Leader’s unshakeable ambition is that China’s renaissance will smash memories of the ‘century of humiliation’ once and for all
By Pepe Escobar, posted with permission and first posted at Asia Times
Chinese President Xi Jinping is poised to take a third five-year term. Image: Agencies / Pool
Marx. Lenin. Mao. Deng. Xi.
Late last week in Beijing, the sixth plenum of the Chinese Communist Party adopted a historic resolution – only the third in its 100-year history – detailing major accomplishments and laying out a vision for the future.
Essentially, the resolution poses three questions. How did we get here? How come we were so successful? And what have we learned to make these successes long-lasting?
The importance of this resolution should not be underestimated. It imprints a major geopolitical fact: China is back. Big time. And doing it their way. No amount of fear and loathing deployed by the declining hegemon will alter this path.
The resolution will inevitably prompt quite a few misunderstandings. So allow me a little deconstruction, from the point of view of a gwailo who has lived between East and West for the past 27 years.
If we compare China’s 31 provinces with the 214 sovereign states that compose the “international community”, every Chinese region has experienced the fastest economic growth rates in the world.
Across the West, the lineaments of China’s notorious growth equation – without any historical parallel – have usually assumed the mantle of an unsolvable mystery.
Little Helmsman Deng Xiaoping’s ’s famous “crossing the river while feeling the stones”, described as the path to build “socialism with Chinese characteristics” may be the overarching vision. But the devil has always been in the details: how the Chinese applied – with a mix of prudence and audaciousness – every possible device to facilitate the transition towards a modern economy.
The – hybrid – result has been defined by a delightful oxymoron: “communist market economy.” Actually, that’s the perfect practical translation of Deng’s legendary “it doesn’t matter the color of the cat, as long as it catches mice.” And it was this oxymoron, in fact, that the new resolution passed in Beijing celebrated last week.
Made in China 2025
Mao and Deng have been exhaustively analyzed over the years. Let’s focus here on Papa Xi’s brand new bag.
Right after he was elevated to the apex of the party, Xi defined his unambiguous master plan: to accomplish the “Chinese dream”, or China’s “renaissance.” In this case, in political economy terms, “renaissance” meant to realign China to its rightful place in a history spanning at least three millennia: right at the center. Middle Kingdom, indeed.
Already during his first term Xi managed to imprint a new ideological framework. The Party – as in centralized power – should lead the economy towards what was rebranded as “the new era.” A reductionist formulation would be The State Strikes Back. In fact, it was way more complicated.
This was not merely a rehash of state-run economy standards. Nothing to do with a Maoist structure capturing large swathes of the economy. Xi embarked in what we could sum up as a quite original form of authoritarian state capitalism – where the state is simultaneously an actor and the arbiter of economic life.
Team Xi did learn a lot of lessons from the West, using mechanisms of regulation and supervision to check, for instance, the shadow banking sphere. Macroeconomically, the expansion of public debt in China was contained, and the extension of credit better supervised. It took only a few years for Beijing to be convinced that major financial sphere risks were under control.
China’s new economic groove was de facto announced in 2015 via “Made in China 2025”, reflecting the centralized ambition of reinforcing the civilization-state’s economic and technological independence. That would imply a serious reform of somewhat inefficient public companies – as some had become states within the state.
In tandem, there was a redesign of the “decisive role of the market” – with the emphasis that new riches would have to be at the disposal of China’s renaissance as its strategic interests – defined, of course, by the party.
So the new arrangement amounted to imprinting a “culture of results” into the public sector while associating the private sector to the pursuit of an overarching national ambition. How to pull it off? By facilitating the party’s role as general director and encouraging public-private partnerships.
The Chinese state disposes of immense means and resources that fit its ambition. Beijing made sure that these resources would be available for those companies that perfectly understood they were on a mission: to contribute to the advent of a “new era.”
Manual for power projection
There’s no question that China under Xi, in eight short years, was deeply transformed. Whatever the liberal West makes of it – hysteria about neo-Maoism included – from a Chinese point of view that’s absolutely irrelevant, and won’t derail the process.
What must be understood, by both the Global North and South, is the conceptual framework of the “Chinese dream”: Xi’s unshakeable ambition is that the renaissance of China will finally smash the memories of the “century of humiliation” for good.
Party discipline – the Chinese way – is really something to behold. The CCP is the only communist party on the planet that thanks to Deng has discovered the secret of amassing wealth.
And that brings us to Xi’s role enshrined as a great transformer, on the same conceptual level as Mao and Deng. He fully grasped how the state and the party created wealth: the next step is to use the party and wealth as instruments to be put at the service of China’s renaissance.
Nothing, not even a nuclear war, will deviate Xi and the Beijing leadership from this path. They even devised a mechanism – and a slogan – for the new power projection: the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), originally One Belt, One Road (OBOR).
A mountain pass along the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. Image: Facebook
In 2017, BRI was incorporated into the party statutes. Even considering the “lost in translation” angle, there’s no Westernized, linear definition for BRI.
BRI is deployed on many superimposed levels. It started with a series of investments facilitating the supply of commodities to China.
Then came investments in transport and connectivity infrastructure, with all their nodes and hubs such as Khorgos, at the Chinese-Kazakh border. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), announced in 2013, symbolized the symbiosis of these two investment paths.
The next step was to transform logistical hubs into integrated economic zones – for instance as in HP based in Chongjing exporting its products via a BRI rail network to the Netherlands. Then came the Digital Silk Roads – from 5G to AI – and the Covid-linked Health Silk Roads.
