Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 01, 2021

To Counter U.S. Hostility China Moves Towards People Centered Policies

In December 2001 China became a member of the World Trade Organization. That opened new markets for China's industry and attracted a lot of foreign investment.

The growth in GDP that China has achieved since is breathtaking.


This development allowed China to make enormous investments in infrastructure. It also generated the resources necessary to eliminate poverty.

It is no coincidence that this development happened while the U.S. was wasting money on wars in the Middle East. As the U.S. is now step by step retreating from those wars to confront China the country needs to prepare itself for the new environment.

The introduction of more and more capitalistic features into China's economy over the last 20 years has created imbalances. Business tried to ignore or to gain influence over government structures and regulations. Companies abused their workers. Speculation by rich people created bubbles in the housing markets. Cultural excesses that emphasized individualism threatened national unity.

These imbalances let the description of China's economy as 'socialism with Chinese characteristics' look empty. Over the long run they would lead to dissatisfaction of a wide range of the public with the ruling political establishment. It was high time to eliminated the excesses the ultra fast development had created.

The government had to act to avoid future internal conflicts. Since the end of last year it has done so with the same efficiency that allowed it to stop and eliminate Covid-19 outbreaks. It does this ruthlessly without regards to stock values or investor interests.

Some six weeks ago I argued against Stephen S. Roach's take on new Chinese regulations and described why the wider public in China will not care about 'investors' and will support those steps.

Since then the regulation campaign has continued with astonishing speed and breath. Here is a collection of headlines, published since my last take, that detail the development and the flood of new regulations and laws designed to set things right while keeping China's economic growth going.

The new slogan for this era is now 'common prosperity', a policy that will reduce large wealth gaps while keeping reasonable monetary incentives and the market economy alive to allow for further development.

A pamphlet, written by a minor Maoist figure, that justifies these measures and puts them into a larger political context was widely published by Communist Party organs:

A commentary published widely in Chinese state-run media described President Xi Jinping’s regulatory crackdown as a “profound revolution” sweeping the country and warned that anyone who resisted would face punishment.

“This is a return from the capital group to the masses of the people, and this is a transformation from capital-centered to people-centered,” the commentary said, adding that it marked a return to the original intention of the Communist Party. “Therefore, this is a political change, and the people are becoming the main body of this change again, and all those who block this people-centered change will be discarded.”

The author then goes on to set the 'profound transformation' into a wider, geopolitical context:

“China is currently facing an increasingly severe and complex international environment. The US has implemented military threats, economic and technological blockades, financial strikes and political and diplomatic siege against China,” Li wrote.

“The US has also launched biological warfare, cyber warfare and public opinion against China.”

“If we still have to rely on big capitalists as the main force of anti-imperialist and anti-hegemonism, or still cooperate to the US’ ‘tittytainment’ strategy, our young people will lose their strong and masculine vibes and we will collapse like the Soviet Union before we are attacked,” he said, claiming that the US had launched a color revolution against China through different channels.

The “profound transformation” underway in China aimed to respond to the US’ brutal and ferocious attacks as well as the current complicated international situation, he said.

The curbs on the entertainment sector were far from adequate as ordinary workers and people should become the main characters on screens. People would benefit from the “common prosperity” goal after the education, medical and property sectors were reformed, he wrote.

While this sounds like Culture Revolution 2.0 it is assured that there will be no rampages of Maoist students through libraries or reeducation camps for party members.

Predatory capitalist George Soros claims in the Financial Times that these moves it will doom China's economy. (See Michael Hudson's counter here.) But people who, like Soros, argue against strong regulations forget that there are would be no markets without them. Companies that only look at shareholder values are not sound and do not allow for a healthy society. Just look Boeing and at the homeless camps in U.S. cities.

Aside from the ideological underpinning the new regulatory moves are populist. The masses will like them. They guarantee President Xi Jinping's reelection at next year's national party congress.

They will strengthen China's unity in its competition with the United States.

Posted by b on September 1, 2021 at 17:49 UTC | Permalink

« previous page

China prioritizes its People population. USA prioritizes its Dollar population.

Posted by: mijj | Sep 2 2021 9:47 utc | 101

# 70

India is an amalgamation of a lot of sub-cultures, each state/province has its own language, so it has been difficult for Indians to think of themselves as a monolithic bloc of people.. the ruling Fascists are trying to achieve that through the trope of "Hindu-ness" or "Hindutva".. But, sadly the rulers and the opposition Congress party treat China with suspicion.. and trust the West more.. Then there are the ruling classes, who want to hold on to their riches from centuries of caste-based oppression.. there is a vast underclass still uneducated.. the ruling class mercilessly beats down any attempts at liberation.. there are oligarchs, and major media are owned by powerful private groups.. Pakistan/Kashmir is one tool to always distract the people from the real issues.. another popular distraction is the 'otherness' fear using the 'Hindu vs Muslim' card.. but the poor have been suffering greatly, and now even the middle classes are feeling the heat.. farmers are protesting against pro-capitalist policies.. there have been 'long marches' by farmers and peasants.. there are signs of a churning, but it will take at least a couple of generations for the people to truly arise..

Posted by: R | Sep 2 2021 9:52 utc | 102

re: my post @100 above

That wasn't too hard. China already had some rather strict regulations in place to reduce gaming addiction and gambling aspects of games including gacha systems. This would explain why gacha systems in games produced in China have not seemed as exploitative and raised the kinds of shit storms that Japanese and American loot box and gacha games have.

Basically, the regulatory changes in China will not have that much impact on the most egregiously exploitative games seen in the West because China hasn't been responsible for those games in the first place... well, Taiwan is part of China but they are rogue at the moment so that doesn't count.

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 2 2021 10:06 utc | 103

ChiNazis There, I said it. Sure, the policies are great. Who wants to live there? Raise your hand.

I wouldn't mind spending a few months of the year there. It is pretty sweet.

If I were a younger man, I would definitely gone there. It is the new land of opportunity.

You should visit. Travel broadens a narrow mind.

Posted by: littlereddot | Sep 2 2021 10:56 utc | 104

Just a question.

