This article expresses similar sentiments to those expressed by you in "The Confucian Renaissance".

You claim that China will develop "an elite and responsible administrative class." But you do not explain how Confucian ethics incorporates any checks and balances; how in the absence of some form of constitutionalism China will cope with ethnic diversity or how this proposed "elite" will remain elite without suppression of the masses.
Incidentally, it is a little cavalier to claim that China has had an unbroken civilisation. It ignores the disruption of the Cultural Revolution and the fact that the Leninism that is applauded by the Chinese elite could hardly be more Western. A response would be appreciated.

The Author said:

>>China’s socialism is providing the model that offers hope for people in diverse parts of the world.<<

R U SERIOUS ? no really.. r u ?

Where...does one find 'socialism' in CAPITALIST China today ?

Does one find it in the massive mistreatment of people whos villages are inconviently 'in the way' of some factory a party member wishes to have constructed so his extended family can benefit from it ?

Or is it in the persecution of the religious minorities.. the bashings.. the jailings..

or is it in the selling of body parts, organs of the executed...

Or in the executions which maybe take place to fill the current 'order' for paricular organs ?

Hmmm..perhaps we find it in the ARTIFICIALLY low cost of labor, and the OPPRESSION of the working classes by the CAPITALIST lords who stamp out any organized labor who might raise the cost of labor by providing a LIVING wage to them ?

Is it in the FROWN and abuse and warnings the Chinese aim at anyone who supports independance for Tibet ?

No..sorry..if this is the model you want people to follow, we need to send YOU off to a detention centre/re-education camp with hard labor for the rest of your days Reg. (or until you recant this political heresy)

Seneca

Thanks to the opportunity to comment. The Confucian Renaissance predicted the rise of China 18 years ago when that was still an unfashionable view, based on the efficacy of Confucian values within a global order created by Anglo-American power.

A Confucian-Daoist Millennium? (2006) has explored that theme further. Sadly, neither Greco-Roman intellectual certainties nor conemporary media disinformation are likely to have much impact on the Confucian-Daoist energies and strategic wisdom that are highlighting the limits of contemporary Anglo-American power and understanding.

I would comment further but am in China, having just visited a model (poor) village, which recruits teachers from all over East and South East Asia to educate students from all over China in Confucian values of filial piety. This is the work at his birthplace of a Chinese born, Taiwan educated, dual Australian/American citizen Buddhist Monk.

With warm regards

Reg

what a looney tune.

the remaining socialist enterprises share only a few characteristics: corruption, inefficiency, monstrous debts propped up by forced loans.

the capitalist activities on the other hand are generally thriving. they are also characterized by corruption, pollution, expropriation of common lands, and oppression of the workforce.

the fact that china is none the less gaining on the west says more about the inability of capitalism to thrive without a growing market. this fundamental flaw will ultimately hobble china also. for now, they are a rickety bicycle staying upright only while they can maintain speed. the western bicycle has slowed, and is beginning to wobble, because it's running out of road.

Which economic system appears to be superior very much depends on what aspects you analyse and what values you use.

For example, using economic analysis you could say that economically China is booming and will overtake the West. However, when you introduce normative analysis and a set of values (say individual freedom and human rights), you could say that China is booming, but not without human and social costs.

Overall an interesting article that challenges the traditional views of Orientalism, which is almost extinct anyway.

Cheers

Josh

Reg,

Thank you.

I would like to continue the dialogue when you return from China.

It seems to me that Confucian ethics are suitable for a gemeinschaft in the sense used by Tonnies but not for a gesellschaft as there is no concept of civil society with its implicit notions of individual freedom, ownership of private property and most importantly separation of powers with an independent judiciary.

Reg, I have an old friend who was a diplomat in the East and The West. He has told me of experiences most of us would be unaware.So I guess you know what you are writing about.I remember the BRITISH EMPIRE culture we were fed at school in the 1930's.Salute the flag and songs like "The British Grenadiers" made us feel superior to the "slit-eyed races"The truth is learnt in time,are we still in a vulnerable position to the modern version of the "yellow peril"

I'm not sure what I'd call China's current system, but it's not socialism. The closest parallel I've encountered is the oligarchy-controlled planned capitalism of Singapore. Indeed, the current regime in the PRC seems less a Confucian-inspired meritocracy, than a corrupt bastion of nepotism and crony-capitalism.

I find myself (to my surprise) more or less in agreement with both BOAZ_David and Demos. China's economy is booming, though it is starting from a very low base. How long can it continue to expand? I suspect that a consumer society of 1.3 billion would require more resources (energy, minerals, food) than are actually available on the Earth.

Reg argues that "Venezuela, Bolivia and other Latin, African and Central Asian communities are likely to find the Chinese model immensely attractive". According to Geert Hofstede's analysis http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_dimensions.php , these countries ARE like China in their social interactions (apologies to all those who dislike Hofstede's analysis). They might understand the Chinese, but that doesn't necessarily mean that their foreign policy and trade agendas will co-incide with China's.

Will China eclipse the West in the current century? Perhaps.

Does the West "marginalise and denigrate other traditions"? Perhaps.

Could a Chinese academic publish a paper complaining that China "marginalises and denigrates other traditions"? Not bloody likely.

