Economist Martin Jacques, author of When China Rules the World, sings the praises of China in BBC Point of View.
“Even though China is still a poor developing country, its state, I would argue, is the most competent in the world. Take infrastructure – the importance of which is belatedly now being recognised in the West. Here, China has no peers…….. we are in a new ball game. With the Western economies in a profound mess and with China’s startling rise, the competence of the state can no longer be ignored. Our model is in crisis. Theirs has been delivering the goods.”
Patrick Chovanec has a different assessment:
“China’s economic miracle was result of govt getting out of way and letting people improve their lives, not planning by all-seeing mandarins.”
China is a developing country, with rapid growth fueled by massive infrastructure investment and strong exports. The country faces diminishing returns on infrastructure investment and dwindling exports — not only from an economic slow-down in the West but from rising wages as the country attempts to boost internal consumption as an antidote to the middle-income trap that is already threatening growth in its richer provinces.
China also faces push-back from the West against trade advantages maintained by suppressing their exchange rate through vendor financing — balancing trade inflows on current account with outflows on capital account. Why else would a developing country hold more than $1 trillion of investment in US Treasuries at negative real interest rates?
Jacques claims that the Chinese state enjoys popular support:
“But does the Chinese state, you may well ask, really enjoy legitimacy in the eyes of its people? Take the findings of Tony Saich at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government……… he found that between 80 and 95% of Chinese people were either relatively or extremely satisfied with central government.”
One of the most powerful tools of an oppressive state is fear: fear of the unknown. Many of their citizens would settle for the status quo rather than risk the turmoil that accompanies change. The same is true of many autocratic regimes. That does not make them a beacon of good government.
Western democracy has many problems but the solution does not lie with increasing the size of the state, nor with greater autocracy. Rather we should examine the most successful Western democracies and learn from them. Switzerland would be a good start. Their well-managed economy enjoys low unemployment, a skilled labor force, and GDP per capita among the highest in the world — 70% above the US. The stable democratic government runs with a strong tradition of consensus among political parties, while citizens hold a collective right of veto over government policy. The country boasts a pristine environment with minimal pollution, a strong human rights record — without oppression of its citizens or minorities — and no territorial disputes with its neighbors.
Which state would you say is the most competent?
Mr. Saich has likely never lived in China among its people (or done any field study which would be a much more valid methodology for this type of problem). If he had, he would understand that the findings are inevitably inflated and biased because of cultural and socialization dynamics. If you survey the average Chen you should notice that in general s/he doesn’t dare to speak up in fear of finding a member of the CCP at their door. Moreover, s/he has been “conditioned” to find it aversive to publicly express individual opinions that go against consensus (- the contents of which are propagated by the CCP throughout its education and media systems). Finally, in the Chinese culture it is generally felt as impolite or inappropriate to “bring bad news” or be “very critical”, particularly to an esteemed outsider, i.e. a foreigner who is conducting a survey (Chinese have more distinct in-group/out-group boundaries). And then of course you have the problem of lobsided access to data/ distribution of information, which keeps most of its citizens in the dark about what is really being done with their taxed money.
Thank you for your insight. The survey results certainly looked “too good to be true”.
I do agree with Juno.
Comparing just the governments of different countries overlooks the profound differences in their cultures. I remember crossing the border between Italy and Switzerland, and was amazed at how Swiss stores allowed customers to touch the goods because it wasn’t asumed that they would be stolen. Switzerland is a culture in which honesty is a high value and corruption is not tolerated. The same is true of Denmark and Sweden.
That is true, but have you ever seen the fees that Swiss banks charge 🙂
There are cultural differences no doubt but these are accentuated by a stable government and a prosperous economy.
What strikes me is that the Swiss governing council of 7 exhibits a similar consensus culture to China’s Politburo Standing Committee of 4 to 9 senior party figures. Where the Swiss model is superior is that these figures are democratically elected — and that citizens can overturn government decisions by referendum.
That is far superior to the coalition governments of the Westminster system or the winner-takes-all system in the US. My ideal system would be to see Obama, Biden, Romney and Boehner or Ryan sitting in a closed room and coming up with a joint policy. Leave the politics outside. And if we don’t like the result, call a referendum.