15 Dec

Statist Wistful Admiration Of China’s Communist Party

                                       

China Celebrating 60 years of Communist Rule

China’s ascendance in our consciousness has been growing steadily for a generation, and we wonder what more impact it will have than has already been felt by our economy and our society. We cannot accurately predict China’s future or its actions going forward, but as it flexes its newfound powers to reshape global conventions, we should remain vigilant that our own perceptions not be warped by ideologically, or otherwise tainted assertions.

Our enthusiastic media collectively extol the moral legitimacy of China’s communist model of political rule which controls 1.3 billion people, and predicts that China’s surpass of the U.S. economy is just over the horizon – scarcely visible as that may be through the toxic haze. Should untarnished freedom be a fundamental human right nurtured within a true democracy, then such adoration of China by our leaders, scholars, pundits and so many others, challenges the core tenets at the heart of the Constitution.

Defenders of the ethos imposed through coercion within China, rationalize that stomping all over individual rights is a necessity which protects the needs of the collective. Somehow when such justification is vaunted by our own self-anointed intelligentsia with the always present caveat that, “after all, how else can you rule over 1.3 billion people?” . . . . we capitulate. All the while our internal turbulence leaves us in visceral disarray.  The virtuosos of the PR machines make it all right that we send (through spending) trillions of our dollars to enrich a regime which recent history (1950s and 1960s) has evidenced as the most ruthless in human history.

As China today shuffles its leadership we are provoked into accepting that the shifting of nameplates is founded on meritocracy and not on handpicked automatons perpetuating dictatorship. The reality that much of the current Chinese leadership is formed by the natural laws of heredity and that the sons of well-known revolutionaries today take up the mantel, does not appear to trouble our cognoscenti in the West. Xi Jinping who will be shortly confirmed as China’s leader is one such “princeling.”   We should remember that in China the Communist Party controls the army and one only touches the levers of power after having held very senior military posts (read: demonstrated ruthlessness).

Should we accept the propaganda (East and West) that virtue rises to the top and that China’s leadership is genetically virtuous and molecularly superior? How affected are we when our media refers to China’s “Communist era,” as if it was some unfortunate ephemeral occurrence of the past, or simply a fading authoritarian dragon which lost its repressive teeth? Just because the Communist Party has carefully allowed some private sector to coexist with state controlled enterprises, does not mean it has relinquished any authority over business, over media, over education, and it is on guard against any de-politicization of the country’s vast military machine. The secretive Organization Department of the Communist Party of China Central Committee controls ‘assignments’ in government and industry. The boot is firmly on the neck.

Recent leaks which the Central Propaganda Department missed, suggest that the high level of corruption within the Communist Party is pervasive. The submissive population cannot react since it knows the potential of the beast camouflaged behind smiles. It knows the despotic force which controls its nation.  This is the virtuosity that is so confident that it siphons its billions off-shore, acquiring hard assets like real estate in safe havens like San Francisco, Sidney and Vancouver.  The pretence of stability provided by the virtuous Communist Party may not be so well founded given that it cannot explain why so many of its wealthiest have ensured themselves foreign ‘pieds-a-terre?’ It is incapable of explaining why so many of the wealthy have moved their families offshore while they continue to amass personal wealth within China.  One acquaintance close to such events reminded me that it is very expensive to move money offshore from China because there are so many hands which have to be taken care of on the way out. Is this virtuosity so prevalent that millions of people, both rich and not as rich, leave the country for foreign shores as soon as they possibly can?

Before we look at what some of our statist virtuosos of the ‘beau monde’ are selling us about China’s version of communism, we should remind ourselves that any government’s legitimate function is to protect the individual’s rights.

In 2009 Thomas Friedman, the writer for the oracle of all that is socialistically holy, wrote, ”One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages.This self-asserted sophistication upholding the concept of the benevolent dictator surely must know something which lesser minds cannot comprehend. Or is it more likely an uninformed observation from a philosopher-king wannabe, lost in ideological nonsense attempting political correctness? Whatever its motivation, this claim evidences a complete lack of insight into human nature’s tendencies and desires for self-actualization. Such ignorant percepts miss the fact that stifling people and frustrating their desire for fulfillment of their potentialities deprives them immeasurably. The result is emotional disturbance and psychological pathology.  Long term, the consequence is broad based despondency. This socio-economic transport of a Nation into the elitist controlled utopia is the ultimate pinnacle of arrogance.  Is this the ‘down river’ that our media is attempting to sell us?

