|
|
The Rape of China's Future
| Article
# : |
15293 |
|
|
Section : |
EDITORIAL
|
| Issue
Date : |
8 / 1989 |
862 Words |
| Author
: |
Morton A. Kaplan
|
The recent savage crushing of the democracy movement in China--the subject of several articles in the Current Issues section this month--is a tragedy for both China and the world. The students had nothing in common with the wild revolutionaries of the Cultural Revolution. They asked for a modernized China in which the government would show responsiveness to the public. They asked for dialogue, a modest demand that was responded to first by martial law and then by bullets.
Why did this occur? Various elements in the Chinese government have noted recently that great economic growth has occurred in the Asian tigers--South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong under authoritarian governments. Order, it was said, is necessary for development. The recent industrial disorders in South Korea that have cut growth in GNP from 11 to 7 percent may also have been noted by Chinese authorities.
If the motivation behind the repression was based on the thesis that authoritarianism was necessary to spur development--rather than to merely hold power--it was a tragic mistake. There is modicum of truth in the belief that labor unrest--particularly in an economy of such a small scale that an export orientation is essential--can delay development. But the situation in China is essentially different.
Each of the Asian tigers was able to increase its standard of living rapidly. In South Korea, for instance, the GNP per capita at the end of the war was about $50, whereas today it is well over $2,000. Despite the 10 percent increase in China's GNP last year, the kind of rapid development achieved by South Korea is beyond the capacity of China. The necessary infrastructure is simply lacking, and sufficient external capital has not been available in any event, let alone after the June debacle.
China already has taken advantage of the easiest transformation, the shifting of state-run agriculture to relatively independent proprietorship. Although additional capital input would be helpful, logistical problems can be solved only by industrial developments that will take considerable time.
The transitional inflation and unemployment in China today perhaps contributed to the problems that were expressed in Tiananmen Square. Certainly the unbearably low pay of academics, even by Chinese standards, contributed. But these problems are not transient.
When difficulties cannot be overcome quickly--when people cannot see a solution to their personal problems--it becomes especially important for the government to be responsive to people. In the absence of quick growth, it is only when the people share responsibility for decisions that revolutionary desires can be dampened.
Perhaps the leaders of China believe they can regain and keep control of the situation through fear. If so, they are wrong. Fear worked for Stalin for a number of reasons. It worked during the phase of heavy industrial development because its inefficiencies were hidden. And that was a relatively simple phase of development. Fear also worked because the myth of central planning had not yet been discredited. But fear cannot work in a modern sophisticated economy.
If the government
...
Read Full Article
|
|
