« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The China Syndrome Amongst The Progressive Left

They?d Find It So Much Easier To Be In Charge Without Those Meddlesome Voters.

Where It's Easier To Be President

A great number of America’s modern leaders are dangerously ignorant with respect to China. In between the bimbo eruptions, GOP Candidate Herman Cain took a few minutes out of his busy day to remind how a GOP foreign policy gaffe by Gerald Ford helped convince America’s voters to pull the lever for Jimmy Carter. Gerald Ford famously insisted that Poland in 1976, wasn’t militarily occupied by the Soviet Union. The 12 Russian Army divisions had just parked their tanks there for the past 25 years so that a high ranking officer could change a flat tire. Herman Cain recently informed us that China has “indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability.”

Sadly, it’s not just Republican leaders that display this lack of erudition. Leaders on the Progressive Left have captured America’s Democratic Party and provide its intellectual gravamen. They are also colossally stupid on the subject of China. Unlike Herman Cain, they don’t underrate China’s capabilities. Instead they overrate China, and commit the grim transgression against republicanism of suggesting we should carefully emulate their despotism.

Thomas Freidman describes why Barack Obama believes it would be easier to be President of China.

Mr. Obama has told people that it would be so much easier to be the president of China. As one official put it, “No one is scrutinizing Hu Jintao’s words in Tahrir Square.”

Yes, I seem to remember a bunch of Chinese protestors who scrutinized the words of Hu Jintao’s predecessor in Tiananmen Square. The government wasn’t particularly interested in their commentary. It’s funny that we haven’t heard much about #OccupyTiananmenSquare in the news lately. China is, after all, where Goldman-Sachs and the Koch Brothers supposedly shipped all of our jobs.

That gets us to the nub of why political leaders like Barack Obama paint us such a bucolic and ideal picture of China. “Folks in Congress are also going to get a chance to decide . . . whether our construction workers should sit around doing nothing while China builds the best railroads, the best schools, the best airports in the world.” claims President Obama. Michael Levy, a former Peace Corps worker in China, describes things a bit differently.

“Imagine that there’s a country exactly like the United States. Exactly the same size. It’s got the same cities. It’s got the same number of rich people and poor people. It’s just like us. And now add 1 billion peasants. That’s China.”

(HT: NRO)

Further damage can be done to the Progressive case for making America more like China by studying just exactly how these 1Bn Chinese Peasants got to be so debased and impoverished. Unencumbered by foolish voters and inconvenient public dissent, Chinese Premiere Mao Tse Tung embarked upon his Great Leap Forward from 1958 to 1960. The University of Chicago Chronicle describes the effects of this program below.

In pursuit of its goals, the government executed people who did not agree with the pace of radical change. The crackdown led to the deaths of 550,000 people by 1958. The government also plunged the country into a deep debt by increasing spending on the development of heavy industry. Government spending on heavy industry grew in 1958 to represent 56 percent of state capital investment, an increase from 38 percent in 1956.

Take away the 500,000 executions, and John Maynard Keynes would have been proud. Without any organized Tea Party to tell Chairman Mao to limit the exuberance of his “stimulus” efforts, the following results occurred.

Although in theory the country was awash in grain, in reality it was not. Rural communal mess halls were encouraged to supply food for free, but by the spring of 1959, the grain reserves were exhausted and the famine had begun. No one is sure exactly how many people perished as a result of the spreading hunger. By comparing the number of deaths that could be expected under normal conditions with the number that occurred during the period of the Great Leap famine, scholars have estimated that somewhere between 16.5 million and 40 million people died before the experiment came to an end in 1961, making the Great Leap famine the largest in world history.

And that’s what makes being in charge of China easy. There is no responsibility assigned to even cataclysmic failures such as The Great Leap famine. The 16.5 million starvation victims won’t exactly show up and vote against you. China isn’t any easier to run than the US. Chinese leaders just don’t ever have to worry about the career dissipation lights blinking.

This also underscores why all of us have to stay active and stay involved. We don’t want to trust these experts. The government can be very knowledgeable. But the institutional knowledge runs a mile deep and only three feet wide. They need to answer to us. The jobs of our political leaders don’t have to be hard per-se, but they should always be extremely consequential.

COMMENTS

  • heraklios

    It’s economy is shot through with corruption and inefficiencies. It’s political system is extremely unstable, particularly if the economy stumbles. There is no innovation in China; they just copy what others have invented. Plus, they face a demographic nightmare within a generation. China may look tough today but really they are a paper tiger and, at most, a regional power.

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      They admire the total power and utter lack of personnal accountability. It’s almost like being a Dungeon Master in an AD&D Game instead of being a Premier.

      • jakeofalltrades

        Ironically, due to their “abundant natural resources”.

        • jakeofalltrades

          nt

    • haumea

      China is the latest incarnation of “country that’s supposed to eat our lunch” (see Nazi Germany, Khruschev’s USSR, 70s/80s Japan.)

      • renl57

        So now you’re saying that the U.S.S.R. was never an existential threat to the U.S.?

        Sorry, that’s rewriting history.

        Had history gone just a little bit differently, the U.S.S.R. could well have won the Cold War. Fortunately the West revived itself “under new management”–Reagan, Thatcher, Pope John Paul II. Otherwise, I don’t think the outcome would have pleased you.