Confucius once informed, “What the superior man seeks is in himself; what the small man seeks is in others.”

Let’s take a look at a rather ideal example of someone who would do well to read Confucius – President Obama’s Chairman of Jobs and Competitiveness, Jeffrey Immelt, who moralized on the Charlie Rose Show this past week, . . . .

Immelt:  “State-run Communism may not be your cup of tea, but their government works.”

Charlie Rose:  “They get things done.”

Well, three cheers for state-run communism. Right? When you instill fear in people to perform your will, you “get things done.” Right Charlie?  Charlie may be a herring mindlessly drawn by the statist current which enriches him, but Immelt is not. He is head of a global corporation doing $146 billion and employing a little under a third of a million employees.

Immelt is self-serving and rationalizing his shift of some General Electric manufacturing facilities to China, knowing full well that the Communist Party makes the decisions on who ‘gets in.’  For now we won’t argue with him whether he could have managed increases in productivity in America instead of moving, but does he really believe what he is saying? Any of it? Does he understand what he is selling?

The mind behind the visage of Obama’s Job Council seems not to grasp the seriousness of his message, nor its impact.  Or perhaps he doesn’t care – there’s a personal empire to build, who cares about the country?  Notice that in this interview, as in others, he has no idea what to do about jobs? None. He is evidently only interested in his own. Where is the wisdom?  He certainly seems to know how to get taxpayer dollars, warming the Oval Office into the purchase of unproductive and unprofitable windmill farms. He can buy influence and taxpayer cash, with taxpayer cash.

We cannot forget the enforcement of the population’s conversion to Immelt’s green-technology-made-in-China CFL light bulbs. Don’t ask him what you should do with the toxic mercury in those bulbs once they burn out well before their due date, just take them to the dump.  We do not need to question why Immelt’s statist views are supported by GE’s tentacles in NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, NBC Sports, Universal Film Studios. We know why. We also will not bother inquiring into GE’s relationship with the U.S. tax system, since we already know it manages to sidestep that annoying tax thingie. Immelt knows how to ride the East-West fence, and statists applaud him as he promotes the socialist message.

The Immelts and Friedmans advocate that we too could find success if only we had top down power of overreaching government following the Chinese model as the symbol of perfection. It is unfortunate there are some already in power here who dream of holding reigns of omnipotent influence over the masses. It is doubly unfortunate that these same individuals influence our media.  Do they really long for a Chinese version of governance? They and their mouthpieces are certainly selling us hard on it, lying about the realities that lie hidden under the propaganda.

Individuals like Immelt should be promoting America, encouraging its freedom, and the beauty of its Constitution. They should be praising and protecting the country which provided them their opportunities and their wealth.  Sadly they represent a broad element across the Nation, too ready to do away with protection of fundamental individual rights.  After all, it works over there, doesn’t it?

About James Raider

A constituent of the vast baby boomer generation with a career which has been fortunate to know the ponderous corporate worlds, as well as the intimately pressurized, and invigorating entrepreneurial domains of high tech and venture capital, I have harvested my share of mistakes meandering through corridors of enterprise from Silicon Valley, to London and endless, colourful, sometimes praetorian points in between. The voyage has provided an abundance of fodder for a pen yielding to an inquisitive keyboard, a foraging mind, and a passionate spirit. Whether political or business or social or economic or personal, is it not all political? It is a privilege to write, and an even greater privilege to be read by anyone, and sometimes with the wind at my back the writing may occasionally be legible. I do not write to invite scorn, nor to invite respect, but if I get really lucky the writing can stimulate thinking. I also write for the very selfish purpose of animating my own processes, and engaging the best of what life offers. Above all, whether biting fire or swatting shadows, I am grateful to be gifted the freedom to write and publish whatever flows down to the keyboard. To all those who enabled this freedom, and to all those standing guard to preserve it, I am indebted.
This entry was posted in Communism, Politics, Socialism and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Saturday, December 15th, 2012 at 6:41 pm
| 426 views

14 Responses to Statist Wistful Admiration Of China’s Communist Party

  1. Skook says: 1

    Outstanding article, it seems Immelt is functioning well as the head of job creation, he is just confused; he is supposed to create jobs in America, not China. Soon the advantage of America’s X-ray technology and manufacturing will be the state property of China, courtesy of Immelt, via GE.

