Главная страница | Контакты | Случайная страница Автомобили Астрономия Биология География Дом и сад Другие языки Другое Информатика История Культура Литература Логика Математика Медицина Металлургия Механика Образование Охрана труда Педагогика Политика Право Психология Религия Риторика Социология Спорт Строительство Технология Туризм Физика Философия Финансы Химия Черчение Экология Экономика Электроника

Conclusion

Tragically, China’s post-1978 market reform strategy continues to be celebrated rather uncritically by the great majority of economists, and generally for the same reasons: the country’s rapid and sustained growth, ability to attract foreign direct investment, and production of ever more sophisticated exports. For mainstream economists, the Chinese economic experience shows once again the virtues of market liberalization. For many progressives, it demonstrates the virtues of a controlled, state-directed market liberalization process. For some, the Chinese reform experience demonstrates the workability (and superiority) of market socialism.

Unfortunately, a deeper look at the Chinese reform experience challenges this celebration. As highlighted above, China’s economic transformation has been driven by a growth process that is now eroding majority living and working conditions as well as national development capacities. This growth process is also contributing to a strengthening of transnational accumulation dynamics that work to intensify competitive pressures on working people throughout East Asia and beyond.

The celebration of the Chinese economic experience by those supportive of socialism is especially problematic. Among other things, it encourages the mistaken belief that socialism can be built through the use of markets and a closer integration with global capitalist accumulation dynamics. At a minimum, this leads to confusion about the nature of socialism and of capitalism as well. This is more than a theoretical concern as progressive economists in countries such as Cuba, Venezuela, South Africa, and Brazil debate the merits of adopting the Chinese strategy.

As highlighted above, Chinese state policies have decisively moved the country away from socialism; in fact, they have led to the restoration of capitalism. And, precisely because China’s own elites are committed to building capitalism (with Chinese characteristics), China (as currently organized) cannot be counted on to assist in, much less anchor, the creation of a new economic system or set of international trading or financial relationships. In fact, growing numbers of Chinese workers are beginning to challenge Chinese state policies, not just in response to the exploitation they experience but also because of their renewed interest in socialism itself. Given the enormous importance of China, as a growing economic power and development model, it has become absolutely essential to clarify the nature of the experience there, both to provide support for those seeking socialist renewal in China and to ensure that efforts in other countries are not compromised by false understandings of the dangers of markets and capitalist imperatives.