(Letter) Disasters and Values
Filed under:-mini-posts, Analysis, politics | Tags:politics, reform
Add comments
People are angry and worried. Company executives are panicked. Government officials are scared.
But what are the causes of these disasters, common causes of these disasters? Punishment of those responsible are not sufficient for preventing future occurrences. A deep soul search is necessary.
As I see it, China’s fast developing market capitalism has surpassed the slow evolution of the complex and backward state system. It has also surpassed the slow evolution of its citizens’ value system.
A value system that can provide positive reinforcement to economic development and check unfettered pursue of self-interest. A value system based on compassion, pursuit of truth, and personal initiative.
Without a well-functioning government system and a modern value system on the part of its citizens, China can’t move forward on its next stage of advancement.
China’s economic reform has hit a bottleneck.
Political reform and renewal of fundamental values are required now.
There are currently 1 comments highlighted: 16403.
September 25th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Reads like something written by 19th/early 20th century American lamenting greater legal protection for industry than people. China will probably follow the same path as America. When those in control of the laws have determined that safety and health of the people is more important than the bottom line of industry, then laws will be passed and enforced that protect the safety and health of the people at the expense of industry. BTW, this is the reason why EU and US are always harping on China for human rights, more robustly enforced environmental and labor regulations, stronger IP protection etc. We’ve already gone through periods without these things, and have already experienced the evils wrought, and we’d prefer that other people in the world not be subjected to such horrors.
September 25th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
@Will Lewis,
😎 🙂 😉 🙂 😉 🙂 😉 🙂 😉 🙂 😉 😎
September 25th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Allen, You’re putting some intention in my words that I did not intend by the combination of your reprinting of my sentences, the smiley faces, and the embedded link in your name. I don’t appreciate your games. Notice that US treatment of its subjugated native peoples is a reflection of China’s. I offer no comment on the rightness or wrongness of what you imply in either of these comments, or on the right or wrong of US relationships with its subjugated native peoples. All I know is that it is an objectively bad thing when children die from eating poisonous food, or when a person’s life is cut short by breathing noxious fumes. But, when counterbalanced with distance and economic benefits, these objectively bad things tend to appear less bad. As the economic benefits grow out of proportion to the moral negatives, the laws change. That is all.
September 25th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
@Will Lewis,
Sorry … I shouldn’t have been so sarcastic. You probably do mean what you say, probably even really do care about human rights of average citizens in China. It’s just that a lot of people who use your rhetoric do not …
My bad – sorry.
September 25th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
I’m afraid the miserable situation will last for a while, as long as the huge gap between rich cities and poor countryside exists. Simply put, China is a combination of 1st world and 3rd world. Latter will benefit from economical advance and jobs generated by former but also create complicated social issues.
September 25th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
“I’m afraid the miserable situation will last for a while, as long as the huge gap between rich cities and poor countryside exists. Simply put, China is a combination of 1st world and 3rd world. Latter will benefit from economical advance and jobs generated by former but also create complicated social issues.”
The rich & poor gap in China is huge, but its effect is overhyped by the west, and the party itself. China is still in initial stage of capitalism, she needs that gap to propel the economy, to drive the nation’s industrialization. Most of civil discontent does not happen between 1st world and 3rd world, it rather happens between 3rd world ppl and local goverment.
.
September 25th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
@ranger — I agree, China is a dragon with its head in the 21st century, most of the body in the 20th century and the tail in the 19th or earlier. It’s a kitschy metaphor worthy of Tom Friedman, but nevertheless lies at the roots of many of China’s problems.
@MoneyBall — a mitigating circumstance for China’s rich-poor gap is that most of the poor see hopes of getting rich, because examples of that is often around the corner in the same village.
September 26th, 2008 at 1:01 am
It’s a lot of work to do.
Although I believe that this is but one of the many significant reasons why the US and EU are bouncing on China’s case. In cases of natural disasters, nearly everyone knows the differences between what are humans responsible and which is beyond our control.
