The truth about China

November 11, 2011 at 10:34 pm (AWL, China, Civil liberties, Europe, Human rights, Jim D, stalinism, welfare, workers)

By Matthew   (Workers Liberty website)

A top Chinese government official has blamed Europe’s economic problems on welfare provision and labour laws.

Jin Liqun, chair of China’s sovereign wealth fund (the body which manages the Chinese government’s overseas investment of its spare loot) told Al Jazeera: “If you look at the troubles which happened in European countries, this is purely because of the accumulated troubles of the worn-out welfare society. I think the labour laws are outdated. The labour laws induce sloth, indolence, rather than hard work. The incentive system is totally out of whack.

“Why should, for instance, within [the] eurozone, some member-states’ people have to work to 65, even longer, whereas in some other countries they are happily retiring at 55, languishing on the beach? This is unfair. The welfare system is good for any society to reduce the gap, to help those who happen to have disadvantages, to enjoy a good life, but a welfare society should not induce people not to work hard.”

Welfare provision, and laws which give workers some protection from unfair dismissal or unsafe work conditions, exist in Europe thanks to two hundred years’ struggle by labour movements across the continent. Eroded in recent decades, they still exist.

China has never had a free labour movement. Since the victory of Mao Zedong’s Stalinists in 1949, all working-class organisation outside the official state-run trade unions (fake “trade unions”) has been suppressed.

In recent years, strikes have become common in China, with the growth of a vast urban working class facing enormous social inequality and corruption. The government, nervous about unrest, is sometimes subtle about dealing with them: but they all happen, at best, in a legal grey area. Chinese workers have no rights.

Welfare provision is minimal. Health care has to be paid for (though some prices are subsidised). People complain that they have to bribe teachers if they want their children to get a decent education.

The Chinese state puts more people to death than all the rest of the world put together. It publishes no information on its use of capital punishment, but Amnesty International reckons that executions in China run into thousands a year, maybe ten times as many as in the next-worst country, Iran.

Jin Liqun’s statement shows what the Chinese bureaucrats think about this. To them, the oppression in China seems normal, and the still relatively civilised conditions of European workers look like an outrageous departure from what is normal and right.

Would-be leftists (like these and these) in Europe who still regard China as “communist” or “socialist” or left-wing should learn the lesson. “Communism” which relies on such oppression of the working class that Merkel, Sarkozy, and Cameron look outrageously “soft” by comparison is not “communism” at all, but a system of exploitation by a bureaucratically-organised ruling class.

Information about industrial action in China here.

11 Comments

  1. SteveH said,

    As a condition for joining the WTO China had to break with the Iron Rice Bowl! So much for the enlightened Western leaders!

    Interesting article here:

    http://links.org.au/node/2536

    China is a fast developing Capitalist economy born from a deformed workers state ruling a peasant nation and the logistics of China (population size for eg) mean straight comparisons with the advanced capitalist West cannot be made. As the West declines in relation to the East I believe the future Sarkozys and Camerons will find their inner ruthless authoritarian bastard that they usually reserve for the foreigners and make the Chinese leaders look like pussycats. Be warned!

    Still no amount of legislation can stop workers in China organising fir better conditions. Which brings us to an important lesson, legislation is one thing (and often good) but as many workers know there is always a gap between what is enshrined in law and what actually happens in the workplace. Only by developing co-operative workplaces can workers ensure their needs are met.

  2. Jim Denham said,

    Vacuous banality. Stick to the ouija board, Steve.

  3. Roger said,

    Meanwhile in the latest of the never ending round of Republican candidate debates swivel-eyed Christianist loon Michelle Bachmann has declared that America needs to copy China’s welfare system.

    Nobody seems to have pointed out to her that a big reason China can get by with next to no welfare system is that for many decades they have been forcing women to abort countless millions of those foetuses that she is so devoted to protecting…

  4. SteveH said,

    Roger, you make my point. As the West declines in relation to the East the Western leaders, so beloved by this site, will entertain ideas that come straight from the authoritarian handbook. So republican candiidates are already thinking about Chinese style welfare!

    Incidentally in the USA the main reason given for women having abortions was poverty. Now that didn’t translate into women in the USA forced to have abortions when this site argued in favour of abortions, that idea was shot down in flames. So what is the official policy on abortion?

  5. Jim Denham said,

    “the Western leaders, so beloved by this site”. One shred of evidence, please?: You’re a liar. Or illiterate. Or both.

  6. SteveH said,

    What do you mean evidence?, this site is the evidence! You follow them around like some needy kid following an adult in order to justify every war they ever enter. And you do it on their terms, freeing the oppressed, putting girls into school etc etc. Their every action is written as some heroic act of selfless advancement of humankind. When they attack Islamists you attack Islamists, when they support Islamists you support Islamists. You’re their bitch.

    Even in this article on China you have to shed them in a favourable light, without bothering to factor in any context whatsoever.

    You are an uncritical servile voice for their policicies, which can be reduced to a singe word – apologist.

  7. Jim Denham said,

    “justify every war they ever enter. And you do it on their terms, freeing the oppressed, putting girls into school etc etc”.

    Mr H: you noticeably cannot produce a shred of evidence, a single quote or *anything* specific to justify your lying and/or ignorant, slanderous generalisations. You have nothing of interest to say and your intellectually barren contributions simply lower the level of discussion. We have no objection to people disagreeing with us here, but we see no need to give space to morons and liars like you. Fuck off once and for all please.

  8. Roger said,

    What Jim said.

  9. Roger said,

    Back on the topic the ‘lets copy China’ (or rather ‘copy China or die’) meme does appear to be growing in popularity amongst the bourgeoisie.

    Recent sub-Spenglerian tracts by Dambisa Moyo and Niall Ferguson seem to be saying exactly that (I have and will do a review of Moyo’s book when and if I can actually struggle to the end of her goddawful undergraduate essay).

    And perhaps this may be the politically correct form that the new fascism will actually take?

  10. Emma Goldman said,

    This guy seemed to have the right idea.

    ‘The Mensheviks attacked not only the militarization of labour, but general labour service also. They reject these methods as “compulsory.” They preach that general labour service means a low productivity of labour, while militarization means senseless scattering of labour-power.

    “Compulsory labor always is unproductive labour,” – such is the exact phrase in the Menshevik resolution. This affirmation brings us right up to the very essence of the question. For, as we see, the question is not at all whether it is wise or unwise to proclaim this or that factory militarized, or whether it is helpful or otherwise to give the military revolutionary tribunal powers to punish corrupt workers who steal materials and instruments, so precious to us, or who sabotage their work. No, the Mensheviks have gone much further into the question. Affirming that compulsory labour is always unproductive, they thereby attempt to cut the ground from under the feet of our economic reconstruction in the present transitional epoch. For it is beyond question that to step from bourgeois anarchy to Socialist economy without a revolutionary dictatorship, and without compulsory forms of economic organization, is impossible.’

    I wonder who wrote this?

  11. Roger said,

    Miss, miss, miss – I know!

    And what if the T-man was right and the reformists and anarchists were wrong?

    No compulsion = no socialism?

    Unless you indulge in no true Scotsman semantics about ‘socialism’ the data does seems to support Trotsky…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 260 other followers

%d bloggers like this: