13-01-2003 11:45									#31
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Yep. And common sense has been in force for the past 10 years.

Strangely, I still haven't found any mention of this experiment in Chinese sources.

	13-01-2003 11:46									#32
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Haven't been any good Chinese communists since the Canton Commune.

	13-01-2003 11:46									#33
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan DuncanK: yes, of course. Nothing can replace checks and balances.

Except true democracy on the most local level

	13-01-2003 11:51									#34
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan Strangely, I still haven't found any mention of this experiment in Chinese sources.

That maybe because they are doing this for the multinational corporations and the international community. They don't want their people to know about it. It might cause problems for them.

	13-01-2003 11:54									#35
	Tired of ads?

Well, the people of Shenzhen should hear of this, at least? If they do, then it would be common knowledge across China in a week.

I'll be watching Chinese news websites for updates.

	13-01-2003 21:18									#36
	Re: China to Test "Western" Political Reforms In Shenzen Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by DanS ...starting this year. Could somebody help give us a clue on what the significance of this is? I'm especially interested that Jiang's man is heading it up, not any of Hu's men.

It's obvious, isn't it. If it works, then Jiang can take credit for it. If it fails, it will fail during Hu's reign so he'll be to blame.

	13-01-2003 23:17									#37
	Got spare money?

I don't see it failing. To do it in Shenzhen, the jewel of the crown, means that it has broad support, even by Hu. Success, in the way I measure things, will be difficult, however.

	14-01-2003 00:05									#38
	Tired of ads?

I didn't say it would fail. I just explained why Jiang would put his name on it.

	18-01-2003 10:03									#39
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Finally! The news appears as headline news at a reputable Chinese news website:

http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2003-01-18/0852879232.shtml

	18-01-2003 10:14									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

A quick translation of main points:

Shenzhen will carry out the reforms in early 2003. In essence, the city government will be split into the three branches of legislative, executive and judicial. This will result in the disappearance of many existing government offices, in the first instance of such reform across the entire nation.

"Mayor Yu [of Shenzhen] explains: even since Montesquieu advanced his idea of limited power for each branch of government, many Western nations have adopted such reforms. This has resulted in both advantages and disadvantages, often an over-emphasis on process has resulted in sluggish decision-making and implementation. Shenzhen's goal is to create a system that is both able to supply checks and balances among its branches and ensure high efficiency in the government."

In addition, the city government delegates the right to approve foreign investment, fixed capital investment to local borough authorities.

The borough governments will also have greater rights in the areas of the environment, commerce & industries, public safety, urban planning, etc.

Some other unrelated stuff.

	18-01-2003 14:34									#41
	Increase Your PM Length

I would hasten to mention that Communism is a primarily economic system, not a political system. All of the world's previous communist states taught consistently that once the revolution was fully achieved, equal self-rule by all people would be the order of the day.

Thus, the ideal communist society bears more in common politically with a democratic society. The paradigm that communism opposes is not democracy, but capitalism.

However, the political system that often accompanies communist nations is authoritarian or police rule. This is what most people mean when they mention "communist". Historically, all communist countries have tended towards authoritarian and police rule, and as such a "communist" is frequently caricatured as somebody who loves police states and oppression (which is an oversimplification of the matter).

China appears to be trying to work a mixture of authoritarian politics, and capitalistic economics. This might lead to a dangerous challenge by the newly empowered middle class, but Jiang's contribution to Chinese Communist thought (such as it is) was to admit capitalists into the Communist Party.

Evidently his thinking was to include the newly economically powerful class into politics, thus allowing them some limited power or perception thereof.

This will certainly help reduce friction with the noveau riche, but risks alienating the enormous social majority living at or below the poverty line.

An International Herald Tribune article recently chronicled (rather positively, I might add) President Hu's latest departures from Jiang's standard. Hu visited rural areas and spoke to local governments about greater state aid to the poor and health treatment. He specifically mentioned the Communist Party's debt to the peasantry, and acknowledged that improvements in their living standards are needed.