Can anyone elucidate how different the changes in China outlined in the regulations b has listed and deemed to be 'for the people' would look if Xi's primary purpose was to retain & consolidate power in China, rather than to "serve the people"? I cannot for me these laws serve either end equally well.

Yeah maybe I'm cynical but imo China is just too big and too diverse to be deemed a single nation. Yep, yep - as are many/most other nations dotted about this old rock. Like amerika China has a provincial or state government system which suffers from the same issues as the national government, the states are overly centralised with power far too concentrated to allow decision making by the people most affected by that decision, although this can work out OK is a handful of instances, it also encourages corruption as well as a well worn path for careerists. For me socialism IS about the dictatorship of the proletariat. For that to occur decisions must be made free of the noise of interested but irrelevant parties, e.g. politicians aka self dubbed *leaders*.

China has come a long way this century meaning that just like most other places in the world, China's people are well informed enough to be able to make their own calls. Leaders, initially appointed because they spoke the 'word of god' and later because they were the only types with the time & knowledge to comprehend all the issues, are surplus to requirements nowadays.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Sep 2 2021 11:18 utc | 105

Max @ 26 What are U$A’s options to transcend and succeed in the global arena?
and Debsisdead @105.. what would the USA look like if it were organized to serve its domestic governed.. ?

Every American I know wants their government to prevent any person or
entity from conducting, for profit or not, any commercial, industrial,
espionage, security, business, banking, brokerage or governmental
activity, of any kind, outside of continental America.

Sovereignty is a two way street: nothing goes in, nothing goes out.

There is no domestic justification for a government, or those it governs,
to allow foreign persons to benefit from the domestic governed or its
converse there is no domestic interest in a government which seeks, or
which allows those it governs, to infringe, improve, exploit, bother
or burden a foreign anything. I think China is well aware of this concern.

Global interest are not American Interest..All foreign business is
un-american.. but the office of the President of the United States was
created by Aristocrats, who formulated the constitution of the USA.
It is these Aristocrats who have operated the USA since the 1789
start of operations. The purpose of that Aristocracy has been to mirror
the British Empire; to establish the USA as a participant in the
Global environment with indifference to non commercial and domestic
American business interest.

The Aristocrat designers never intended to limit the constitution they
penned in Philadelphia to domestic America or to produce from their governing
activities improved quality of domestic life for Americans, except as
such improvement might come about as byproduct of the commercial and
industrial activities of those the constitution was designed to serve.

The design produced by Aristocrats assists, promotes and facilitates the
global interest of the Oligarch. It projects a government tailored by the
Oligarch for the oligarch. The Oligarch direct government to facilitate the
needs of capitalism, often at the expense of the welfare of Americans.

Understanding purpose explains much of the design, understanding design,
explains much of the result produced by those who execute the design.

Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution of the USA.
1(0). is about how the President is elected.

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution of the USA.
(1). makes President CIE of Army, Navy & Militia; grants power to pardon
(2). grants Treaty power & appointment power over Ambassadors public
ministers, consuls, Supreme Court Judges, Officers of USA,
(3). grants power to fill All Vacancies, during recess of the Senate.

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution of the USA.
Commands President deliver State of Union, recommend measures
for Senate consideration; receive Ambassadors/Public Ministers,
execute faithfully the laws, and Grants power to convene &
adjourn either or both houses of Congress, and to Commission all U.S. Officers.

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution of the USA.
Threatens removal from office if convicted after impeachment for Treason,
Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Posted by: snake | Sep 2 2021 12:18 utc | 106

The Global Times has already clarified the issue in its English version:

West media smears misread China’s market regulation: Global Times editorial

It really is a storm in a teacup. Some half-dozen garage journalists machine translated some obscure commentary by a CPC militant and cherry-picked the one or two bombastic terms in order to ape the Red Scare. It may or may not have been induced/stimulated by Soros' tweet (which predates the commentary and his FT article), but it doesn't matter in the great scheme of things.

I'll just leave here two key excerpts from the article, because I know most of you won't read it:

China's recent market interventions and policy adjustments enjoy deep-seated support from the country's public opinion. They respond to real problems and people's genuine wishes. The test for China is how to accomplish the tasks and create long-term dividends for the Chinese society.


China has been at the forefront of developing countries, and we are determined to take a modernization path that is different from that of capitalism.

I also recommend paying special attention to the two last paragraphs. The whole concept of concrete reality (results are what matter; we need to do this and that; we need to go from point A to point B) is pure Marxism, you'll absolutely never see anything even close to this in the West.


@ all

I notice people here are still seeing the ghost of orientalism.

The CPC is a legitimate communist party. Its break up with the USSR happened due to fundamental disagreements with the VKP(B) in the Comintern (Third International). It is an internationalist party, which comes from China.

I highly recommend everybody to read this document:

The CPC: Its Mission and Contributions

In this text, you won't see one mention of Confucius or Confucianism. But you'll see many mentions (including an entire chapter) on Marxism and Marxism-Leninism. Last time I checked, Marx and Engels were not Chinese.

The argument that the CPC are a bunch of closeted orientalists who read the Chinese philosophers and consult the I Ching is risible. It is an extremely falsified vision of China that comes from the times of the Western social-democrats of the 1910-1920s, and was only perpetuated and reinforced during the post-war period after the victory of the CPC. It is a cheap argument used by Western Marxists and their derivations used in order to keep the monopoly of universality to the West, and only helps the cause of the liberals and neocons in their anti-communist crusade. It is pathetic, really, because this big lies are, most of the time, perpetuated simply because some Western Marxist wants to keep his academic prestige/job in his cushy university job. Meanwhile, the average Joe in the West perpetuates this fallacy simply because he wants to sleep better at night.

Posted by: vk | Sep 2 2021 12:21 utc | 107

Sushi @Sep2 6:01 #88:

... capitalist hyenas ... better not to dignify venal conduct by giving it a gloss which suggests some intellectual underpinning.

I think I address the 'hyena' aspect when I talk about supremacist mindset. 'Hyena' is certainly a more visceral term for that.

Capitalism is also an "intellectual underpinning", isn't it? Whereas 'hyenas' are about POWER. Hyenas don't just eat, they conspire with other hyenas to ensure that their consumption is not interrupted.