What’s certain is that all these roads lead to Beijing. They work as much as economic corridors as soft power avenues, “selling” the Chinese way especially across the Global South.
Make Trade, Not War
Make Trade, Not War: that would be the motto of a Pax Sinica under Xi. The crucial aspect is that Beijing does not aim to replace Pax Americana, which always relied on the Pentagon’s variant of gunboat diplomacy.
The declaration subtly reinforced that Beijing is not interested in becoming a new hegemon. What matters above all is to remove any possible constraints that the outside world may impose over its own internal decisions, and especially over its unique political setup.
The West may embark on hysteria fits over anything – from Tibet and Hong Kong to Xinjiang and Taiwan. It won’t change a thing.
Concisely, this is how “socialism with Chinese characteristics” – a unique, always mutant economic system – arrived at the Covid-linked techno-feudalist era. But no one knows how long the system will last, and in which mutant form.
Corruption, debt – which tripled in ten years – political infighting – none of that has disappeared in China. To reach 5% annual growth, China would have to recover the growth in productivity comparable to those breakneck times in the 80s and 90s, but that will not happen because a decrease in growth is accompanied by a parallel decrease in productivity.
A final note on terminology. The CCP is always extremely precise. Xi’s two predecessors espoused “perspectives” or “visions.” Deng wrote “theory.” But only Mao was accredited with “thought.” The “new era” has now seen Xi, for all practical purposes, elevated to the status of “thought” – and part of the civilization-state’s constitution.
That’s why the party resolution last week in Beijing could be interpreted as the New Communist Manifesto. And its main author is, without a shadow of a doubt, Xi Jinping. Whether the manifesto will be the ideal road map for a wealthier, more educated and infinitely more complex society than in the times of Deng, all bets are off.
So timely and fascinating, but I would be willing to bet on their success, simply based on recent track record.
Does anyone here have any insights as to why the CCP would elevate “thought” over perspective and vision?
It seems that here “thought” (Mao and Xi) is referred to in terms that mean considerably more than what a modern Western trained intellect might imagine.
Any ideas?
Perspective places the past and present into correct order. Vision sees the future and its possibilities. Thought implies understanding directing the will. Thought would work the imagination; improving perspective not only to the possibilities of the future but also to what might have been, hence -The Heavenly Kingdom- Thought would be applied to those famous details. Thought: leaving no temporal or transcendent stone unturned.
Nice; Thank You Vittoria.
Two early Christian terms seem not foreign to this concept of “thought”; that is, ‘discernment’, along with ‘standing with the mind in the heart’. I could hopefully see a positive role being eventually filled by western nations, in that of object lesson. Clearly embodying the path which ought not be taken.
Some point down the road, we in the west may have a sign of friendship posted as well.
Paradigm, perhaps philosophical branching.
Regards, Spiral
The West may embark on hysteria fits over anything – from Tibet and Hong Kong to Xinjiang and Taiwan. It won’t change a thing.
No it will not! The West need to focus more on their own shortcomings ! They are thick on the ground!
@ Snowleopard
If you understand German, I recommend you reading “Moulüe – Spraplanung” by the Swiss sinologist Harro von Senger (Hanser ed., 2018. First ed. 2015): probably the most interesting book on China published in Europe in the past two decades. It explains the importance and the methods of multi-factorial and long term thinking and planning in Chinese politics, explains what Sino-Marxism is, and how stratagems and the solving of contradictions function “à la Chinoise”. I’ll try to write a review of this book in the coming weeks for the Saker blog – so you might get a glimpse of the book – if Andrei agrees, of course. Cheers
Xi is a thinker not just a time serving party hack,he has a vision for China’s future which he has spent his
life time fine tuning,and is now putting into concrete action,his priority was to crush corruption in the party
to retain the mandate from Heaven,which he has done in spades,at this critical juncture with the US rapid
decline,China has a leader of his caliber,and no amount of western demonisation will change that.
I’ve published a machine translation of Xi’s Manifesto here. The original Chinese text along with pics can be read here.
O.Historian, sorry I could not log in to read your translation (the Catcha caught me). However, the heading was interesting:
“Xi’s Manifesto: arm the Party with Marxism and Innovation. ”
Makes a startling contrast with the British view of China that I learnt at school:
“Better a century of Europe than a thousand years of Cathay”.
Pepe, you almost hit upon the real reason for China’s interest in Taiwan. The cultural history of China’s long empire. These traditions left China proper withChiang Kai-shek along with Chinas gold. They, plural, want access and inspiration from these traditions. Like they have the biggest film industry in the World now!! I’d say go for it China The history of the hundred year humiliation erased. The longer miliemums activated.
I have been enjoying your writings for years always great stuff.
Mark Cheley
Pepe’s analysis is, as always, thoughtful and prescient. However, as someone who has studied China longer than Pepe has been alive, I must contest two of his assertions:
1. “The CCP is the only communist party on the planet that thanks to Deng has discovered the secret of amassing wealth”. Mao accumulated China’s basic wealth–infrastructure, education, health, food, etc. He grew the takeoff economy faster than any country, ever, despite ceaseless attacks, sanctions, and embargoes that make today’s look tame–and left the country debt-free.
2. “To reach 5% annual growth, China would have to recover the growth in productivity comparable to those breakneck times in the 80s and 90s, but that will not happen because a decrease in growth is accompanied by a parallel decrease in productivity”. 5% (or any percent) is not a measure of growth. China’s 2021 economic acceleration rate, 8%, produces GDP growth of $2 trillion PPP, the fastest in its history. Productivity has doubled every ten years and will continue doing so for decades to come.
@Godfree Roberts
I certainly agree with you on point 1, that Mao began the great creation of national wealth with his investment in the people – particularly in the much-misunderstood Cultural Revolution. One could almost say that Mao actually amassed the tremendous wealth, and Deng realized it, or energized it. Not to disparage or compare anyone, simply to say that the record of achievement rests on the foundation of Mao – flawlessly furthered by his successors.
I’ve learned a tremendous amount about China from your writings, Dr. Roberts, and I must also credit Ramin Mazaheri for his series explaining the Cultural Revolution. It was here that I saw exactly the impossible thing that Mao actually achieved, taking power from the top tier and thrusting it all the way to the bottom tier – a brilliant and revolutionary act that we now see continues to repay the effort many-fold.
But I liked Pepe’s formulation that the CPC was the first communist party to understand how to amass wealth. That should dumbfound the jackals of the west ;)
If the Party retains its principal focus on the well being of all the people, I expect that all will be well with China – and probably that your point #2 will prove to be the case as well.
Many thanks for your input here, and all your work.
President Xi’s “Thought”:
‘Xi Jinping Thought’ consists of a 14-point basic policy as follows:
1. Ensuring Chinese Communist Party leadership over all forms of work in China.
2. The Chinese Communist Party should take a people-centric approach for the public interest.
3. The continuation of “comprehensive deepening of reforms”.
4. Adopting new science-based ideas for “innovative, coordinated, green, open and shared development”.
5. Following “socialism with Chinese characteristics” with “people as the masters of the country”.
6. Governing China with Rule of Law.
7. “Practice socialist core values”, including Marxism, communism and socialism with Chinese characteristics.
8. “Improving people’s livelihood and well-being is the primary goal of development”.
9. Coexist well with nature with “energy conservation and environmental protection” policies and “contribute to global ecological safety”.
10. Strengthen the National security of China.
11. The Chinese Communist Party should have “absolute leadership over” China’s People’s Liberation Army.
12. Promoting the one country, two systems system for Hong Kong and Macau with a future of “complete national reunification” and to follow the One-China policy and 1992 Consensus for Taiwan.
13. Establish a common destiny between Chinese people and other people around the world with a “peaceful international environment”.
14. Improve party discipline in the Chinese Communist Party.
So, ‘Thought’ seems to be the dogmatic pillars of the philosophy of President Xi. They create goals and processes to drive forward the Communist ideology as espoused by China’s Communist Party, exemplified by Xi Jinping.
Yes Larch the thought = thinking transferred into concrete goals and processes
that will drive the party forward in the 21st Century.14 pillars the collective West
will try their best to knock over,but the opportunity to do that will get harder and
harder every year that passes.
Thank you Pepe for sharing your accumulated wisdom about China. You are a great journalist.
Thanks Pepe for this prescient article. This is journalism at its best.
One sentence particularly stands out in your article : “The importance of this resolution should not be underestimated. It imprints a major geopolitical fact: China is back. Big time. And doing it their way. No amount of fear and loathing deployed by the declining hegemon will alter this path.”
The Chinese civilization stands indeed in stark contrast to the rupture that is at the root of the civilizations that originated in the Tri-Continental-Area. China’s civilization and its worldview (Chinese Traditional Culture) are both rooted in continuity. Continuity from animism. Unfortunately the short thinking time-span of Western liberal rationalists (two centuries and a half) is hindering their possible appreciation of what this notion of continuity is all about. The Volume 1 of my series “From Modernity to After-Modernity” was devoted in its entirety to this notion that I adapted to our contemporary context under the moniker of “The Continuum of the cultural field”. So what does continuity imply for China’s future ? It implies that the notion of Chinese governance, as a fully developed discipline of study, is finally emerging. It remained strangely absent from the lexicon of sinologists until today which is a very apt illustration of the deep ideological framework of sinology in general. Those who might be interested to have a peek in what Chinese governance is all about can check the “Qunshu Zhiyao” that ‘Emperor ‘Taizong (599–649) of the Tang dynasty decreed to be compiled from “the Books and Writings on the Important Governing Principles contained in14,000 books and 89,000 scrolls of ancient writings dating back from the era of the Five Legendary Governors to the Jin dynasty”. The following 3 volumes are a compilation of the Taizong era compilation. Volume 1. Volume 2. Volume 3.)
As Pepe wrote the recent resolution of the CC of the CPC “…imprints a major geopolitical fact : China is back. Big time. And doing it their way”. In my view the Chinese way is already acting, silently and without publicity, as the determinant force in re-balancing the Geopolitical reality around the notion of “Regional Economic Blocks” (REBs). In this view China acts as the center. East-Asia (ASEAN + the Confuciam area + Eastern Siberia) is growing into the dominant REB and is fully integrating into a Chinese Confucian sphere (Yes it’s an economic integration and also a cultural integration). And the East-Asia REB is also gradually integrating with Eurasia which develops into its own REB with Russia, Iran, Turkey ? as locomotives. The next step involves the integration of Africa and of Europe… Part 5 of my book “A first societal blow in Late-Modernity” deals with this REB problematic.
