which are not one-party dictatorships? Or which don't have any capitalistic features whatsoever?
My first and only thought on his going dark was 're-education'.
I remember the case of Fan Bingbing [0] that she disappeared for 3 months.
It so happens that Ma reappeared after 3 months. Hmmm... I see a pattern here.
That should tell us that in China your money doesn't count. State gives life and more important State takes life (or borrows your for a 3 months intensive re-education).
I don't know much about torture.. what type of wounds disappear after 3 months?