I think those that direct us to mere greed as the root cause of our problems are neglecting (deliberately?) the group power of the hyenas that feed off the carcass of democratic governance.

'Hyenas' recognize and respect other 'hyenas'. The rest of us are fair game.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 2 2021 13:21 utc | 108

Grieved @Sep2 3:46 #79:

... this progression in China is NOT the second Cultural Revolution (CR)

Yes, "cultural revolution" is an exaggeration.

But it is consistent with the prior 'revolution'.

China strengthens its 'cultural revolution' while the West appears stuck in a 'cultural devolution'. I anticipate that culture will return with a veagence in West in the form of 'conservative values' - values that (conveniently) reinforce oligarchy.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Sep 2 2021 13:32 utc | 109

As impressive as Chinese GDP growth is it's worth mentioning that in 2021, China still only has a GDP of 73% of US GDP. $16.6 trillion v. $22.6 trillion.

Nearly 60% of USGDP is financial flows.

If one compares industrial production, the Chinese economy is as of today, more than twice the size of the US economy.

Wake up!


Posted by: Dr. George W Oprisko | Sep 2 2021 13:51 utc | 110

Cadence calls | Sep 2 2021 7:13 utc | 93

Most prefer their own country's culture whatever that may be. Xi has been quite open about calling their system communism with Chinese characteristics. For me China is a country with very high population density whereas Australia has a very low population density. There is a vast difference in culture regardless of the system of governance of the two cultures. A vast difference in language both written and spoken.

To go and see other countries and cultures, get an understanding of them - there's always something useful to learn, to gain the understanding that no one culture is best, and that no one size fits all.

It was only late in life I traveled outside my own country and culture and I wish I could have done more of that.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Sep 2 2021 14:14 utc | 111


I thought the Nazis already cleansed your type of gays in france, the pansey LGBT libtard faggot types who even manages to have whiny notions like a a Vichy french crying cu*nt getting railed by a powerful German cock

Posted by: German Muscle | Sep 2 2021 14:21 utc | 112

Debsisdead @105

Can anyone elucidate how different the changes in China outlined in the regulations b has listed and deemed to be 'for the people' would look if Xi's primary purpose was to retain & consolidate power in China...

If you mean “retain and consolidate the power in China” to the Communist Party (all hundred million of them and their fellow travelers) then there is no difference. The alternative is for power to be consolidated into the hands of capitalist scum like Jeff Bezos, Jack Ma, and George Soros.

It would be nice to have stateless anarchy, and ponies too! I think it would be inadvisable for any peoples to let their states become too weak while the evil Empire of Chaos still exists, though. Libya is an example of what happens to a country where an idealistic leadership tries to disperse state power to the population while the hyena packs described by Sushi above still roam the globe looking for easy targets. The USA and global capitalism must be gone before the ChiComs can relax and let the state begin to wither away.

So yeah, stateless anarchy is a nice idea and all, but there are a few more things that must be accomplished before even considering putting it on the to-do list. What China is doing now is one of those things.

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 2 2021 14:54 utc | 113

vk @ 107... that's a lot of material. I'm willing to read it if you first concisely explain to me what "orientalism" means aside from "racist empire academic". A link will do, hopefully not WikiP.

We could trade information. Did you know Canada has around 700K NEETS? These are people not looking for work, education or training. That's the claim anyways. I personally feel you should be doing one or the four, formally or not, or you really are a "useless eater".

What's the fourth? Work, Education, Training, Child rearing. The latter is usually omitted as it is these days considered useful occupation, kids don't raise themselves, unless you are living in 1960. I add it for emphasis.

Anyway, in a civilized society they are forced to live in poverty, or their parent's basements ;-), sometimes both. That's the penalty, a life of poverty.

What's the CPC line on that anyways? Starvation or jail I would assume.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 15:04 utc | 114

@Posted by: vk | Sep 2 2021 12:21 utc | 107

I greatly enjoy your insights, but it seems that you have blinkers when it comes to "Socialism with Chinese characteristics". China didn't start in 1949 and of course the CCP will be affected by the intellectual and philosophical traditions of China. And of course the official document of the CCP is not going to mention anything but communism! Xi himself quotes Confucius, and much of the ways in which the CCP operate mirror those of a Legalist/Confucion state - minus the feudalism. This does not mean that they are not communist, but saying that the previous 2,000+ years of Chinese history is irrelevant to the CCP is not correct - and pushing over straw men does not change that. China is Chinese and not Western and is implementing its own path - certainly not blindly following one of the "universalist" Western projects.

Posted by: Roger | Sep 2 2021 15:13 utc | 115

David G Horsman @114

China has tons of NEETs, but most are like NEETs anywhere else and leech off their parents. Studies in China show the NEET rate is almost 8%.

China’s incarceration rate is extremely low, only 121 per 100,000 population as compared with America’s 639 per, so I doubt anyone in China is being locked up for being a NEET.

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 2 2021 15:28 utc | 116

"It is no coincidence that this development happened while the U.S. was wasting money on wars"

That is how Spain wasted its Empire and its wealth when it was the most powerful European country. All this has happened before, and has been fully explained in detailed studies, books, and courses. Yet we just did it again anyway.

Posted by: Mark Thomason | Sep 2 2021 15:38 utc | 117

@ Posted by: Roger | Sep 2 2021 15:13 utc | 116

But that logic is applicable to the West, too. We could easily revert your argument to state that China has the true Marxism and the West has a failed version of Marxism - to be called "Western Marxism". At least this version of the narrative can claim to have empirical backing, because the revolution in China was the victorious one.

Nobody claims German society is Kantian, Schopenhauerian or Nietzschean. Nobody claims France is Rousseaunian, Diderotian or Montesquienian. The European Left don't call their socialism or social-democracy "socialism with Western/European characteristics". The West is simply considered to be inevitable, universal - the rest of the world being anomalies or variations of the universal. My argument is Western leftists - specially Western Marxists - should be a little more humble and recognize that, if we look at the achievements, they are the anomaly, not the CPC.


@ Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 15:04 utc | 115

Orientalism is the term colloquially used to designate what essentially is the intellectual version of racism towards Asia by the West. It usually delves into the preconception that the Asian is extremely superstitious and deceives people with sorcery, divination and enchantments. It may or may not be accompanied by some colorful cultural illustrations (weird food, weird medicine, weird clothing, etc.). In opposition to the superstitious and mystic Asiatic man, orientalists like to oppose the rational, scientific and objective Western man.

It's important to state that, during the Roman times, Asiatics were basically synonymous with Greek. They were basically referring to the Balkan Peninsula, Anatolia (Asia Minor or simply Asia) and Egypt. The Chinese were considered to be their equals, the great empire that mirrored them in the East. The "racism" or orientalism was only extrapolated to China after it was defeated and colonized during and after the Opium Wars.


@ Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 2 2021 14:54 utc | 114

We don't have to imagine how a world with the anarchists conquering power would be. We have a concrete case of study in the case of Republican Spain.

Long story short, the anarchists quickly devolved into tribal groupings - each one taking care of, in many cases, one single building - and started to literally kill each other. Franco didn't have to do much to reconquer Spain.

There's a reason Anarchism disappeared from the face of the Earth.

Posted by: vk | Sep 2 2021 15:43 utc | 118

@Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 15:04 utc | 115

"What's the CPC line on that anyways? Starvation or jail I would assume."

A nice line in smears and bigotry for the morning! Anyone can be a NEET (not in employment, education or training) if they have well off (or not even well off) parents who are willing to support your lazy ass, and there are lots of those in China it seems. A great example, he is certainly not being jailed or starved:

If you actually need or want work, then the CPC is focused on upgrading the economy to provide better and better jobs - unlike the West with the increasing precariousness of work and falling wages in real terms. They also did a massive roll out of a national healthcare system in the past 15 years, and all those high speed trains for well off slackers to wander around China aimlessly in.

In North America there are also a lot of utterly useless degree programs for "parking" grown up children who will then graduate into the Barista ranks - communication studies seeming to be the biggest of these or perhaps media studies at Columbia for US$70k per year! Plus of course the diploma mills. North America has been through 40 years of neoliberal destruction of much of the career and life paths of the young, as well as any sense of national cohesiveness and mission, the result is a large chunk of the young being aimless and lost - in many cases being NEET (in many cases they have "off the books" jobs) is psychologically accepting the shitty world that they have inherited. Unless my parents were very well off in US or Canadian terms, if I were 20 I would see a much rosier future in China than in the US if I was willing to work for it.

Posted by: Roger | Sep 2 2021 15:46 utc | 119

vk @119

Agreed. A great deal more societal development is needed before allowing the state to “wither away” is advisable.

Posted by: William Gruff | Sep 2 2021 15:52 utc | 120

@Posted by: vk | Sep 2 2021 15:43 utc | 119

I have no problem with Western Marxists needing to be more humble in the face of China's success. Also, with seeing the laziness, Eurocentrism and Orientalism of many mainstream Western academics when they analyze China (in many cases their work does not even rise to the level of "analysis", more the spewing of intellectual tripe and worn out tropes).

China has always been open to the integration of many different philosophies, as during the Tang Dynasty with combining aspects of Legalism, Confucianism, Taoism etc. It has never been pedantic about such things. China took the insights of Marx and Engels (and Lenin etc.) and integrated them with their own philosophical insights and cultural milieu into a hybrid - whatever you want to call it. This was the end result of the vibrant philosophical reimagining driven by the Century of Humiliation. Xi Jinping himself has stated that the CPC will take the beneficial elements of other philosophies (including liberalism) and blend them with its own, being careful to not incorporate the harmful elements of those philosophies. We can see a bit of that "pruning"of harmful elements being carried out currently.

Westerners don't call it "Marxism with European characteristics" or "Liberalism with American characteristics" because they consider themselves to be the centre of the world, from which all others can learn the "universalist" paths to civilizational perfection.

Posted by: Roger | Sep 2 2021 16:01 utc | 121

Confucianism is not an abstract, academic pursuit like Kant, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche or even Montesquieu, Diderot and Rousseau. Confucianism may not take the same form as religions are expected to have in Europe etc. But Confucianism is very much a religious/cultural movement, the high-minded non-denominational version held by elites who think the popular superstition is only to be expected in the lowers forms...but that at least their hearts are in the right place.
There is no philosophical critique of superstition in Confucianism, only a bland assumption that good manners forbid being so rude as to call folly by its name, and good governance requires lip service to the prejudices of the rabble. (You may think "only" radically underestimates the significance. I disagree.)

Posted by: steven t johnson | Sep 2 2021 16:05 utc | 122

Posted by: Roger | Sep 2 2021 15:46 utc | 120

Yes, I agree, if we do not have a "brain drain" going on here already, we soon will. Nobody here left worth working for, unless all you care about is the money. Never a shortage of those.

Posted by: Bemildred | Sep 2 2021 16:09 utc | 123

One final note, on the word "democracy". I suggest it makes things much easier if we use the word "representative" instead.
Fact is, no one wants democracy. What anybody wants is good representative government.
Posted by: Grieved | Sep 2 2021 3:47 utc | 80

It is a mistake to try to separate the words "democracy" and "representative" - they are two sides of the same coin, and either is meaningless babble without the other. That said, however, "democracy" is the higher term because "representative" is included entirely within it but not vice-versa.

Democracy means government by the people (often expressed to be "of the people, by the people and for the people"). That necessarily entails such government acting as representative of the people.

Even if you take a government by a "benevolent dictator" - and the obvious example that springs to my mind is Anand Panyarachun - such a "benevolent dictator" is only benevolent to the extent that he was acting as representative of the people. [Anand Panyarachun was appointed interim Prime Minister of Thailand twice in 1991-1992, the first time briefly - in error - by the brutal executor of a military coup General Suchinda Khraprayoun, and the second time - by popular demand and against his own wishes - a year later after the next "elected" government collapsed. I won't go into details here now because it would make this comment too long but it is worth reading up on. There are many aspects of interest to the current question. Many have described him as the most democratic prime minister in Thailand's history, which in most important respects is true. He was a very modest but highly able and intelligent man who reluctantly accepted the post, and he pushed through many difficult leglislative changes vitally needed by society and for the long term benefit of society.]