China's non-autonomous regions are all linked by a common script and many similar cultures (though not entirely identical). This is one of the reasons proffered to explain why China has not fragmented to the same degree that the Soviet Union did. The USSR admitted republic nations but did not provide them with political or economic equality, and could not convince them of the validity of the Moscow rule over their territory. China, on the other hand, has a sufficiently coherent and continuous historical/cultural bond with most of its non-autonomous regions that any sustained pro-indepence activity would be unlikely.

Taiwan, Tibet, and Xinjiang are exceptions to this. Taiwan, though culturally similar to China, is at present politically distant (insofar as military and diplomatic intervention by the Americans have worked to foster an anti-Beijing, pro-Taipei stance). Economics used to define the major differentiation between China and Taiwan (during the Chiang rules, Taiwan's political system was every bit as draconian as China's... a fact that most westerners do not hear about) but now with the attractiveness of mainland investments, and the shared culture and language, more and more Taiwanese investors and entrepreneurs are returning to China, lobbying against Taiwanese policies which could endanger peace (such as declarations of independence) or hurt profits (such as regulations limiting the export of human skills and resources to the mainland).

Tibet and Xinjiang were annexed recently enough so that pro-independence movements are more influential. Moreover, both regions have considerably different cultural and linguistic histories than the Han states. At present, the Chinese government is pouring huge amounts of state and private investments into the development of these two territories, and international policy upholds Chinese sovereignty over these two areas.

	18-01-2003 16:07									#42
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan Shi Huangdi: Yes, China has stayed together for thousands of years, mainly due to the draconian, tyrannic governmental measures that were first set in stone by Shi Huangdi.

Definitely not. It is the culture that bound the people together.

	18-01-2003 16:09									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

There has been no mention of this in the local news either. Very odd.

quote: I would hasten to mention that Communism is a primarily economic system, not a political system.

	18-01-2003 16:28									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

What's with the communist talk, anyway? It's not like the PRC is connected to communist ideas, really.

	18-01-2003 23:19									#45
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Definitely not. It is the culture that bound the people together.

No. Before Shi Huangdi's time, China was fragmented enough to be very Europe-like. Each "state" in what is now China had its own culture, language, philosophies, script. The outlying states like the Chu, Qin, Yue etc were considered semi-barbarian.

This is the reason why China could go through five hundred years without showing any signs of political reunification -- there was simply no concept of "China" at the time, at least no more than the concept of "Europe" is today.

Shi Huangdi changed all that. Among many of his deeds, he destroyed the old system of states and initiated massive migrations; he unified the scripts and measures of the individual states; and he first set in stone the idea of an indivisible China. The difference between him and Rome, however, is that his state-control mechanisms worked better for China, which was less geographically fragmented anyway. Hence subsequent dynasties were able to keep the country together until it really gained a sense of "cultural unity".

China didn't begin as a "cultural monolith" -- it was Qin Shi Huangdi who first created that concept.

Besides, cultural unity is irrelevant anyway. China has flown apart countless times in history, culture or no culture.

btw, here's a link to Chinese news:

http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2003-01-18/0852879232.shtml

	18-01-2003 23:34									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan The difference between him and Rome, however, is that his state-control mechanisms worked better for China, which was less geographically fragmented anyway. Hence subsequent dynasties were able to keep the country together until it really gained a sense of "cultural unity".

Were the mechanisms different or was there some other reason why they worked in China instead of Rome? Very interesting

	18-01-2003 23:37									#47
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

"Shenzhen's goal is to create a system that is both able to supply checks and balances among its branches and ensure high efficiency in the government."

High efficiency in government?

As for the rest of the description, it seems pretty vague, but there are some promising parts, such as moving spending more toward the local level. Is the government at the local level elected in any way, shape or form? If not, who is the local government accountable to?

	18-01-2003 23:44									#48
	Suffering from ads?

"Very odd."

Why do y'all consider this odd?

	19-01-2003 05:18									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by DuncanK Were the mechanisms different or was there some other reason why they worked in China instead of Rome? Very interesting

China was easier to keep together than Rome because China is a continuous landmass that is more or less flat.