Sometimes, I think there’s need be another term to describe progress instead of saying 1st world or 3rd world, etc. although the background of why people use them is understandable. If you all think about it, for those countries who are of “Developed” status, in many of their systems, industries, human social issues…there’s still a lot of work to do and many goals to reach, though it is better than before.
Also, although some places may seem very comfortable, “high-end”, safe and glamorous…someone out there is doing the dirty work, plus like you all said, not many people (out of genuine sympathy) around the world really want to see China and other developing countries go through some of the heart-aches others have or currently enduring from.
September 26th, 2008 at 2:46 am
@MoneyBall: “The rich & poor gap in China is huge, but its effect is overhyped by the west, and the party itself. China is still in initial stage of capitalism, she needs that gap to propel the economy, to drive the nation’s industrialization. ”
I’m not sure it is hyped. I would sure like it to be (it would make everything simpler), like some people believe the greenhouse effect is hyped. China has already developed in this way for 30 years, and is no longer in an initial stage of capitalism (hence the many debates about more encompassing laws).
@Allen: “You probably do mean what you say, probably even really do care about human rights of average citizens in China. It’s just that a lot of people who use your rhetoric do not …”
I’m not sure most people who use the rhetoric doesn’t care. In the worst case they’re ideological and blind (and I’ve met quite a few), and probably know very little about what their concepts mean, but they don’t have any ulterior motives.
September 26th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
@Wuming –
None of which is going to stop me from stealing it and claiming it as my own when I bring it up in conversation 🙂
@Will Lewis –
The American path is, of course, not the only path. Much of what is dealt with in the courts in the United States is elsewhere handled (or even avoided) by greater regulation, or greater involvement of union representatives on management boards, or through the activism of trade unions. What is certain is that systemic change is needed to better protect workers and consumers. However, you cannot really say that the the current system protects even ‘big business’ as much as it should, it is just that the protection for ‘big business’ is stronger than that for individuals as business has driven much of the change we have seen up to now.
Lord Bingham gave a speech on the rule of law a few years ago which I won’t bore people with here, but you would certainly gain from giving it a read:
http://www.cpl.law.cam.ac.uk/past_activities/the_rule_of_law_text_transcript.php
From the way he describes it, his eight ‘sub-rules’ are only patchily covered here in the UK, I couldn’t really say to which degree they are covered in China, but process of reaching toward a proper rule of law is everything. Without a process for change there can be no change.
September 26th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
@Will Lewis –
I guess I should also add that human rights legislation does not, classically speaking, have much bearing on relations between companies and individuals. My human rights under the European Convention on Human Rights cannot be infringed by the actions of family, friends, co-workers employers etc., but only by the state (e.g., by a statute which unfairly discriminates against a group of people’s right to a fair trial). Strengthened human rights legislation in China would do much to liberate the Chinese people from state oppression, but little to better protect individuals from the actions of companies or other individuals.
September 26th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
I believe there are some current tendencies in the Chinese culture that lent themselves to creating these three disasters. These are strictly conjectures but I’d be curious hear what others think.
1) Many in the current business leadership came of age during the Cultural Revolution. They placed their trust in the high ideals promulgated at that time and saw their world fall apart. These days, they no longer trust any ideals except to make money and take care of their family, and if they can get a nest egg out of the country, maybe a son or daughter overseas, it gives them protection for their futures, since things might change again. It’s kind of the old “burned once your fault, burned twice my fault” thinking. Many younger Chinese have told me stories about family members who have been cheated by friends, and how much they find this abhorrent. IMO, I think this attitude will change as the next generation takes over from their parents with a different mindset than before.
2) In any society, most nouveau riche tend to be oblivious to others around them, concerned with materialistic trappings, showing off, etc. and many use cutthroat business practices. China is full of nouveau riche these days, and if you were raised in horribly poor circumstances, you are driven to maintain that success no matter what you need to do. Money equals survival and morals take a back seat.