Most people in the west believe western propaganda that democracy = elections, because elections are the trick the west uses to hoodwink idiots into believing they have "democracy" (or "representative democracy"), but it is trickery because it is neither democracy nor true representation. Elections have nothing to do with democracy, EXCEPT and to the extent that they are one way of deriving the selection of "representatives" to do the representation. If the election process is mis-representative then the representation which results will necessarily also be mis-representative (for example, the election candidate mis-representing his interests and intentions to voters, media mis-representing candidates and issues, oligarchs bribing candidates before and after election, electoral enticements to the voters, the election process itself being fraudulently manipulated, etc etc). Mis-representing the meaning of democracy and the significance of the electoral process is also a crucial part of the de-democratisation.

It would be foolish and incorrect to claim that democracy must be one particular electoral system and that any other structure is not democracy: democracy can take many different forms and arise in many different ways, but the only important defining characteristics are (a) that it represents the people, and (b) that it tries to benefit the people. The only characteristic necessary and sufficient to MEASURE the extent of democracy is the end result - are the benefits of the people increased or decreased (and why), and do the people have the ability to change policy or not. Structurally different electoral systems have different advantages and disadvantages (and those advantages and disadvantages advantage different parties and in different circumstances), but as a generality it is not possible to say that such-and-such an electoral system is democratic while another is not - they are all logically valid, but their advantages and disadvantages apply unequally to different perspectives and different interest groups (consequently, those with the power to do so always select whichever system benefits their interests).

In the west voters have virtually no ability to influence government policy, whereas in China ordinary citizens have virtually unlimited ability to change government policy - not just through election of local officials and committees but especially through protests, complaints, criticisms, blogs etc - all the things that are totally ineffective in the west.

Posted by: BM | Sep 2 2021 16:46 utc | 124

interesting conversations.. i would like to reemphasize peter au's @112 comment up above...

"...go and see other countries and cultures, get an understanding of them - there's always something useful to learn, to gain the understanding that no one culture is best, and that no one size fits all."

no truer words have been spoken.... as i have said before, some of the comments are more a reflection on the person talking, then anything else...

Posted by: james | Sep 2 2021 16:49 utc | 125

"Last time I checked, Marx and Engels were not Chinese."
That's not true VK... they were wearing white face.
So global times is heavily moderated possibly? New commentators usually get moderated so I can't immediately tell.
As a semi retired Commiedian troll I generally get spam checked. Call it a professional risk.

Anyways I was worried about ending up on yet another list so I went there and quoted you instead.

I hope that was okay...and please note I DID apologize later vk. That should count for something.

Anyways... (Normally I continue at some length)

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 17:02 utc | 126

The most satisfying moment is to read Soros whining about China not doing the "right" things.

George: keep it up and whine more, before you go belly-up like a goldfish - I am going to miss you. The world needs more entertainment and negative education from your hypocrisy and stupidity.

Posted by: d dan | Sep 2 2021 17:04 utc | 127

Also. I forgot something. There are disclosure requirements that are project related.
I am supposed to tell you that I am a Russian Ukrainian Menonite Canadian spy.

We're on the watch list. Google us or something. But if you want to meet face to face please allow time for shipping container to come back.

I'll be in the one making all that noise.
(Source: 1000 Ways to Die)

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 17:08 utc | 128

@Cadence calls (94)

There, I said it.
Sure, the policies are great.
Who wants to live there?
Raise your hand.

Don’t everybody jump up at once."

Actually, surveys show that people living in China are far more optimistic about their futures than people living in the U.S. Also, the former are more likely to regard their government as "democratic" than the latter. As an American, I do not consider our political system as remotely democratic. Rather, it is oligarchic, something that China is trying not to become.

Posted by: Rob | Sep 2 2021 17:43 utc | 129

@ snake (#107), thanks for your perspective. Agree on the dream of an empire and “government”. This is the reason I refer to it as an ‘administration’. Similarly, as a protest, I refer to our nation as the ‘U$A’. If one doesn’t support what the administrations is doing then they need to protest in a symbolic and peaceful way. If they don’t then they are part of the problem. Be part of the solution to build a better nation.

Our “Declaration of Independence” clearly states: “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. ”

It is time that the governed take back the power to create money from the administration and create a sovereign monetary authority. This way the administration will come to the governed for money. Then the populace will have a seat at the table and not be on the menu.

What is the existing REALITY in the U$A?
Most Americans are subjects of the Financial Empire and controlled by the following ENSLAVEMENT plan:

“We create all money out of thin air through your Central-Private banking system and lend it to you and your government & businesses, then you pay us interest on that money forever. We own your traitorous puppet politicians because they depend on us for campaign funds. We stage false flags all over the world in order to drag you into totally unnecessary wars based on lies, so you’ll have to blow huge percentage of your money and resources with the defense contractors we own, so you can fight our enemies for us and steal resources on our behalf. And finally, we control your education system and own your media outlets in order to keep you totally in the dark, as we systematically loot and destroy your country, en route to your ultimate enslavement. Those are the elements of our plan. Any questions?”

In the U$A, there are three main blocks: (Inter)national Oligarchy, Administration and Populace. How will the populace achieve happiness and economic security? Are you living in a wealth or debt generation system? Are you free or enslaved? If the latter, what is your plan to achieve freedom & build a better nation & world? An enlightened citizenry is indispensable for the proper functioning of a republic.

“The rise of the Financial Empire,”

Posted by: Max | Sep 2 2021 18:28 utc | 130

In case it hasn't been posted anywhere here, here is the Michael Hudson takedown of Soros"

Posted by: Billosky | Sep 2 2021 18:51 utc | 131

BM 124

Democracy now seems to mean voting a group to the leadership from a number of choices. Once they are voted into power, they are absolute rulers until some other group are voted into power who then become absolute rulers.
The general meaning of the word democracy now is that a leader or leadership group is voted in to office to be absolute ruler for a fixed period of time until the next election occurs.

I very much agree with Grieved on that difference between representation and democracy. To me, how a country's leadership comes to power is totally immaterial. I have commented a few times on the forum that throughout history, a good leader is one that brings peace and prosperity to the people.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Sep 2 2021 19:29 utc | 132

First off thanks very much for William, vk and Roger.

"For me socialism IS about the dictatorship of the proletariat."
- Debsisdead @ 106. Yeah sure. Me too, but I am troubled by that.

Btw, At first I was sad you lost your wife... but now I know better. ;-)

You have a similar problem with democracy do you not? And that's a thing often put forward by rulers and liberals both.

And it is a problem contained within a solution isn't it? You can never do one thing after all. It can't be ignored. Ignorance is deadly.

So ideologically I am zeroed in on minority rights frequently. Lacking a term, locally autonomous socialism could "work" in theory; to the extent that minorities can localize themselves perhaps.

Ultimately you can empower even the voter that lacks time. But if you are unintelligent and ugly it appears you are truly f**ked regardless of your ethnicity. How would I empower them?

That's a more difficult problem. I have heard the dictatorship of the proletariat referred to as the tyranny of the majority. Whatever the label it has a utopian smell.

So what then is the technology required to address all this and establish a level playing field? Additionally, can a legal version exist? Imagine the pushback.

Most of all, what would result from that?
Democracy, Peace and Freedom in that Order. That reeks of an ideology because it is one. Aren't they all?

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 19:35 utc | 133

@ Peter AU1 | Sep 2 2021 19:29 utc | 132 who wrote

To me, how a country's leadership comes to power is totally immaterial. I have commented a few times on the forum that throughout history, a good leader is one that brings peace and prosperity to the people.

It is hard to argue against peace and prosperity but I think that the meritocracy that fuels Chinese leadership power is material when compared to Hand, The Invisible leadership power of the West.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Sep 2 2021 19:38 utc | 134

"'. I anticipate that culture will return with a veagence in West in the form of 'conservative values' - values that (conveniently) reinforce oligarchy."
Jackrabbit @ 110 that is what Trump started but remains far from finished.

This has happened many times before. We have been here before.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 19:58 utc | 135

"Wake up!"
Dr. George W Oprisko @ 111 Look doc, if I wake up do I have to be woke? Not a chance doc. I'll grant you the rest of that tho.

And could someone please tell me what INDY means in this context? That's new. I've seen it somewhere else.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 20:04 utc | 136

German Muscle @ 113 I suggest not sharing that on Facebook with other Germans. Just a tip.

Everyone else, what the hell was that? I'm not policing but totally perplexed.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 20:10 utc | 137

"There's a reason Anarchism disappeared from the face of the Earth."
vk @ 119
From what I could see, in the US, they rebranded themselves as libertarians. Same shit different pile of propaganda.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 21:11 utc | 138

Me @ 115
"What's the CPC line on that anyways? Starvation or jail I would assume."
Roger @ 120
"A nice line in smears and bigotry for the morning!"
I will aim to be less provocative if that is offensive. That's how capitalism works after all and I was thinking about something else.

I primarily look for red flag and while the system is strong what is meant by"discarding people"? That's given the party's sentiment not any poll results.

I am not trying to be "clever" here. I want an answer.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 21:31 utc | 139

james @ 125 well that's frequently not an option to the disabled James but great advice.

I am satisfied with my inquiries regarding China and read everything. That said, maintaining a balance in this multipolar world means helping our good friend Mr. Putin.

And I think that middle finger should be clear enough to the Canadian government. I don't assist fascist regimes of any sort. They need to slow their roll.

When I finish my childcare gig (day off today) I am very publically go about my own business.

It's a political thing. Heck, I am probably among folks that would get the idea. So let me try...

Would you all like to see my medical history... (Ie again...) Why all sorts of weirdos look at it already. I don't mind. We could share...

....... nobody gets it but me... It's a political statement damn it!

(Don't worry, I wouldn't flood the board here)

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 21:49 utc | 140


I think a judgment using peace and prosperity as the gauge is merit based. Russia, in its presidential and military circle is very much merit based. I always wonder how much more prosperous would the Russian people would be now if they did not have to put so much productivity into defense.
Putin has pulled the Russian people out of the poverty of the 90's under constant attack or threat of attack in the financial information and military spheres.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Sep 2 2021 22:07 utc | 141

"I greatly enjoy your insights, but it seems that you have blinkers when it comes to "Socialism with Chinese characteristics". China didn't start in 1949 and of course the CCP will be affected by the intellectual and philosophical traditions of China."

Hi Roger @ 116, You wouldn't believe the rat holes I am getting sucked down trying to research China.

I had no idea what "sissy pants" were but it appears the women in China love covert and implied male-male romance on TV. Similarly to Russia such broadcasts are banned.

And yes, if you are the adventurous sort of guy, you can get sissy pants and panties as well. Who knew? More importantly, why would I or China care? They do though. Oddly, I assume most of this is made in China so go figure.

Then there's the whole issue of children's names being regulated. I pointed out that in NA naming your kid "Adolph Hitler Smith" might get you a visit from child protection whereas in China Muslim ("overly religious") names are banned. I am not sure what to make of that.

While I am certainly centered on human rights and individualism vs collectivism within ideology (for the moment) I am not finding this very helpful. Nnot at all really.

Here's my problem Roger. I don't think Xi or Putin care what we in the west think, but they do care what their own people think. A lot. But what form does that "caring" take? How much can I trust these much more substantial links and citations I find here beyond their merely being state propaganda? I am a little uneasy about my lack of information coming from within the country at this point.

Is the solution to machine translate Chinese and Russian social media? I am looking commentary from actual people that live there. How biased are ex-pat communities going to be? Where can you get polling data that isn't manipulated?

I am mainly interested in Russia, and it took 4 years to decide that, but going forward these are the questions I must answer one way or another. What I am going to do is go back to work with some clear plan selected.

"I must ponder my fate." What that really means from a cognitive science perspective is that I have already made an emotionally loaded choice and am now going about the task of rationalizing my "decision".

What I would like to point out is that continuous knowledge of process has little influence on the outcome. Notably, a comedian playing a Russian spy (troll) might be expected to, as an analyst, have an exceptionally good case for selecting Russia.

