Worst Dictators

[Mao]

Originally posted by DaShi


Yes, you contend that, because you've taken one group who has been compensated for their losses and are using them to represent the conditions of all the peasants in China.

What are you talking about, "losses." As I said before, I contend that life is better for most peasants, not because they've been compensated for losses, but because it just is better and they haven't lost anything. Again, I speak of most peasants while you only speak of a minority. And once again, they're no longer starving and suffering from famine, which makes their life better now than before. Do you agree to this? I mean, really, if you can't agree to this point, there really is point in going further because it's simply factual. There have been famines in peacetime, many times. There aren't any more. On a most level, doesn't that make life "better" now?

Yet these people don't protest because they have been placated. I would argue that they've sold out their future for better homes and television, and are living in future ghettos that will also create more problems in the future.

I disagree. They haven't "sold out their future," most are still working hard as they have been for generations. I also disagree because I don't believe the current regime can last much longer, but that's a different issue altogether.

However, they are not what this is about. This is about the people who are protesting, specifically those in the countryside.

No, it isn't about them at all. As I said before, I'm speaking about the majority of peasants. The majority aren't protesting. The majority haven't had lands taken away from them. The majority are making more money now than they ever have been before. Why is that so hard to understand. Can you really not see this? Again, as i said before, there are many peasants who have gotten the shaft, but they represent a minority. You never argued this point, but rather just tried to steered the argument to something else (a point, I might note, that I agree with you on).

I'll concede that life for farmers wasn't always so great in the past. However, it is difficult for me to support your first argument that the protests of the countryside farmers are only about getting a better life. Unless I can see examples of protests that were about this and not about the building of a new factory or something similar.

OK, my logic about the "better" life is a bit hard to understand, because frankly, it's a bit weird, but I think it's logical. Let me try to explain it more clearly:

Before, lands were being taken away from peasants without reason/right, etc.

Now, lands are being taken away from peasants without reason/right, etc.

Hence, the peasants protest for a "better" life so that they're lands don't get taken away without reason/right. What's happening now is the norm, rather than the exception, and they want something better than that. Does that make sense?

Now, this specifically about land being taken away by the government. I can use this same line of logic, however, to argue the same about pollution, etc. (ie: when dams were built that stopped/reduced irrigation to an area).

If you can provide them, then I'll be able to see you point more clearly. And perhaps, given the shear number of protests, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that among them are protests simply for better conditions in the countryside in response to the growth of China.

See above. The difference now is that there are protests, whereas before many suffered in silence because they saw no way out. Now, they see protest as a way to fight against the system.

How could you not notice the contruction workers who have been forced to abandon their families for a job where they are fortunateif they are paid?

I did notice them. The majority of them could stay in the countryside and live at subsistence level, or a bit above that. It's not a great life, but again, three meals a day is better than what their forefathers could've enjoyed. Also, I'm not saying that the better life is purely a function of the Beijing government, indeed it's not, but at least the Beijing government didn't take them further back in time a la DPRK.

Did you not see the poor children wandering the streets during school hours or working in their family restaurants? How about the endless lines of beggars, some with self-mutilations? Or worse the children beggars? Their injuries are not always an accident nor are those their parents that they run back to after you give them some money. I saw this regularly in Hangzhou. Do you really believe that this is better than their forfathers dreamed?

Eating three times a day is better than their forefathers dreamed. If they had stayed in the countryside, they wouldn't have much hope for advancement or such, but they would have food and could eat three meals a day, and even meat. They no longer sell off their daughters or sons. That's more than their forefathers dreamed. Let's take this one by one, however:

Working in family restaurants??? You do realize that their forefathers could've never dreamed of owning a business.

Beggars, children begging, etc. - Again, the majority of peasants do not do this. I'm speaking of the majority again. You speak of a minority. My argument in the beginning was that life is better for the vast majority of peasants, you've still yet to say anything against this. If you're argument is that for some, they've been left behind, then I agree. I also believe that a measure of a people is not how they treat those who have plenty, but those who want. I don't believe the Beijing government is benevolent, but it's dealing with peasants is very enlightened at times.

They move to the cities in hopes of a better life only to find it not there. So they meek out an eager existance. The luckiest ones end up in factories that perhaps in the future will have better conditions for them. For now it's better than lying in a ditch. These are the people who are left behind.

Again, nothing you say here contradicts my main point. I agree with you, too many have been left behind, but how would you reform the country? Could you come up with a plan to raise everyone out of the poverty at once? I can tell you that I couldn't, so the government is modernizing region by region, village by village.

Yes, most these are what is offered only to compensated farmers.

Again, I don't know what you're talking about. There are many villages, especially on the east coast, that haven't had land taken away from them to build a new factory here or there, but are still doing very well. New houses, electricity, etc.