3) Life is dearer in some societies and cheaper in others. The Chinese won a war of attrition against Japan, and after the revolution Mao’s battle plan was to sacrifice troops to achieve victory. To him, taking huge casualties was fine, since he was using a resource that China had in abundance. Life is dearer than it used to be, but still cheaper than in most countries. The attitude in business tends to reflect the attitudes of government and society.
4) Throughout history, “one party” governments have battled corruption since there is always a lack of checks and balances. Democracy is only successful when those checks and balances exist; if not, the democracy quickly descends into a corrupt oligarchy with fixed elections or a military coup. China is stuck in that area between dictatorship and democracy, without the institutions to achieve democracy but free enough to create a lack of control by the government. I have always felt that democracy in 1989 would have spelled disaster for China, since there were none of the institutions necessary for a successful democratic government. At this time, China is looking for a style of government different from what they have now but also different from western style governments. Can they achieve this? No one knows. Properly run constitutional democracy isn’t the best system of government, it just happens to be the most effective one invented so far.
5) What’s happening in this milk scandal? It’s what usually happens when disasters strike. A few heads will roll, there will be an appearance of reform but underneath the appearance, very little will change. When profits can be made in the short run, safety and the ramifications of a lack of safety are ignored. Let’s compare it to the current Wall Street meltdown. Why were all those bad loans made? Because investment bankers get bonuses, HUGE bonuses for making deals. They didn’t have to be good deals, just deals. When the reward system doesn’t jive with the safety and well being of a society, then the society will suffer. Safety has to be made profitable in both the short and long run.
September 26th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
Hi Steve,
I think almost everything you said is quite informative and reasonable, given how you explained it. The only thing that sort stuck out for me was regarding point #3. The examples you provided given in that context is understandable, but it’s just the general “life is cheaper here and more dearer there” statement;I heard quite a lot of it before and elsewhere, and it had a lot of very um…questionable content. There’s no doubt given the population and experiences of the leaders–people in China at that time would have provided the background for such beliefs…it’s just hard to accept it as something absolute in certain societies, given that in “a lot of circumstances” most human beings will behave and act towards others the same way.
Maybe I’m thinking too much about it. Let me repeat, I understand your point, but like most things in life, I don’t think it’s that simple…the ideas and outside appearences maybe but how people deal with it, probably not as black/white.
September 26th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Reading back and thinking about it for a while, part of the reason why I’m confused is I’m not sure what are the standards and criteria to judge whether a society holds life dearer or cheaper. In a general sense, there are times where I have a hard time separating between cultural-religious–social policies/attitudes regarding this.
I remember being a part of such conversations in college and community events…sometimes the reasons they listed for that type of judgement appears subjective. Others are a bit more obvious like the treatment of women/elderly/children…unborn chlidren–another most talked about topic, etc.
September 27th, 2008 at 4:54 am
Hey Daniel,
Thanks for the comments. Like I said, these were conjectures to bat about. As regards #3, I agree with you completely that it is not an absolute, and in my opinion not even a cultural or societal trait, but more a product of equality, education and overall wealth of a country. Let me throw out three examples:
I was in Chile back in 1989 on an extended business trip with a friend who had been brought up both there and in the USA, and was living in Tucson, Arizona at the time. Both he and his wife were from the Chilean upper class but one thing that bothered him while down there was that, though they all thought they treated their servants as equals, he could see that they did not and talked down to them without even realizing it. This bothered him since he had lived in the States for too long and was used to the idea of equality, so it was very noticeable to him. I think when societies have mostly upper and lower classes without a majority middle class, the lives of the people in the lower classes aren’t treated as “dear”. As the society changes and the middle class becomes dominant, then this naturally goes away.
Chinese example: An industrial concern in Zhejiang province has a toxic chemical spill. They hire lower class laborers to clean it up. These guys are out there in shorts and sandals with their bare skin coming into contact with the chemical spill. If they die, the company pays their family a couple hundred dollars and goes on with their business.