I did consult the President of The Association of Assassinated Canadian Scientists but he did not comment. Worse, I am still waiting for my application to be approved. That seems a bit odd. Did they finally get Eddie or did he run out of beer? Lazy Canadians. What can you do?

Oh... I was just asking about NEETS. I am entirely not invested with them, incels, antifa, and all them terrorists republicans (eye roll). I am invested in The Zietgiest Movement if they ever get around to admitting they too have an ideology. As we all do.

And for the record folks, it was an anarchist that did an insightful in depth analysis on what their ideology is, regardless of their awareness of it or desire to be inclusive of people of all beliefs. That's an honest conversation that has to take place is it not?

So politically, my departure from TZM is a statement that someone has to go about doing the science the continually talk about or it is nothing but a utopian dream. It's not that they lack good academics. It's a question or how would it ever occur.

Maybe you all could tell me. I expect a massive pushback, probably quite violent, should any anarchist, socialist or progressive movement become dominant. I am not saying it would succeed, but would it even be able to establish itself in the G7i or G20?

While I too work within a nonviolent paradigm I do not have projections that result in a win. I have a plan I selected that is an edge case that could win... if fish could fly.

The alternative is that you burn it all down. I know that is not what anarchism means as an ideology, but it also doesn't qualify as nihilism even if that motivates it. What are violent destructive anarchists called?

Hmmmm. These would also be fascist sympathizers wouldn't they? I have numerous questions.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 22:29 utc | 142

@ German Muscle | Sep 2 2021 14:21 utc | 113:

I'm sure I speak for the vast majority of barflies -- well, maybe just for myself -- when I express my self-abasing worship of your massive, lengthy, and girthy Teutonic cock. What a shame there wasn't enough room on it for even a tiny swastika. But no matter; enough of the barflies here will be happy to offer it the adulation it so richly deserves. After all, we don't cotton to no fags here.

Posted by: corvo | Sep 3 2021 0:30 utc | 143

India is an amalgamation of a lot of sub-cultures, each state/province has its own language, so it has been difficult for Indians to think of themselves as a monolithic bloc of people.. the ruling Fascists are trying to achieve that through the trope of "Hindu-ness" or "Hindutva"

Posted by: R | Sep 2 2021 9:52 utc | 103

I have a little experience on that. From personal contacts, there is a big difference with the Brahmin tradition that is very education oriented, personally uptight, and in some ways more traditional -- and when you go to Bharata, they can be VERY traditional, while guys from merchant castes are more often easy going and culturally very open minded. But this stereotype from academic setting does not seem to include motel operators reverently (if discretely) displaying the visage of Lord Ganesha.

One contrast from my single visit to Bharata: hard to find less scrupulous people than tricycle drivers (cheap taxis). On the other end of the spectrum, lacking a laptop at the time I was checking news and e-mail in an Internet cafe and somehow I forgot 100 Rs note on the computer keyboard when I was leaving. The young man in attendance chased me like 100 m to give it back to me.

There are many other contrasts. The Indian variety is comparable to Europe where a sane person would not expect Albanians, Irish, Chechens and Portuguese to behave similarly.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Sep 3 2021 0:48 utc | 144

ChiNazis There, I said it. Sure, the policies are great. Who wants to live there? Raise your hand.

Don’t everybody jump up at once.

Posted by: Cadence calls | Sep 2 2021 7:13 utc | 94

Myself, I'd be delighted to live in a country with sane, competent leadership and a future besides. But alas, I don't speak Chinese; the USA is already a big step up for my spouse; and China is wise enough not to want immigrants anyway.

Posted by: corvo | Sep 3 2021 1:47 utc | 145

Hiya b - Dunno if others are experiencing the same thing but.. I'm getting a few comments on and Noting Moon of Alabama links aren't working - I've just checked and it seems to me that Google (and probably Twitter too, soon) Are attempting to stop people looking, reading, learning. This amounts to a covert form of censorship, and 'passive propaganda'.
Twitter do the same with
Workaround: Ignore the 'warning', copy and paste h t t p s : / / w w w . m o o n o f a l a b a m a . o r g / (take out the spaces) into your browser address bar and you'll find the articles I mention post quite easily.

Posted by: Barrie VVeiss | Sep 3 2021 5:23 utc | 146

RE: Posted by: Barrie VVeiss | Sep 3 2021 5:23 utc | 146


In significant degree the “powers” of “The United States of America”, the CIA, the NSA, Google etc are based on the beliefs of others in the existence of their “powers”, and hence the beliefs that challenging them is a fools errand.

However a popular saying in the transcendence of “The Soviet Union” was “100 people make the laws and 100 million find a way round them” a useful catalyst in the Soviet Union being Mr. Gorbachov's attempted anti-alcohol policy as an element of “perestroika”.

Another example was during a Gosplan kombinat audit in Western Siberia which went approximately.

Gosplan : The politburo won't like it.

Kombinat : What are they going to do? Send us to Siberia? We're there already.

Enjoy your journey

Posted by: MagdaTam | Sep 3 2021 11:05 utc | 147

@Laguerre | Sep 2 2021 7:53 utc | 97

I'm glad to hear you claim to be an expert. All that you've shown is that you believe the propaganda.

I am certainly not an expert on China, nor have I claimed to be one. But as OhOh said, what I wrote about China is actually true. This contrasts very sharply with your obviously profound ignorance of the country -- and your brain's imperviousness to learning.

Posted by: Cyril | Sep 3 2021 13:01 utc | 148

@Debsisdead | Sep 2 2021 11:18 utc | 106

Leaders ... are surplus to requirements nowadays.

Nonsense. Leadership makes a vast difference. Compare China's deaths from Covid-19 (under 5000) to the US's (over 500,000). The major reason China's count is orders of magnitude lower is its hugely better leadership.

Posted by: Cyril | Sep 3 2021 13:04 utc | 149

@ David G Horsman | Sep 2 2021 21:49 utc | 141.. okay - thanks david! not sure what to say in response!

