sheng86_Kevin FrayerGetty Images_beijing

西方批评者看不到的中国

Mar 26, 2019 Andrew Sheng , Xiao Geng

香港—华盛顿似乎已经形成关于中国的两党共识：美国面临着一个操纵贸易、极权、盗窃知识产权的对手，并在战略上威胁到美国及其盟友，因此中国必须受到惩罚。但这个共识与事实不符，而中国的成就与贡献应该得到理解及承认。

近几十年来，中国对全球经济增长、绿色发展、及创新做出了前所未有的贡献。自20世纪70年代末“改革开放”启动以来，八亿中国人摆脱了极端贫困。从中国以及世界发展经验看，这一成功主要来自当局的务实及灵活的决策方法，即不断试错并及时调整政策。

在西方，人们通常认为民主选举是保证政府对其政策负责的关键。与西方流行的信念相反，中国的治理方法是支持务实的结果问责，而不是形式上的选举问责。证据表明，中国的决策实际上在不断回应中国人民和国际社会的反馈。在得到新信息后，中国领导人能够纠正错误并更新过时的措施。

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world's leading thinkers, including weekly long reads, book reviews, topical collections, and interviews; The Year Ahead annual print magazine; the complete PS archive; and more. All for less than $9 a month.

Subscribe Now

Andrew Sheng

Writing for PS since 2011
124 Commentaries

Andrew Sheng, a distinguished fellow of the Asia Global Institute at the University of Hong Kong and a member of the UNEP Advisory Council on Sustainable Finance, is a former chairman of the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission.

Xiao Geng

Writing for PS since 2012
114 Commentaries

Xiao Geng, Chairman of the Hong Kong Institution for International Finance, is a professor and Director of the Institute of Policy and Practice at the Shenzhen Finance Institute at The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 16 Comments on this article

Adeline Tornton Apr 2, 2019

Washington considers China an authoritarian country, which is engaged in trade manipulation and theft of intellectual property and represents a strategic threat to the United States. This attitude of the United States pushes China away from mutually beneficial bilateral ties. This provides Russia and China with many opportunities for diversified Russian-Chinese cooperation.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Lawrence Lezard Apr 2, 2019

The most candid paragraph was the first one relating to “a trade-manipulating, authoritarian intellectual-property thief.” After that it was CCP spin. Let’s see why:
• When a political party, the CCP, has totally destroyed the country’s economy, then the only way is up. From 1978, all the CCP did was step back and allow FOREIGN money and technology into the country and through the hard work and smarts of the Chinese PEOPLE, massive economic improvements took place. All the Party had to do was regulate environmental protection. Needless to say, they screwed that one up as is now very apparent. True, China is leading the green movement, simply because it has to, due to previous flagrant disregard to the environment; but doing it the CCP sponsored way, that is stealing the technology from the West Eg. SInovel copied software from AMSC.
• “policymaking is responsive to feedback from both the Chinese people and the international community” Really, like the feedback in 1989 that people wanted less corruption and more freedoms? If this feedback is so important and relevant, then why is EVERYTHING so severely censored with no freedom of press and information? How can there be any feedback when people are muzzled and jailed/disappeared if they make any criticisms against the CCP?
• Are the authors aware that the only REAL decision-making power lies with the 7 members of the politburo standing committee and increasingly with the self-appointed dictator, Xi JinPing? The farce that occurs in March is a mock congress with only rubber-stamping powers. EVERYTHING in China revolves around the PARTY and ensuring its survival – at any cost to the Chinese people.
• The congress only NOW figured out that the neoliberal model is best for developed economies? This has been apparent for a few years. I suppose that would explain China (like the West before) forcing trade agreements on undeveloped countries, like in Africa, and dumping their cheap manufactured goods, thus killing local manufacturing.
• “In response to these anxieties” – Yes, created by China undervaluing its currency that ensured foreign countries moved all manufacturing there.
• “Despite the challenges China faces “ – Created by ignoring market forces in a desperate ploy to boost GDP figures. “13.6 million urban jobs were added” – By whom? The state sector? No, private sector that is starved of loans which instead go to propping up unprofitable state firms so the CCP can maintain control over their now outdated command economy.
• The CCP runs a mercantilist economic system that largely excludes foreign investment/competition in many areas and the ones that are open force technology transfer and must have a local partner, who will ditch the foreign firm when possible. Let’s see if the new law changes make any difference in practical terms.
• “improving the quality of life and work” Chinese people have done this themselves. The CCP will throw anyone under the bus if in the Party’s interests. For example, what about all the army veterans who get little to no benefits after being jettisoned? What about all the thousands of protests or ‘disturbances’ from workers who have legitimate grievances every year but get ignored and thrown out of Beijing if they try to get them addressed?
• For a socialist country there are no independent labour unions, so all these sops the CCP is now dolling out are done to avoid rebellion due to economic mismanagement by the Party. For example, by not regulating P2P lending, creating housing bubbles, supporting an inefficient command economy, not allowing the ‘invisible hand of the market’ to allocate resources efficiently, no free press and independent judiciary means perpetuating state corruption, maintaining an education system that promotes unthinking loyalty above innovation thus inhibiting business progress etc. etc.
• “granted permanent urban residency to 14 million workers from rural areas” –China has a migrant population of 250 million who have no rights or recourse to any urban services and the authors are proud that a few percent have been allowed ‘regular person’ status?
• “improve substantially the protection of intellectual property rights” The CCP know they can’t steal IP forever and have invested heavily in R&D, so NOW they want to protect IP? Conveniently late now that China has largely caught up through illegal means.
• “They know that neglecting the needs of homo politicus could lead to social instability “ This hasn’t stopped the CCP under Xi’s rule from reducing previous limited freedoms (press, social interaction/expression etc.), increasing ‘patriotic education’ (brainwashing), and instituting cultural genocide in Xinjiang. A repressive regime must always face this imbalance of what the people want and the oppression dealt out.
• “evidence shows that policymaking is responsive to feedback from both the Chinese people and the international community” Really? Like the feedback from Xu Zhangrun, who has now been suspended like countless other Chinese intellectuals over the years? And the US must force tariffs on China to try to level the playing fields? Very responsive.
• China’s constitution states that China is a democracy and Article 35 of the 1982 State Constitution proclaims that "citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession, and of demonstration." This is pure rhetoric and blatantly false, but it looks good and to the CCP, appearances are everything. So, in the same way, don’t take anything too seriously from China apologists.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
enfant terrible Mar 30, 2019