Now more mobility doesn't necessarily mean a better condition. The farmers of the American Dust Bowl had mobility to seek harsh and cruel work elsewhere. Their lifes weren't better for it.

You're right. Mobility in and of itself doesn't mean better conditions. However, the practical fact is that it does mean better conditions for most farmers, as they can transport their goods further.

Like the Chinese, many of them lost their land to greedy corporations or banks. More mobility is better here in that it gives people who are put in bad conditions to roll the wheel somewhere else.

That's true in some cases, but not most.

As for no taxes. Farmers still pay local taxes and fees. And compensated farmers don't make any money to be taxed. And the homeless and migrant workers don't make enough to be taxed.

Again, you really have to define what a "compensated farmer" is. I really don't understand the term. Not everyone in China is having their houses taken away, do you really think they are? Farmers do still pay some local taxes and fees, but this is TINY in comparison to what they had to pay before throughout history. Both in absolute terms AND in proportional terms.

Yes, and in the past they may have lost the land but were still able to work on it. Fair, no. But at least they had a job and weren't displaced in society.

Nothing here contradicts my main point once again, because you're talking about what's happening to a comparatively small minority. Again, it doesn't excuse anything, but the way you make it sound, one would believe that all the peasants in China are getting their lands taken away. Also, it's not necessarily true that they were still able to work on the land. Even if they were, is indentured servitude really better?

They weren't forced to leave. This direct and immediate consequence leads most to migrate and some to protest if they can gather enough support. Perhaps if it was the central government who was directly taking the land, they would be compensated. I'll give it that much credit, even if it does lead to future problems. The companies offer little to nothing ever increasing this "lost" population who are coming to cities in hordes looking for a new life to replace the ones that they lost. But I understand where you're are coming from on what they want better.

Honestly, we don't really disagree on much I think. The main points, correct me if I'm wrong, would be as follows:

1.) The majority of peasants have a better life now than at any time in their history. Note that I don't make any causal links here.

2.) There are a wealth of social problems in China relating to industrialization and modernization, including the hidden population, land being taken away, etc. etc. This will lead to greater problems in the future if allowed to fester. This is also very unfair.

3.) Neither of us believe that the Chinese government is a "good" government with the needs of the people in its heart.

Also, if you do want to talk about, actually study the Chinese peasanty intellectually/seriously (as opposed to talking me in an online forum), I recommend "China Against the Tides" by Blecher, "The Paradox of Chinas Post-Mao Reforms" by Goldman, "Governing China: From Revolution Through Reform" by Lieberthal, "Chinese Society: Change, Conflict and Resistance" by Perry, and "The Spiral Road: Change in a Chinese Village Through the Eyes of a Communist Party Leader" by Huang. These books, I believe, give an incredible insight into what the Chinese peasantry is like, other than mere anecdotal evidence and stories we've heard. If you actually do care, it's worth a read. I've also found them to be amazingly balanced (in most cases) as well.

[DaShi]

Honestly, we don't really disagree on much I think. The main points, correct me if I'm wrong, would be as follows:

1.) The majority of peasants have a better life now than at any time in their history. Note that I don't make any causal links here.

2.) There are a wealth of social problems in China relating to industrialization and modernization, including the hidden population, land being taken away, etc. etc. This will lead to greater problems in the future if allowed to fester. This is also very unfair.

3.) Neither of us believe that the Chinese government is a "good" government with the needs of the people in its heart.

Also, if you do want to talk about, actually study the Chinese peasanty intellectually/seriously (as opposed to talking me in an online forum), I recommend "China Against the Tides" by Blecher, "The Paradox of Chinas Post-Mao Reforms" by Goldman, "Governing China: From Revolution Through Reform" by Lieberthal, "Chinese Society: Change, Conflict and Resistance" by Perry, and "The Spiral Road: Change in a Chinese Village Through the Eyes of a Communist Party Leader" by Huang. These books, I believe, give an incredible insight into what the Chinese peasantry is like, other than mere anecdotal evidence and stories we've heard. If you actually do care, it's worth a read. I've also found them to be amazingly balanced (in most cases) as well.

Perhaps we do agree on more than I thought. And I'll take a look at some of those books. Thank you. I believe that my opinions are colored on a lot of what I saw while there. A rather down-trodden poor surrounded by a rapidly growing middle class. However, I can't say that my experience is comprehensive.

[Mao]

I mean, we really do agree on the main points I think. We even disagree very little on the details it seems. It just took us *WAY* too many posts and too many paragraphs to realize this.

Bookwise, China Against the Tides can get heavy at times, but in general it's pretty light (it gives a nice brief history of what's been happening). The last book, Huang's, puts a personal light into the village. Oh, and since you're interested in the protesting and such, Perry's book is probably a must since it does give a lot of attention to how wronged citizens have tried to resist.

With that we can return this thread back to it's regularly scheduled programming...