Posted by: james | Sep 3 2021 16:25 utc | 150

I beleive we may be entering a Pax multipolaris. There is no way neither China nor Russia will be stupid enough to be goaded into a war. Neither do I see India and China duking it out.

The non-US powers know that the modern world is weak when it comes to war as a solution. It will continue to be economic and diplomatic warfare that will shift the pieces.

I am sure USA will continue to run their mouths, but there will be only bark and no bite. If we count Afghanistan as the early start of the declining BRITISH empire, I belive Afghanistan is 4/4 if we add Alexander the great (with some goodwill) to this.

Militarily, I belive we may move towards more domestic-based defenses, like home guards and local defenses like the Swiss structure. Throughout history, there are great examples of local people putting a halt to empires. We have the picts and Parthians against Rome; Swiss canton defense history; Tsar Alexander and vast Russia against Napoleon; Serbia and Yugoslavia in both world wars and,,, Afghanistan.

We can already begin to expect that the military doctrines will be changing massively. How will this affect the MIC? Massive capital and investments are at stake. However, I see a worldwide arms reduction as inevitable with regards to imperial military might.

May we gradually decommission the nukes and use the material for peaceful purposes also.

Posted by: Harald | Sep 3 2021 19:29 utc | 151

@ William Gruff
All the gacha games are like that, you just pay for the chance to roll for characters/equipment, exactly like gambling/rolling the dice.
Chinese gacha games aren't different in that regards.

Posted by: Smith | Sep 4 2021 6:50 utc | 152

On the other news, as expected, Xi Jinping is opening a new stock exchange in Beijing:

This is good, consolidating the financial power in the Beijing/North China, South China with Shanghai, Shenzen and HK have been capitalist hives since Deng's betrayal.

Posted by: Smith | Sep 4 2021 6:52 utc | 153

How the CIA castrated East Asia and beyond.

Guess what, the first jap boyz band was orchestrated by Johnny Kitagawa, a jp gringo from the FUS embassy' in jp ,, and ...sponsored by the FUS occupation army.

Go figure.

Posted by: denk | Sep 4 2021 8:08 utc | 154

@ denk

Seems like a lot money wasted then considering the jap kids love samurai anime like Kimetsu no Yaiba.

Then again, this might not be good for China because the chinese don't like samurai, especially a samurai anime with setting in the Taisho/Imperial era.

Posted by: Smith | Sep 4 2021 8:30 utc | 155

Smith 156

If the jp see a problem, they cant do shit about it,

When CCP sees a problem, they can act on it.
China is clamping down on girly culture now.

See the difference bet a sovereign nation and a lapdog ?

Posted by: denk | Sep 4 2021 9:14 utc | 156

@ denk

Sure, sure, I see it. I'm just saying all hopes is not lost yet.

Posted by: Smith | Sep 4 2021 9:17 utc | 157
Speak of the devil, massive japanese self-own just happens in Okinawa, the chinese are laughing.
As the japanese want to dump contaminated water in the Pacific, the US just dumps contaminated water in Okinawa.

Posted by: Smith | Sep 4 2021 10:31 utc | 158

Hope I'm not too late to ask this on this thread, but, regarding China's recent prohibition of 'girly men' on TV,

1. Under what metric do China's censors determine certain behavior to be “effeminate”? (i.e. would something like this warrant a ban?)

2. Where does one draw the line when it comes to “masculine” women? (And under which category would ‘tomboys’ fall into?)

Posted by: joey_n | Sep 4 2021 23:59 utc | 159

@ joey_n

I think that counts. Before the implementation of the ban, there was a notorious "girlie man" tik-toker who was banned with that familiar feminine style:

So beware all the males with the super white skin, no beard and talking with high-pitched voice.

Posted by: Smith | Sep 5 2021 6:26 utc | 160


Seems like a lot money wasted then considering the [Japanese] kids love samurai anime like Kimetsu no Yaiba.

Then again, this might not be good for China because the chinese don't like samurai, especially a samurai anime with setting in the Taisho/Imperial era.

I can't say that has stopped the detergent brand Liby (立白) from doing a cross-promotion a few months ago wherein characters from Kimetsu no Yaiba appear on the products' packaging. The metaphor doesn't appear to be off the mark, but I digress.

I see.

RIA Novosti ran an article talking about Chinese television prohibiting the depiction of 'girly men'.
Does the new law apply to video streaming sites like Bilibili as well, or does that fall under a different jurisdiction? (One of the anime series hosted there, That Time I Got Reincarnated as a Slime, has a male protagonist Rimuru Tempest who otherwise has long hair, lacks any facial hair, and speaks in a high-pitched voice (at least in the original Japanese version). That it's still available legally in China implies that the new law applies only to television broadcasts... doesn't it?)

Posted by: joey_n | Sep 5 2021 22:56 utc | 161

@ joey_n

Bilibili is kind of a chinese weeaboo website since it's based on japanese otaku culture (the name is inspired from a Raildex character), it has strafed many times with China authority in the past, but strangely enough, Bilibili also has a lot of communist and history videos.
I think it would be still allowed if it stays low and out of sight, and depending on if Japan's relationship with China continues to worsen or not.

Posted by: Smith | Sep 6 2021 1:55 utc | 162

My question was whether the new law against 'girly boys' applies solely to television broadcasts or if the internet in general is also affected, Bilibili being one example. Thanks for your consideration.

Posted by: joey_n | Sep 6 2021 2:52 utc | 163

@ joey_n

For that, I can't say. I haven't seen the actual wording of the law yet, but considering one Tik-toker was banned, it might not just be limited to broadcast TV.

Posted by: Smith | Sep 6 2021 3:09 utc | 164
It's happening, the gaming laws is in effect.
The biggest online/mobile game in China, Honor of Kings, is already affected.

Nice! I hope this means more single player games.

Posted by: Smith | Sep 6 2021 11:18 utc | 165
Authorities call up Tencent and NetEase to talk about gaming policies.

This is good IMO, Tencent and NetEase are basically chinese EA and Activision, hated by the chinese and studios under their direction all make cashgrab online games. Hopefully they will focus on single games now.

Posted by: Smith | Sep 9 2021 13:24 utc | 166

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.