So a person from Japan who makes this same argument is also a Westerner?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
enfant terrible Mar 30, 2019

but first: what is a Westerner and why do these two authors think only this kind of person has a problem with china?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Lucas K Mar 28, 2019

strange argument. The communist party is already anti neoliberal as that is a core part of its ideology so this isn't proof of the responsiveness or accountability of anything at all. Just like how you wouldn't say a government founded on the ideas of racial supremacy is responsive or accountable because its policymakers debate the social backlash to a policy of accepting migrants of another race
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
F E Mar 28, 2019

more proof why academia has gone to hell and it is due in no small part to apologisms like this. May I remind these fake, party academics about document number nine which their chinese socialist government published (http://www.chinafile.com/document-9-chinafile-translation) which described the following as "false ideological trends" and for which it has even until today made no apologies

1) Promoting Western Constitutional Democracy: An attempt to undermine the current leadership and the "socialism with Chinese characteristics" system of governance. (Including the separation of powers, the multi-party system, general elections, and independent judiciaries.)
2) Promoting “universal values” in an attempt to weaken the theoretical foundations of the Party’s leadership. (That “the West’s values are the prevailing norm for all human civilization”, that “only when China accepts Western values will it have a future”.)
3) Promoting civil society in an attempt to dismantle the ruling party’s social foundation. (i.e. that individual rights are paramount and ought to be immune to obstruction by the state.)
4) Promoting Neoliberalism, attempting to change China’s Basic Economic System. (i.e. unrestrained economic liberalization, complete privatization, and total marketization.)
5) Promoting the West’s idea of journalism, challenging China’s principle that the media and publishing system should be subject to Party discipline.
6) Promoting historical nihilism, trying to undermine the history of the CCP and of New China. (For example to deny the scientific and guiding value of Mao Zedong thought.)
7) Questioning Reform and Opening and the socialist nature of socialism with Chinese characteristics. (For example, saying “We have deviated from our Socialist orientation.”)

You deserve "recognition"? Prove it. Stop killing your people who renounce that document number nine crap. Stop disappearing your democracy activists. Stop portraying us as the evil villain in your media. And stop attacking our way of life. Do that first. Then we will talk about your "recognition"
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
眼光 Canadian / China Mar 27, 2019

China is opening up , slowly . The new Belt and Road involving 20 different countries will boost the Chinese economy to become number one in the world. This is what the USA fears , also when this happens the USA dollar will loss it's value on the international stage. After all the USA did invent the IMF of which they still will not let China join Technology wise China has all Ready passed the USA with development . The 5 G is moving forward in the UK and certian parts of North America ,not in USA as they believe China can spie . To me a Western man I believe every country spies on each other . Maybe all these spie entities should join forces and work together to make this planet a safety place to live. Yes we sure do have many different political systems in this world. Countries were you can do anything criminal and laugh about ,the you have some that work for the people , The problem of military in this planet has been a problem from the beginning of time. Man I believe is his own worst enemy . He kills over religion, over material gain, over different thinking of poltical systems and to change an economy man will start a war , or to disruption of a country by intensify a government. All these little things I mentioned usually do no happen in a country that has control over its population . Yes it is very secure in China .
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
David Donald Mar 27, 2019