As “a gwailo who has lived between East and West for the past 27 years” Pepe summed up the essence of Xi’s moment “… as a quite original form of authoritarian state capitalism – where the state is simultaneously an actor and the arbiter of economic life”. I developed the same kind of thesis in Part 9, of my book “A growing disconnect between East and West”, “The communist party ‘owns’ China” . In substance China was a market economy since thousands of years and nothing will change in this regard. What changes is that the neoliberal version of the market that has been taught in US universities since the seventies and which got mentally internalized by many Chinese educated in these universities is presently being tamed and replaced with the more traditional Chinese approach of state preeminence over society as a whole. Where I diverge with Pepe is in the concept he uses to characterize this new economic phase. He calls it “authoritarian state capitalism”. I’m afraid that as a concept that emerged in a Western, or Western dominated context, this concept does not apply to the particularities of the Chinese cultural field. The same goes with the concept “god” that Matteo Ricci used as translation for the spirits that are venerated in local Chinese Traditional Culture. The fact is that Ricci’s use of the concept “god” was a manipulation in order to induce the belief in Chinese minds that Christianity and Chinese Traditional Culture are the same thing. It was simply a trick to convert the Chinese to Christianity. And the concept of authoritarianism characterizes China in the same tricky propagandizing fashion. I could extend the examples of Western opportunistic conceptual propagandizing to the use of the concept “Empire” which Western politologists used to characterize China’s traditional form of governance. In reality “empire” corresponds to the governance form that emerged in the Tri-Continental-Area as a result of 7,000 years of infighting, between candidates men of power, that from there got expanded to Rome. The transition from tribal egalitarian non-power societies to power-societies in China did absolutely not follow this kind of infighting. It was the result of a peaceful tribal animistic cultural unification that, with the need of big infrastructural works (anti-flooding), gradually developed into a governance with power attributes.
So how to characterize China’s system of governance ? It seems to me that the CPC acts fully in line with the traditional Chinese system of “knowledge dynasties” that were grounded in the Confucian concept of legitimacy called “the mandate of heaven”. That mandate has nothing to do with a mandate to “an authoritarian state”. It is a mandate to maximize the initiatives and interests of the people. It was a mandate understood as — a protection from foreign violent intrusions (stability and continuity) — and a protection from state interference in people’s production of the daily life of their families (stability and continuity). And the mandate was considered void when the dynasty in charge no longer offered those two protections and people were then considered having the right to set aside that dynasty… As a side note. Some Westerners have the gall to characterize China as a dictatorship that is afraid of its own people while their own so called democratic systems, as a matter of principle, don’t give a damn about what their people want. Am I the only one to observe the irony that is at the heart of Western authoritarian democracies ?
A last word about Godfree Roberts’ interesting comment. It should be noted that Deng’s characterization, of Mao’s era as 70% positive and 30% negative, disappears from the CPC lexicon. This confirms the CPC recognition of what Godfree Roberts’ mentions about the Mao era which indeed “accumulated China’s basic wealth–infrastructure, education, health, food, and” most importantly perhaps that Mao’s era guaranteed the success of the agricultural reforms of the eighties. Without the titanesque public works to repair and extensively develop irrigation systems, and clean water distribution systems to peoples’ houses , the agricultural reforms of the eighties could not possibly have succeeded which would have hampered the further industrialization of the country. So this recognition of continuity in the history of the CPC will definitely remain an important contribution to Xi’s legacy.
About Godfree Roberts’ second point related to economic growth I think that my previous remark about Western conceptual imperialism also applies in the domain of economics. Western economics is indeed rooted in modeling the economic activities of their own countries. Those models clearly do not work in the different context of China. That’s why Pepe could write that “Across the West, the lineaments of China’s notorious growth equation – without any historical parallel – have usually assumed the mantle of an unsolvable mystery”… We’ll soon enough come to discover that much of what passes for science today in the West is no more than Western imperialist intellectual conceptualization of what are no more than “aprioris” grounded in the axioms of their civilization and their ideological worldview. The examples I have given here above are merely the tip of the iceberg. Lets note that Chinese scientific research barely enters the domain of fundamental (basic) research. Until now it was mostly preoccupied with applied research. This has now started to change and the government is supplying loads of cash… My bet is that we’ll soon start to discover that, based on the axioms of their own civilization and worldview, Chinese scientists will start to churn out their own concepts and their own systemics…
Another area is dawning on us …but the world will first have to handle the numerous side-effects of Western Modernity. But that is another matter.
Iaodan: i was eagerly awaiting your contribution to this conversation and you did not disappoint. I completely agree with you about the falsity of interpreting Chinese Marxism in Western patriarchal terms. To call the Chinese Communist Party “authoritarian” is a blind Western projection. The power that comes with the Mandate of Heaven is not authoritarian. It is authoritative. There is a vast difference between “authoritarian” and “authoritative”. To be Authoritarian is a power projection of ego dominance. The Romans mastered the art of making power projection appear authoritatiive. But that was just a propaganda coating for ego driven power and class domination. It is just an act generated by egos on power trips.
The British modernized the art of masquerading class dominating power as authority. “Authoritarian” means I have the power to control the violence, therefore you must accept that as coming from God. Fear of god and fear of power in the name of god. The oppressor adopts the mantle of “God.” A great con if you can pull it off. Real authority however is the voice of god. And it is found in the heart. Easy for Chinese to understand. That is the meaning of the word. So as a Westerner I would read the Chinese Mandate of Heaven as carrying a natural authority that a Christian would think of as the voice of God. There is absolutely no contradiction here between such authority and democracy. This I think has a lot to do with why the Chinese Communist system is so balanced and successful.
I find your comments about Chinese animism most interesting and would like to see you flesh this out in a manner that Westerners could more readily understand. Westerners suffer greatly from a sense of being alienated from nature and trapped in mental ego states. Healing for the Westerner is often thought of in terms of “getting back to nature.” This seems to be a major feature of the unconscious hostility Westerners feel towards China. I interpret the strength of China as being a civilization that has never left nature. China and the natural world are in a state of unity (Being). This is how I read your “animism.”
This leaves me with a perception of the world mind that goes something like this. The English speaking mind is the bright shining crown of the world mind, overwhelming in its dominance, whilst all along the Chinese mind is the quiet, stable foundation of the world mind. It is un-interupted Being. You call it animism it would seem. But the bright world dominating light of the English mind is historically alienated from its natural foundation in Being. Hence It is unstable and neurotic. Because of this the English mentality feels profoundly threatened and confronted by the Chinese mind.
I will never forget an admonition popularized by English imperialists in Beijing in 1900. It was a simple statement that an Englishman should never have a conversation with a Chinese man as that conversation with the Chinaman will be harmful to the mind of the Englishman. This means that the mental ego of the Englishman would be undermined by exposure to the Chinese mind’s grounding in Being. It would feel in danger of collapsing back into the “unconscious.” For westerners Being is “unconscious.” Hence the neurosis.
So if we are to find healing the Western mind must reintegrate with natural Being (exemplified by Russian & China) but that will require a world wide drama wherein the egoism of the West acts out its profound alienation and antagonism towards Being – this is why the Brits just cannot stop trying to crush China. They are reactively acting out a collective neurosis on a world scale, and we call it politics. Your thoughts?
What you write there is right on the mark : “I interpret the strength of China as being a civilization that has never left nature. China and the natural world are in a state of unity (Being).”
That state of unity is the Dao that Laoze talked about in the Dao De Jing. See this excellent multi-translation and interactive tool. The sharing by the Chinese, of their Traditional Chinese Culture + the axioms of the Chinese civilization, allows them somehow to surf on the waves of natural evolution while Westerners are “trapped in mental ego states”. And attentive observers of the Geopolitical scene are not missing the fact that China today, as a nation, is at the top of its game of surfing…
Two other interesting quotes from your comment :
— “The power that comes with the Mandate of Heaven is not authoritarian. It is authoritative”.
—“Westerners suffer greatly from a sense of being alienated from nature and trapped in mental ego states.
Your words are ringing truthfulness.
I like the way you render my thinking alive in the present context. My writing is a deconstruction of the past in order to clarify how we landed in the present mess.
I understand that you would like me “to flesh this out in a manner that Westerners could more readily understand” but you have to know that I’m engaged in an analytical adventure that covers a few thousand pages of text… and I furthermore offer the result of my research in “open access” mode.
So to get a better understanding about how the societal path of China, and the West, bifurcated I advise you to read the introduction of “The Continuum of the cultural field” as well as “Part 2. Worldviews”.
I believe that a good understanding of this bifurcation is an absolute necessity for Westerners and for Chinese to finally understand their otherworldiness in the eyes of the other…
I forgot that one. It made me laugh. Is this the output of your creative mind or do you have a source ?
“I will never forget an admonition popularized by English imperialists in Beijing in 1900. It was a simple statement that an Englishman should never have a conversation with a Chinese man as that conversation with the Chinaman will be harmful to the mind of the Englishman. This means that the mental ego of the Englishman would be undermined by exposure to the Chinese mind’s grounding in Being. It would feel in danger of collapsing back into the “unconscious.” For westerners Being is “unconscious.” Hence the neurosis. “
Ioadan: I thought that we would understand each other.
You asked – “is this the output of my creative mind or do i have a source.” I have a source. It is one of the many little pieces I remember reading of over many years of political research. i shall now offer you another one. In each case I am applying a Jungian psychological interpretation of the internal contradiction that exists between English imperialism and the subjects of their empire. Lets call it the mass psychology of the relations between oppressor and oppressed. That’s where the creativity of this interpretation comes in. The reason this creativity works is; Jungian psychology and its practice in the West has now established itself as a legitimate “wisdom tradition.” This works as Jung’s psychology has its roots in the ancient spiritual tradition of Hermeticism. Hence it embraces “the Dao” in relation to the modern mind.
So the other piece which I carefully established as historically valid is the precise wording of the English Army Major who was writing a letter to his family back in England whilst on a train in India. This was the man who had just ordered British troops to open fire on a crowd of protesting Indians, now known as the infamous massacre at Amritsar. So I am sure he was releasing a little stress which makes the reading of his words that much more psychologically revealing. These are the exact words of the man who ordered the massacre:
“It gave me great satisfaction to fire round after round into a seething mass of sweating niggers.”
Nothing creative in the letter but it gets fascinating when we recognize that each of the words he applied to the Indian people “seething,” “mass,” and “sweating” “niggers” is a psychological code word generated by the modern Western conscious ego mind intended to be descriptive of what Jungians call “the collective unconscious.” The Army major was psychologically declaring war on fullness of Being on behalf of the ego mind.
Recall that at all times an Englishman in his empire must avoid “going native.” The English would bemoan such “regression” as a psychological collapse into primitivity. There is interesting literature around that.
