finished this one this afternoon, 2 jun 17, good read, 3 stars, i liked it.
enlightening and informative about china. reminded of when nixon visited china, you remember that don't-cha? jim croce, on 8-track, swoosh! swoosh! swoosh! people over in japan, what's that noise? oh that's just every chinaman, sweeping the snow. moa zedung, communist red china, vietnam was hot and heavy and korea wasn't that long in the distant past. the mystery of the orient.
this helps the reader understand, somewhat, china.
several times as i read, came across something that some big talking head, some big financier, someone who should know all...comes across as clueless. weren't his colleagues who didn't have options jealous, the fidelity broker asked? the executive replied that the options were meaningless, as they weren't really his. the fidelity broker erruted in anger, the banker recalled, demanding to know if all the other information attached to the new issue was equally fake. the executive quickly realized his mistake and backpedalled, saying he had donated the money to the state, so as not to cause divisions with his colleagues. there was one other place that had to do with something like this...guess i didn't bookmark it and i'm not going to look for it now...but it was along these same lines. and yet another that i do remember though i didn't bookmark that one either, had to do with bush senior. should i look. naw, read it and discover it on your lonesome.
has to do with china being more "open"...foreign investment, that sort of thing...some able, persuaded, encouraged, to partake. but the party. always the party. china differs crucially from the soviet union in one respect: the system is far more pervasive, penetrating deeper into lower levels of government and other state-controlled institutions.
has to do with what "foreign" firms must do to be on the up and up...who's in control, who sits where at the table. though some are/were encouraged to become public...offering...i dunno, seems like those big talking heads should have known that "the party" is/was still in control. is and isn't. here, there, but even the locals bounce and strut. there's a new saying, the new black-collar class that sums it up.
ummm...did see in that other non-fiction piece i'd read...how dictatorships coop "protest" movements to handle them. that is explained here in a number of ways. as well as outright stomping them into the ground...that manner of speech in all its forms is also handled by "the party"
just as 'investment' is handled. the real issue for the party was the threat that the foreign and local private sector might become a political rival. the fabled middle class again...necessary, i'm told, to any successful revolution. but it if is co-opted...handled. all is well and all manner of things are well. there's a sense of learning. the realization that the chinese economy could not grow and prosper without private enterprise took nearly four years to sink in after the post-1989 backlash.
too...in that ho chi minh biography i'd read...there too, there is that sense of allowing private enterprise time to flourish (and handled) to allow the economy (vietnam's) to grow. i believe the same thing happened, in a sense, in lenin's soviet union.
there's quite a bit to this one, lots of information, all of it enlightening, at times orewellian. sanlu. the sars scare, the 30-35 million starved to death under mao, more...more as in bits and pieces, lines that suggest volumes could be written about each one, covered in a line here...but the sanlu, sars, tienanmen are covered in more detail. this was put out before the arab spring, though...wasn't it. thinking of the "jasmine" revolution and perhaps it was in that other one, about dictatorships....some bits and pieces about china. the party had its watchful eye out at the time.
beijing has cannily leveraged a modern tool to keep the sesame officials in line, allowing chinese journalists and bloggers to expose local abuses of power in a way they would never tolerate with senior leaders in beijing handled. co-opted. that sort of thing.
the system's blindspot is overwhelmingly political
reminds me of the idiots here in america. for eight years during the clinton abuse of the white house, all and sundry had no problem using vitriolic speech, using words like white trash, rednecks, trailer trash, big-haired wimmen and the like...this, followed by eight years of all and sundry being a "racist" is one opposes the one...and lately we have had hillary doing stand-up on the pulpit, blaming all and sundry for her not hold the office she coveted. in the end, what's the use. you could tell them but they won't listen. 'bout all you can say is, well, i remember when.
book makes the point that many have forecast the downfall of china. if china continues to invest far more than it consumes, the domestic economy will eventually stagger under the weight of its own imbalances, with an impact on the rest of the world. and then too, he makes the point that china will have an impact, staggering or swaggering, my word, not his.