The authors write, ”But in China, when mistakes are made, adjustments follow,” and they might well have been thinking, ”while in the West, when mistakes are made, even larger mistakes will follow to help the populous forget the first mistakes. ” With Trump around who remembers the faults of George W? And when one million are marching against Brexit, who remembers the equally large but futile march against the Iraq invasion? Diversion is the key to controlling large crowds, and demonizing (admittedly imperfect) China is just one more such diversion.
- Watson Brown Mar 28, 2019
  
  incorrect. see your government's illegal activities in the SCS which you ignore because you are pro beijing
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Ross Mar 26, 2019

A government that does not see a free press, or independent justice system as a good; and a People's Congress that has endorsed, in the mid 90% range, every Central Committee plan is not really responsive to their citizens. One would have to believe in the infallibility of a group of politicians who's own wealth and self-interest would make their decisions less than altruistic, were in fact altruistic.

Nor does it explain a Gini coefficient higher than the US, which is difficult to achieve.

But that China sees a different road is good, just don't try to tell the world it is better.
- F E Mar 28, 2019
  
  You are completely right. If you aren't aware the chinese socialist government which these two party academics excitedly defend published a document called document number nine (http://www.chinafile.com/document-9-chinafile-translation) which described the following as "false ideological trends" and for which it has even until today made no apologies
  
  1) Promoting Western Constitutional Democracy: An attempt to undermine the current leadership and the "socialism with Chinese characteristics" system of governance. (Including the separation of powers, the multi-party system, general elections, and independent judiciaries.)
  2) Promoting “universal values” in an attempt to weaken the theoretical foundations of the Party’s leadership. (That “the West’s values are the prevailing norm for all human civilization”, that “only when China accepts Western values will it have a future”.)
  3) Promoting civil society in an attempt to dismantle the ruling party’s social foundation. (i.e. that individual rights are paramount and ought to be immune to obstruction by the state.)
  4) Promoting Neoliberalism, attempting to change China’s Basic Economic System. (i.e. unrestrained economic liberalization, complete privatization, and total marketization.)
  5) Promoting the West’s idea of journalism, challenging China’s principle that the media and publishing system should be subject to Party discipline.
  6) Promoting historical nihilism, trying to undermine the history of the CCP and of New China. (For example to deny the scientific and guiding value of Mao Zedong thought.)
  7) Questioning Reform and Opening and the socialist nature of socialism with Chinese characteristics. (For example, saying “We have deviated from our Socialist orientation.”)
  
  So you see it's not just a matter of "seeing things" it's a matter of policy that the very things you are talking about are things which are to be seen as inherently hostile. And apparently WE are the ones who are supposed to "check our privilege" (so to speak) and mind our criticisms. The fact that these two apparatchiks could get a platform on this website to spout this B-grade propaganda is yet another example of the dismal and corrupt state the academy finds itself in today.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Godfree Roberts Mar 27, 2019
  
  There is no such thing as a 'free press' and never has been. We allowed public information to be privatized and the Chinese did not. That's why 80% of them trust their media and 6% of us trust ours.
  
  There is no such thing as an 'independent justice system' and never has been. Justice systems are specialized arms of–and entirely dependent on–political systems. Their dependence becomes more obvious with cases involving national pride, security or embarrassment, as we see with Ms. Meng's detention.
  
  You misinterpret as being unresponsive to their citizens the fact that People's Congress typically endorses legislation in the mid 90% range because you are unfamiliar with the Chinese Congress' function: its a supervisor and evaluator of government trials and legislation. In survey after survey–by Gallup, Edelman, Harvard and WVS–citizens are MORE approving (95%) of policy direction that Congress itself!
  
  And why should they not be? Can you find a PRC policy ( direct quote from the policy/legislation document) that you personally would not support? please do so: a, not a paraphrase or allegation.
  
  They are all online.
  - Lucas K Mar 28, 2019
    
    "There is no such thing as an 'independent justice system' and never has been. Justice systems are specialized arms of–and entirely dependent on–political systems. "
    
    This is a strange thing to say. Using your argument, there would be nothing that you could do if the courts reinstated the 'separate but equal' doctrine because that is what the ruling party demanded. More concretely, there could be nothing that you can do if the ruling party said that all Asians must be sent to internment camps because Asians are at greater risk of spying for Communist China . These hypotheticals sounds crazy, but your argument means that you would have no choice but to accede to them
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  - Watson Brown Mar 28, 2019
    
    the trust figures are high because china is a carbon copy of nazi germany. you do not see this because you are pro beijing
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.