This is a big deal in Jungian psychology because it holds the primary internal contradiction governing human relations as being the polarity contradiction between the ego and the contents of the unconscious. For unconscious read the Dao. So what constantly holds my attention is how acutely this inner process manifests itself as a global defining conflict. This perspective can recognize our primary political contradictions as externalized expression of a mythic movement in the Dao. This is why I find such comfort in the integrity of Chinese communism. They seem to have mastered the art of politically moving in the Dao.
Thank you for your research suggestions.
Thank you, Laodan, for the many perceptive remarks, so many of which are new to me, but which rings true and deserving of investigation. I have saved your piece for further study.
Thanks also, go to Snow Leopard, whose remarks are also worthy of more reflection.
Profoundly helpful, laodan and Snow Leopard, so glad to read.
On another level, I heard from commercial pilot sources, that the Chinese training and flight procedures are highly intensive, (all countries are of course, and all types of aircraft have different training requirements,) but what struck me about what I heard, was their dependence on the purely technical flight roles, meaning also the computerized aspects obviously, but how human adaptations requiring very practical, or hands on management, were more challenged than to pilots of the west.
I thought about this a lot, and the huge advances of China in technology, their geopolitical staging, etc, and their relationship altogether with the progress and advancements of the last hundred years.
Even Pepe Escobar geopolitical commentator most extraordinary gets it WRONG every time. It is the Communist Party of China the CPC and NOT the CCP I guess only in Global Times can you find the correct abbreviation very disappointing.
CPC = Just a different abbreviation.
And we all make typos.
“A final note on terminology. The CCP is always extremely precise. Xi’s two predecessors espoused “perspectives” or “visions.” Deng wrote “theory.” ”
What does it do for your credibility when you make a statement like this and get the name of the Communist Party of China wrong??? “extremely precise” are the Chinese, not others.
Perhaps because he is speaking to a Western audience that is familiar with the acronym CCP and not CPC.
When writing to a English speaking audience about a sweet smelling flower that I saw in Beijing, it would be more effective in communication to call it a Rose, and not a meiquihua, and even less so a 玫瑰花
China is largely posturing. Their food situation is precarious. There is no possible way that they can get into any big conflict. But the same applies to energy – especially oil.
The USA only became so successful because it was the world’s biggest oil and food exporter for decades.
I recommend this interview of Gregory Copely
“Gregory Copley: Coup Season In Africa, China Can’t Go To War, West Becoming Soviet Union”
https://guadalajarageopolitics.com/2021/11/11/gregory-copley-coup-season-in-africa-china-cant-go-to-war-west-becoming-soviet-union/
1/ China can switch existing rice plant to the fast growing hybid species which texture is less appealing than the traditional crops. If situation calls, the switch can be done in a few seasons. Grain storage is enough for everyone at least ONE year.
2/ Oil importation is for automobile and petrochemical industry. China is also an oil producer itself, about 30% of its need. The major source of energy is actually coal which is most locally produced. Import of coking coal and thermal power coal is only a few percent to the total.
China doesnt want a conflict – they are a peaceful people just wanting to prosper.
They work hard and have done amazing things.
China itself is an amazing place.
They built the Great Wall.
The whole issue of Taiwan is just an artificially created play to facilitate a US Fleet in the region – them and Sth Korea and Japan. And Hong Kong.
Does China actually think Japan, Philipines, Vietnam, are going to attack them ?
Well, the hotly awaited Xi and Biden* virtual meeting is over.
Xi Jinping with a whole lot of confidence after the Plenum, stressed what we all know. No interference in the Taiwan question
“Both China and the US are at critical stages of development, and the “global village” of humanity faces multiple challenges, the Chinese president said.
As the world’s two largest economies and permanent members of the UN Security Council, China and the US need to increase communication and cooperation, each run their domestic affairs well and, at the same time, shoulder their share of international responsibilities, and work together to advance the noble cause of world peace and development, Xi told Biden.
A sound and steady China-US relationship is needed for advancing the two countries’ respective development and for safeguarding a peaceful and stable international environment, including finding effective responses to global challenges such as climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic, Xi stressed.
“China and the US should respect each other, coexist in peace, and pursue win-win cooperation,” he said, expressing his readiness to work with Biden to build consensus and take active steps to move China-US relations forward in a positive direction.
The Chinese President laid out three principles and four priority areas for the China-US relations. In terms of principles, the two countries firstly need to respect each other’s social systems and development paths, respect each other’s core interests and major concerns, and respect each other’s right to development.
They also need to treat each other as equals, keep differences under control, and seek common ground while reserving differences. The other two principles include peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation. No conflict and no confrontation is a line that both sides must hold, the Chinese President said.
The US side has suggested coexistence between China and the US. One more word can be added to make it peaceful coexistence, Xi said. With their interests deeply intertwined, China and the US stand to gain from cooperation and lose from confrontation.”
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202111/16/WS6192f731a310cdd39bc757fb_1.html
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202111/1239058.shtml
Oh Man! Those Chinese are fast. Already we have a summary of the read-out from the Chinese side.
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1919223.shtml
If I am not mistaken and I could well be, the US is trying in a funny way to sue for peace, so that they can be allowed into a 3-polar world. Perhaps they are begging for a slice of the pie while wanting to create the shape of the pie. It’s early days and we will assess the chatter from the Chinese people to see if they are happy with the content of this meeting.
Pepe’s commentary in a tweet this morning:
CIA chief Burns in Moscow and Biden/Blinken on Video w/China are both desperate to buy Time, slow China, separate Russia-China and rebuild the Hegemonic image among the world’s nations.