Another Chinese example: A lady who had made quite a bit of money as a translator in Shanghai is driving her Mercedes down the highway way over the speed limit. She loses control of her car, hits and kills a man in another smaller car. This particular lady was in the hospital for a long time with pretty bad injuries, but still faced charges for what we’d call manslaughter. (not sure of the exact wording of the Chinese charges) In the end, she pays his family a couple hundred dollars, no jail time, no probation, just a relatively low fine.
I didn’t make up these examples; they are all factual. I’m not trying to be judgmental, since I think life has improved enormously for most of the Chinese people in the last 20 years. I hope and believe that over time, incidents like the three given will happen less and less as the society learns how to deal with this kind of behavior and people come to understand that it is unacceptable. I’d compare it to the Gilded Age in the late 1800s, when steel workers, coal miners, track layers, etc., were considered expendable and their lives not worth much. Hopefully a Chinese Teddy Roosevelt will come along and successfully push needed change, but societies typically evolve gradually.
September 27th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Very nice and another informative comment, thanks Steve.
I would like to visit the mainland someday, to see things for myself, and be more than a tourist….if I can’t, at the very least see the usual Beijing, Great Wall and ancestorial village.
I believe all three examples are true. The Chinese examples sounds similar to what I’ve heard from my Mainland aquantinces and people who have live there for some time.
The Chilean example, I think it might be a combination of overall quality of society and some…a little bit of cultural–historical influences. The reason why I think it may be is because back when I went to college (a year and a half ago) there were some similar conditions like the Chilean couple from the international students I interacted with. They told me about their lives, and a lot of people accepted it as normal or the way it is.
I assume judging from Steve’s comments, you probably are also American, so I will feel a bit relieved saying this. Some others have issues whenever we use the US as an example or comparison. One of my college professors said there were people in the States who still have that social class attitude, even though their families have been here for several generations. The way he explained it, I could understand given that if a family had a level of wealth and status generation to generation, they might feel that way. Although our social mobility is a bit more fluid than others, it still takes some times and it would help if there was a strong foundation to begin with. Not saying that it’s necessary but conditions like that exists.
I mean, everyone is judgemental in their own way….or a better term could be analytical. The way that many people here on this blog and my aquantinces/contacts with the Mainland explained it, China sounds like a place with so much to understand and see. I’m getting more convinced how much work needs to be done and how it has 1st and 3rd world conditions….what was it someone said “head in the 21st century, body in 20th and tail stuck in the past.”
For some odd reason, I’m not too surprised…many of the benefits the developed societies enjoyed also took time and were comparably recent in terms of world history…China sort of had that inequality of many things for a long time as well, though because of so many events/turbulences, a lot of it was blurred how went into a cycle of downs and ups/destroyed and rebuild, etc. I think a 100 Teddy Roosevelts and Helen Kellers may be needed…just guessing the top of my head.
September 28th, 2008 at 7:23 am
I agree that the traditional value system has corrupted, but I don’t think it’s all because of the cultural revolution. Part of it was caused by the economic reform too, when people began to put money and wealth above everything else. Neither do I see how a political reform could alter the situation.
I think the deep-rooted problem of this milk scandal is really the immaturity of China’s capitalism. The country is at an age of great progress and fast development; the rich-poor divide is widening up (which I don’t think is always a bad thing). But socially it creates a shared sentiment that to get rich is not only good and glorious, but also the only value to pursue. Many are pursuing wealth at any cost, and they are looking only at the very short term.
In this milk scandal, milk manufacturers add in chemicals to reduce the cost of production. They know in China’s consumer market, price is still the only effective weapon of competition. They all just want to make money in the short term, and not having the long-term vision that quality and a good brand name would bring more value to themselves in the very long run. Few businesses are thinking about long term strategies and lifting competitiveness in a global stage. Most are still competing by prices only, and that is the core problem. I believe, and hope, that as our society matures and slowly adjusts to the real capitalistic style of competition, more and more corporations would realise that quality and a brand name surpasses everything else. And I hope Chinese consumers, as they get richer, would also go beyond the stage where all they care about a product is its price.