    In the mean time, the sons of Communism are educated in Vancouver and worry over whether to buy a Ferrari or Bentley.

    ReplyReply
  2. James Raider says: 2

    Skook, absolutely right. That is one of the consequences which has damaged our market advantage. And China is ruthless in its theft.

    ReplyReply
  3. Pingback: Anonymous

  4. james raider says: 3

    @Skook: #1

    “the sons of Communism are educated in Vancouver and worry over whether to buy a Ferrari or Bentley.”

    Related to a question I raised recently of someone intimately familiar about why there appears to be proportionally more interest by many Chinese of influence to buy into Canada (1.Place cash in a stable haven & 2. acquire raw natural resources ) than to buy into United States companies, the response was in effect, “because the U.S. owes us so much, eventually we’ll just take them (companies).”
    I thought this response peculiar, since it suggests a misunderstanding of America’s ‘structure’ (you can’t just trade a national debt with private equity) and it was disturbing to me that the broader explanation contained strange indication of patience in a long term strategy toward America.
    They obviously see Canada as an open door and a walk in the park. America presents them with a different and more complex conundrum.
    I hold misgivings about what I’m hearing and sensing.

    ReplyReply
  5. Skookum says: 4

    JR, the entitlement program tends to work in reverse in Canada, for immigration. If you have the bucks, you move to the front of the fast lane. The US likes to put the illiterate, untrained in that position. The Chinese can establish immigrant status or citizenship in Canada and they have a home in a country where they can buy almost anything, especially ocean front property in a fairly mild climate. The economy is strong, the politicians aren’t determined to destroy the country to achieve some type of Social Justice that will ultimately destroy the country. It’s a no brainer, Canada is the best choice for the immigrant. We shouldn’t even mention the difference in energy policies. Western Canada can support the rest of Canada because of its energy and natural resource policies.

    Remember, America or Obama has a vendetta for the bourgeoisie and intends to tax these people into oblivion or at least a vulnerable position. Why would a wealthy Chinese business man who may someday face confiscation of resources at home want to tie up resources in a country headed for the confiscation of wealth syndrome.

    Canada supports wealth or capital. They realize capitalists are the ones responsible for bankrolling the different projects within a national economy, not the government with dim witted politicians. The US is headed for the economic doldrums and by draining the money supply through increased taxation, we are essentially taking down more sails to catch some wind to gain momentum. The US is a losing proposition to the Chinese Communist who grew up in the backward thinking Obama and company are embracing. To the reformed Communist, having totalitarian control of the people within a burgeoning capitalist semi-free market with strict government control is the best of both worlds.

    The US is embracing the systems they have abandoned. Immelt and Obama like the idea of totalitarian control of labor, with all the capital flowing directly to the Elites. The exact situation in China, there is one problem, over there leaders and mafias change; one day you are on top and a billionaire and next month you are in a gulag. It’s not the best situation. It is far better to have one foot in a country that respects capital and freedom, while your other foot is stirring up the dollars in the cess pool of an emerging capitalist society that still has the iron heel on the throat of its citizenry in a totalitarian control situation.

    In the mean time, they can deplete the wealth of the US by supplying cheap manufacturing goods that leave the American worker idle and draining the economy and they can continue to loan the US money until the country is flat broke. It is a method of wealth depletion. Whether in the form of welfare payments or cheap manufactured goods, the money supply is only going over the Pacific and then to Vancouver.