Words and smiles in these moments of contact are foreground to the menacing background of Hybrid War, military threats, wild inflation exported to all the world’s economies, disruption of the global supply chains, and financial sanctions combined with lawless persecution and prosecution of whomever the FBI and CIA can grab in foreign countries and haul to the US for ‘justice’.
Centuries ago, the US would be a pirate nation, a danger to all travelers, a thief of incalculable greed, murderer, highwayman, killer of women and children.
China and Russia know what the soul of the US government contains. Only the US thinks it is fooling anyone.
The reason for Burns’ trip and Biden/Blinken trying to cajole Beijing is the terrifying self-knowledge that their power has ebbed and they have lost most advantages they grabbed when the USSR died. They have tossed away the thirty-year superiority, and now are looking at their competitors, Russia and China, sprint away from them.
The US is bleeding out from self-inflicted wounds. The bandages and medicinals it needs are stuck in containers off-shore. Time is running out.
President Xi got a 3.5 hour observation of the victim.
President Putin had a phone conversation with Burns. They discussed ‘first aid’ which Patrushev and Naryshkin in person with Burns suggested the patient go rest in a sanitarium or it will be relegated to a hospice if it didn’t take care of its own mental and physical health.
This is very well put :
“Centuries ago, the US would be a pirate nation, a danger to all travelers, a thief of incalculable greed, murderer, highwayman, killer of women and children.
China and Russia know what the soul of the US government contains. Only the US thinks it is fooling anyone.”
I hope you are right on that one :
“If I am not mistaken and I could well be, the US is trying in a funny way to sue for peace, so that they can be allowed into a 3-polar world. Perhaps they are begging for a slice of the pie while wanting to create the shape of the pie.”
On one side the US economy is in shambles and it becomes difficult to imagine how it could avoid financial and social collapse in the near term. On the other hand it appears that China is rapidly taking an irresistible lead in technological advancement. So suing for peace is perhaps the only possibility for the US to escape financial and social ruin while preserving a slice of the pie. But, in such a context, Chinese classics leave no doubt that this will not be how things eventually end…
I also found the discussion between laodan and Snow Leopard on Chinese consciousness [mind] and the consciousness of the West profound and seemed to be immediately confirmed by babyl-on’s [babble on] superficial pedantic distraction. Maybe; CCP could refer to the Central Committee of the Party.
This level of consciousness [mind] which laodan and Snow Leopard have picked up on confirms what Marx said about religion and its origin, “The man who has found in the fantastic reality of heaven, where he sought a supernatural being, no more than his own reflection, will no longer be satisfied to find only the semblance of himself, only the unhuman, where he seeks, and must seek, his true reality.” I also interpreted this to mean that you cannot replace religion by coercion. “The removal of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness.” The demand that they should give up illusions about real conditions is the demand that they give up the conditions which make illusion necessary.”
Hope this is not too far from the significance of what XI is saying. Certainly there is not comparison between the of the two minds – Xi and Biden. Xi is speaking respectfully
Anyway, Xi’s speech is both clear for everyone and deep and profound at the same time; and while he is speaking directly to Biden, without intentional condescension, in words that he hopes Biden will understand the meaning of, he is obviously directing his comments to the world.
We may consider it – while dealing with the realities of the problems of the contemporary world – as in the tradition of Confucius or the historical concept of the “Mandate of Heaven”. An awareness that departure from which has its own consequences.
Rapid changes in the basic [economic] structure of society are driven by the revolution in technology, which in turn influences and determines the mode of production; but our consciousness tends to lag behind. However, in time, necessity demands a new philosophy, or way of being, in harmony with the new. It can portent a bright future for human kind – and we hope the planet – or in common ruin.
Readers can decide who is putting forward the most positive possibility of a golden future and whose ideology and thinking [mind] is chained to the past and is reactionary and moribund and could lead to disaster. And whose system is failing and subjectively infects us (like a virus) with despair and foreboding?
I read somewhere, a profound example of the dialectics of nature, I think it was Mae-Wan Ho in her Book Genetic Engineering [Dream or Nightmare?]. That to remain stable the organism (Genes) must be fluid. Adaptable to change. The question is: In what direction is that change to take place?
And good old Pepe is – believe it or not – human, and makes mistakes from time-to-time and is probably accustomed to his teachers correcting his essays.
‘Make trade; not war’ instead of ‘PAX Americana gunboat diplomacy’, a little marketing would go a long way and would force the U.S. to spend real energy to counter. I bet we would accuse China of Maoist sloganeering but still, eventually the world would be able to see truth when it is concisely stated and demonstrated over and over again. How many times can you drone stroke an innocent family, blame the victims and accuse China of aggression? So far, the number is 10 but I bet it is not infinite.
————————-
BTW I wish I could invest safely in the Chinese stock market but I bet we will eventually remove them from the exchanges as we did to Venezuela. I do have a token amount in MCHI. When your economy is growing at least 5X faster than anyone else, it will eventually reflect in your valuation. I mention this in part to show that the U.S., like the U.K. in 1900 still has some teeth.
China has and is doing well but Xi needs to realize storm clouds are gathering to bring it into line – aka Soros. It may not want conflict but…………
The EU elites cannot have an uncontrolled China (or anywhere else) powering ahead and unstoppable.
It must be brought to heel or brought down.
The plotting is going on right now.
The same happened in 1760s when the UK elites brought down the American economies because they were doing so well with the system of paper money. When they imposed gold/silver based exchange and taxation it created a depression and that was the cause of the Revolutionary War.
You only have look to what was done to the SE Asian economies in 1997. Same deal.
Xi should realize war can start without even firing a shot.
One cannot but be amazed that so many people believe that Chinese (and Russians, for that matter) are living in the clouds and don’t ‘realize’ the situation. Fortunately there are people who know better and give them advise.
Yes but war can start with the subtlest means.
The stroke of pen in some instances. Or a few words.
Or failing to do something. Or a non govt commercial decision having profound effects.
The list is endless.
Russian and China are alert but something may slip thru.
No, in the 21st century, war does not start with the subtlest means. Not unless it is village warfare. War costs money and preparations, you see.
The Chinese and Russians have been watching the instruments of Yank “foreign policy” at work. They have booted out its NGOs years ago. I am sure they are watching the situation closely.
I would say it is probably one of the reasons why Bitcoin is banned, the tech billionaires who got too big for their shoes were humbled, the unhealthy private tuition industry was levelled with one sweep of the hand, gold ownership is promoted. They are deflating bubbles and toning up their economy proactively. Likely more measures to come in time.
I do not pretend to be an expert on this and i have zero information other than what I pick up here and there, but i have a gut feeling that something has happened in the last month or so, such that the USA is not as cocky as it was. My evidence/potentially significant issues such as it is:
1. Burns trip to Moscow – seems a little desperate
2. This Biden Xi Zoom
3. Milley’s tripolar world
4. The submarine collision either they were sailing in uncharted Chinese waters, or their commander was incredibly careless – either option is significant
5. Russian anti-satellite missile
6. Failure of the Belarus insurrection
7. The US cargo ship build up – there is MUCH more to it than lack of truck drivers. Perhaps Walmart and others are over stocked because consumer spending has tanked ie the economy is in much worse shape than they are saying
8. COVID is still killing
9. The mood has swung against Biden in the US
10. The stupid AUKUS deal upsetting France.
No doubt lots of other things but something seems to have changed.
It seems that US strategists finaly realized that it is impossible to fight on two fronts simultaneously. They still have to accept that they are not fit to to fight on single front. ( Well, maybe, against 100 times weaker oponents they’ll still get the chance).
Will they ever come to revelation they are unable to fight with themselves?
Searching for rationale in behaviour of foulmouthed, aggressive drunk who is just about to trip and fall Into ditch is fools errand.
“Essentially, the resolution poses three questions. How did we get here? How come we were so successful? And what have we learned to make these successes long-lasting?” – Incredible statements.
The Chinese are not stupid. They will raise many of their friends into powerful actors on the world stage. This so as to not be the exclusive attention of envy or ignorance.
“To reach 5% annual growth, China would have to recover the growth in productivity comparable to those breakneck times in the 80s and 90s, but that will not happen because a decrease in growth is accompanied by a parallel decrease in productivity.”
China invested huge amount into infrastructure, and continue to do so. That investments will return eventualy with astronomical profit. Until then, the cost is slower growth and lower standard of living.
The competitors did next to nothing. It is unreasonable to compare them.
Snowleopard writes: “..The British modernized the art of masquerading class dominating power as authority..”
They did that and John Ruskin was one of the mouthpieces for the purpose.
Aristocratic socialists wanted the masses to like them and to let them be their gods just like you say.
But they did more than that; they successfully imposed communism on both Russia and China.
Something western leftists apparently cant touch.
Classwar is the reason why communism fails to bring the progress that some of you wellintended romantics try to read into what was there before the realist Deng took over.
Before Deng those aristocrats encouraged China for remaining underdeveloped and for using simple technology rather than attempting to aim for development and to become more competitive.
Peasant romanticism was likewise encouraged and that wasnt even new.
It came already during the so called enlightenment when under its false disguise its proponents actually encoraged backwardness and ridiculing Leibniz ( who incidently was an admirer of China) and whose vision was that all of humanity deserved to access the tools for embetterment
But Xi doesnt throw out anything from the old conceptual apparatus if it still has a positive ring in the audience.
Communication is the priority in political speeches.
Western leftists are wellmeaning but irrational and vain about their own shortcomings.
I wish they would begin to cleanse their minds from the illusion of communism as an authentic massmovement.
The chinese one was substantially aided by the Pilgrim Society which employed a pseudochristian youth movement as a cover for the training of the young communist adepts.
That does not mean Mao didnt have good intentions but the whole situation was a foreign-controlled plot.
I doubt that Chiang Kai Shek fully appreciated that but probably feared communism as something catastrophic. I wonder if he would have guessed that the western ‘christian missionaries ‘ were used to play such games.
And yet nearly a century earlier another pseudochristian movement conjured up by the same western oligarchy managed to bring China to her knees and to the profound humiliation they had to go through.
Biden is the living embodiment of ‘vacuous’
The less said about the VP the better.
So …. they are not in charge and we must guess who is and what they want to achieve.
I am sure the Chinese have either worked out who is in charge or, basically, couldn’t give a rat’s bum and will go their own way.
I just hope the Chinese (and Russians) factor in the potential for those in charge of America to bring about armageddon in preference to playing 2nd fiddle.
Deng gave a practical edge to Mao’s legacy. The leaders from Deng to Xi were very competent managers. Xi is carrying on the vision of Mao and Deng …. internally – ‘poverty is not socialism …. externally – regaining China’s role as a leading power.
Xi’s thought will succeed.
If I know that, then the people in charge of America know that.
What will they do?
That is the question.