        In the 1940s, the Axis Powers had the raw potential to defeat the West too. They made a number of disastrous strategic mistakes and that’s what doomed them.

        As for China, if they’re going to collapse they had better do so quickly. Because if present trends continue, then sometime in this decade China’s economy will surpass America’s as the world’s largest economy.

        And that’s going to have huge implications, both domestically and in foreign policy.

    • drewlovs

      Right now, there are two things we as Americans can do with China; the first is to wait them out. Everything this poster has stated is true, and given enough time, China will have to stop looking greedily at the rest of the world and look internally to “fix” the problems that are brewing. My best friend was born in China, and he has serious doubts about that government’s ability to ratchet down on the freedoms now availible to a citizen of China if it wanted to…they have tasted freedom via capitalism, even if only on a local level, and it will be difficult if not impossible to take it away. Imagine Tiananmen Square but not limited to just college students. It might happen anyway, but it will look more like the middle east in application.

      The second is to stop supplying them with our financial well-being. No matter who is the eventual Republican nominee, the most important task s/he will face is to get our economy growing dynamically to stop the borrowing we are doing with China. Let’s hope this happens, because if China gets wealthy enough, many of the outlined future challenges can be solved by throwing money at them.

      As far as the Cain slip up about a nuclear china… I watched the interview, and I think he was TRYING to say they are developing the ability to fling their weapons far enough to be a concern. Namely, ballistic missile systems. No, I cannot read his mind; but I’ve heard him speak elsewhere, and he knew THEN that China is a nuclear power.

      I’m a fan of Cain, but not for the White House; as Dick Morris once said, my heart is with Cain, my head is with Newt, and my desire to win at all costs leans towards Romney (the desire part is my contribution).

  • heraklios

    Democrats would love to have the power of a Chinese premier. Which shouldn’t surprise anyone because communist China and the Democrats are branches off the same tree, grounded in the theories of Marx and Engel from the 19th century.

  • jaykali

    I lived in China and the people are okay with not having much in the way of freedoms bc overall things are improving, particularly their prosperity. Eventually they will hit hard times, especially bc the government doesn’t have much in the way of accountability. I think then you will discontent, just like in any country, even ours. The difference though in a non-democracy is that discontent can lead to overthrowing the govt since there isn’t another means to enact change.

  • http://beaglescout.wordpress.com;http://news.unifiedpatriots.com/ Beaglescout

    This doesn’t mean they haven’t developed other nuclear capabilities already, but that they continue to work on new ones.

    China is fielding four new nuclear capable ballistic missiles.
    http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20111104_7716.php

    US complains that China obscures its nuclear capabilities.
    http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/10/us-china-nuclear-talks-stymied-by-distrust-and-miscommunication/247589/

    So when Cain said that China was developing nuclear capabilities he was right. If he knew he would be intentionally misinterpreted he could have added a “new” in there, but that should not be necessary.

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    I could easily see it as meaning “develop further” or “develop in new directions” or just meaning to develop their capabilities… if he is truly ignorant of the nuclear weapons capability since forever ago that wold be another thing but it’s so commonly known I kind of doubt it being meant as a remark that some read into him stating an ignorance of weapons capability.

    On the other hand Obama’s remark is a warning in disguise about what he’d like to have if he could get away with it… the real shame is the play the two different remarks get. One is vilified as proof he’s ignorant while the other is virtually ignored.

    • Tbone

      Palin never came close to saying anything this plain effing ignorant.

      It is amazing the pass you guys are willing to give him. Is it because he is black?

      • NeoKong

        The former ballistics analyst for the U.S. Navy in the early seventies had no idea China had nukes.
        You been hanging around with streiff too long.

        • Tbone

          he offended got paid off to protect his sorry butt. You tell me how dumb the guy is. And, just what is a “ballistics analyst”, anyway?

          • haumea

            Someone who’s sufficiently versed in precalculus? :)

            Don’t know what that has to do with foreign policy though,

          • Tbone

            I think. Maybe Herman would know?

  • Snertly

    So the proper defense of Hermann Cain’s knowledge of global politics being about fifty years out of data is “Don’t worry! Democrats are stupid, too!”

    This is not a reassuring defense.

    By the by, regarding “those meddlesome voters” have you forgotten the many studies showing that the greater the number of voters who make it to the polls, the more likely the winner is a Democrat? What do you think Real Voter ID is all about?

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      The point of Voter-ID is to make sure legally registered voters as oppossed to non-citizens make it to the polls. I get the feeling that you already knew that.

      Democrats also have a history of doing better when more voters show up to several different precincts as well.

  • ihavehadit

    in their blind support of this man. No matter what he does, or what he says, they make excuses for him. They are not just devoted like the Ron Paul supporters but rather they are vicious and belittling of any other candidates and their supporters. I will take a Ron Paul supporter any day over a Cain supporter. At least they make sense. Cain doesn’t have a clue about how to run a government. People need to check out his business record at God Fathers Pizza. He took over they were Number 5 in the business, and had over 900 stores, when he left they were Number 11 and had less than 500 stores. Many people lost their jobs, how is that good management. The man can not talk about foreign policy without making a major blunder. This man is dangerous. Every bit as inexperienced as the Zero in their now.