    ReplyReply
  6. james raider says: 5

    Skook, there is also an easy inference I can reach from what comes across my radar that there is an attitude held by powerful Chinese about individuals like Immelt, one that you’ve nailed in #1 – we come bearing gifts of technology, knowhow, processes, patents. We set up camp, and hand it all over. As you know, when executives of companies such as Apple wish to visit their manufacturing plants in China, . . . the Party ‘knows.’

    The other is related to the political decisions with respect to debt and deficits. They (China) appear to be more aware of the ‘abyss’ just down the road than many here are prepared to admit. They seem convinced that assets will be available at bargain basement prices. They are patient on that front.

    Canada’s natural resource wealth will keep its coffers relatively stable and whitewash many mistakes for some time yet. Keep in mind, although it has a Conservative leader and majority, roughly two thirds of the population is liberal and/or socialist (NDP).

    ReplyReply
  7. Skookum says: 6

    Canada’s natural resource wealth will keep its coffers relatively stable and whitewash many mistakes for some time yet. Keep in mind, though it has a Conservative leader and majority, roughly two thirds of the population is liberal and/or socialist (NDP).

    Harper has pulled it off partially because the Leftists are in two diverse camps.

    We seem to be suicidal facing a 2 to 4 point deficit. Our NDP is in control in the US, but if we can cause division in their ranks.

    The university indoctrination in Canada seems to be more blatant or overt than here, judging from my conversations with college students. Marx is a source of reference in the most diverse classes, imagine that.

    ReplyReply
  8. james raider says: 7

    @Skookum: #6,

    Marx is a source of reference in the most diverse classes, imagine that.

    As you have no doubt heard Canada’s answer to Paris Hilton, Justin Trudeau, is seeking the leadership of the Liberal party. He’s the ‘Princeling’ dimwit who claimed that growing up and through his life he called Castro, “uncle Fidel.” . . . Yup, Marx is not only alive and well, he’s rising in academe, . . . no warped percepts there.

    I’ve spent much time at MIT and at Stanford, and I think that they’ll give McGill and UBC a run for their money on % of socialist believers.

    ReplyReply
  9. johngalt says: 8

    @james raider:

    I will never understand how people can look at a government taking away people’s choices and see that as “freedom”.

    I understand that some people have an affinity for shackles, but they chafe the hell out of me.

    ReplyReply
  10. james raider says: 9

    @johngalt: #8,

    I will never understand . . . . .

    I’m still working on it as well. :-) It’s hell attempting to get your mind around it. I understand ‘lazy’, I understand complacent, I understand insecurity, but I don’t understand not being able to differentiate Lies from Truth. There are good liars but still. And where is the common sense? Why is it so difficult to listen, and to parse proclamations or assertions against the context of ‘motive’?

    If only there was a store where one could acquire scepticism chits.

    ReplyReply
  11. Skookum says: 10

    In the two college curriculums, I think Canada’s is far more honest. They aren’t teaching the covert ideas of Communism under a veil of secrecy, where everything, but the intent is hidden. Up there they openly tell the students they expect them to be good little Communists and Socialists, and wherever they choose between those two philosophies is their freedom to choose.

    ReplyReply
  12. Skookum says: 11

    JR, the big difference in American and Canadian colleges is the product. The Canadian graduates knowing he has been indoctrinated with four years of propaganda; they know they have been trained as Communists and are ready to deal with the situation. The American graduate is trained/indoctrinated with the classical indoctrination to resist pushback; consequently, an American graduate doesn’t have the confidence of a Canadian Communist, he believes he is a patriotic American espousing Marxism.

    ReplyReply
  13. Hard Right says: 12

    “Enlightened” like in China? They often execute people whose only crime is upsetting the state. They get a bullet to the head. Then they charge the family for the cost of the bullet.
    It’s hard to tell if friedmen is suffering from the pathological denial of reality that is a major trait of leftists, or if he approves of such a thing. Go to huffpo, DUNG, or KOS and you’ll see much support for executions of Conservatives.

    ReplyReply
  14. Skookum says: 13

    JR, I spent some time reading about Justin Trudeau, this morning. It is obvious, that without his last name, Justin like Hillary would have a difficult time being elected or taken seriously as a candidate for dog catcher.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>