As for the mechanisms themselves, I don't think they were that different at the beginning.

	19-01-2003 05:20									#50
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by DanS High efficiency in government?

Explain 's.

quote: As for the rest of the description, it seems pretty vague, but there are some promising parts, such as moving spending more toward the local level. Is the government at the local level elected in any way, shape or form? If not, who is the local government accountable to?

Elections - to an extent. There's been plenty of experiments where the most local councils are elected.

As for accountability, they are accountable to the next level up, of course.

	19-01-2003 05:20									#51
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I wonder if this will affect my supply of fried rice

	19-01-2003 08:38									#52
	Tired of ads?

quote: Shenzhen, the jewel of the crown

What? I think that distinction goes to another Chinese city.

This is the first time I have heard of this, too. I think it fits the pattern of conservative officials announcing something after the fact in order to avoid embarrassing humiliations. Example: the earlier Shenzhou space missions were not announced until the capsule had safely returned to Earth.

Anyway, I hope Shenzhen's experiment goes well. Efforts at the local level to date have had very mixed results, from what I ahve gathered. Often, elected independant officials find their efforts thwarted by party members at the next level up. Local party officials are such notoriously petty tyrants.

	20-01-2003 16:55									#53
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan No. Before Shi Huangdi's time, China was fragmented enough to be very Europe-like. Each "state" in what is now China had its own culture, language, philosophies, script. The outlying states like the Chu, Qin, Yue etc were considered semi-barbarian.

No (again). First of all, there had been at least a couple of dynasties before the Autumn-Spring Period and the Warring States. If you count the Sha dynasty there had been at least three. Secondly, Each state were largely similar, including language and culture. As for philosophies, the Warring States was the golden age of Chinese philosophy, giving rise to such great schools of thought such as Taoism and Confucism.

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan This is the reason why China could go through five hundred years without showing any signs of political reunification -- there was simply no concept of "China" at the time, at least no more than the concept of "Europe" is today.

This is again not true. There had been tens if not hundreds of little states at the beginning of the Spring and Autumn Period but only seven left at the beginning of the Warring States.

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan Besides, cultural unity is irrelevant anyway. China has flown apart countless times in history, culture or no culture.

What do you think that brought them back into one piece? Why did the Roman Empire ended up in pieces, but China remains as one?

	20-01-2003 16:57									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan China was easier to keep together than Rome because China is a continuous landmass that is more or less flat.

Flat? Have you look at a topological map of China lately?

	20-01-2003 17:20									#55
	Inflate your Upload Space

I think he means a single continuous landmass. It' is true that so was rome, but then, you'd have to walk around the med.

	20-01-2003 23:40									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Flat? Have you look at a topological map of China lately?

Have you looked at map of ancient Rome. Horrible mountains dividing it from its empire.

	21-01-2003 00:42									#57
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

"Explain"

It's just bureaucratic blah. You hear it all the time here in Washington, but you've got to discount it as BS.

I know when I see efficient government services, but it is my view that this efficiency results from accountability to the people, since they are the "customers". Also, the people may not want efficiency above other aspects of the system. For instance, the people may want a broken system in order to paper over differences in opinion. F.e. the INS.

"I think it fits the pattern of conservative officials announcing something after the fact in order to avoid embarrassing humiliations. Example: the earlier Shenzhou space missions were not announced until the capsule had safely returned to Earth."

Yes, this is a fundamental misreading of the value of "live" PR. Re the space capsule, they probably pissed away a good deal of the PR value. This translates into a reduced value of the actual program, which is a shame. (Well, it's probably not a shame in this instance, but I digress...)

Further, it just shows that Chinese media is a stovepipe to the Communist party to the exclusion of other sources. The Chinese media could have picked this up from FT, but the systems just aren't constructed that way.

Not that American media doesn't look primarily at press generated by the US gov't, for instance. But you can pick up Reuters stories just as easily.

Last edited by DanS on 21-01-2003 at 00:47