The famous physicist Wolfgang Pauli once said of a rambling unclear paper that it was "not even wrong." Since then "not even wrong" has been the greatest insult a physicist can deliver. It describes a paper that is so intellectually sloppy that it is not really possible to discuss it.

The article tells us more about Reg Little than it does about China. If this is the level of "analysis" that prevails in the Australia diplomatic service then I have only one comment:

Be afraid

Be VERY afraid.

A few examples of sloppiness.

Little refers to "the West."

What is "the West?" It's a cold war construct which is becoming less relevant by the day.

Little seems to think that "the West" did not anticipate the rise of China.

That may have been true in the stultified atmosphere of Australian diplomacy. In the real world resource companies in South Africa and Australia were trying to estimate the impact of China's rise on demand for resource as far back as the 1980s.

I think China probably will make it to great power status though it's not there yet. For an idea of some of the challenges it faces see:

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070901faessay86503/elizabeth-c-economy/the-great-leap-backward.html

Quote:

The coal that has powered China's economic growth, for example, is also choking its people. Coal provides about 70 percent of China's energy needs: the country consumed some 2.4 billion tons in 2006 -- more than the United States, Japan, and the United Kingdom combined. In 2000, China anticipated doubling its coal consumption by 2020; it is now expected to have done so by the end of this year. Consumption in China is huge partly because it is inefficient: as one Chinese official told Der Spiegel in early 2006, "To produce goods worth $10,000 we need seven times the resources used by Japan, almost six times the resources used by the U.S. and -- a particular source of embarrassment -- almost three times the resources used by India."

Poppycock! Socialism with Chinese characteristics is like black with white characteristics!

The dynamic of the Chinese economy comes from pure unalloyed capitalism. Meanwhile the regime spouts the outdated pure socialist rhetoric of the past. Successful entrepeneurial ventures all over China provide the cash that props up sclerotic state enterprises that would fall over if they had to survive on the own resources.

In truth China is a mass of contradictions that will have to be resolved some day. I very much doubt the regime knows how.

"China welcomes leaders from all corners of the world to Beijing in a unique and grand ceremonial style and can show them an energetic, purposeful and highly productive population in all parts of its extensive territory." Yes, like Tibet, presumably.

What nauseating propaganda!!

Michael

Michael T,

More like nauseating poppycock. It's not even propaganda.

It is frightening to think this man was an Australian DIPLOMAT!

I sincerely hope the Australian diplomatic corps has lifted its game since Mr. Little left

Seneca

Sorry I have been out of touch for some days. Could you let me know how we continue our dialogue. Would it be simply as further comments on this page or in some other way?

Some of the subsequent comments have been amusing, but for their their bullying, intemperate and ignorant character. Clearly there are a number of people who wish to maintain stereotypes of China, preferably without setting foot in the country. Having been in half a dozen major Chinese cities (three with populations approaching that of Australia) and several smaller towns and villages over the past month or so I am dismayed at how many self proclaimed experts do not seem to have any curiosity about the forces already beginning to re-shape Australia in ways few understand and over which ever fewer have any influence.

I might mention that my submitted draft had a question mark at the end of the title. I did not think it mattered too much when it was dropped in the published piece but it may have conforted some who seem to have been so upsret that Chinese dynamic 'capitalism' is capable of being presented credibly as 'socialism'.

A reading of the first two lines of the Daodejing (followed by some subsequent years of serious reflection) might also help those who cannot see the logic in my piece. Unfortunately the Chinese have no obligation to conform our intellectual expectations.

With best regards

Reg

Reginald

Is the emergence of China as a great power reshaping Australia?

Of course it is. On many levels. My daughter is currently in China learning Mandarin. I'm staring a Mandarin course myself in a few weeks. I'm currently struggling through a set of flash cards. With much difficulty I've mastered 21 ideograms.

Is there much that is valuable in Chinese culture? Much that we could learn?

Unquestionably.

Just as there is much of value the Chinese have learned and continue to learn from the cultures of Europe and North America.

But none of this is what your post was about.

YOU MADE A SPECIFIC CLAIM.

You asserted that socialism was "triumphant" with a "Chinese face."

If you truly believe it's all that simple I wouldn't even know where to start a discussion with you. It puts your post in the same category of silliness as a tract attempting to prove the literal truth of Genesis.

If there is anyone here who wants to know how China will behave if it achieves great power status I suggest a re-reading of Orwell's "Animal Farm."

For a more scholarly work on the behaviour of great powers I suggest:

The Tragedy of Great Power Politics by John J. Mearsheimer (Paperback - Jan 2003)

Either or both these books will provide better insight than the inane scrivenings of a former (God help us!) Australian diplomat.

Reginald,

I can only repeat my fervent hope that the Australian diplomatic service has lifted its game since your departure.

Reg,

Ignore the naysayers.

I have a genuine interest in exploring what type of
governmental framework is envisaged for China.

I would appreciate a response to the questions posed in my last post.

Thanks,

For those who are interested here is a different and, dare I say it, more realistic perspective on China.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/opinion/04brooks.html?em&ex=1197003600&en=11676006ac944c4e&ei=5087%0A

The author is NY Times columnist David Brooks. Unlike the erstwhile (God help us) Australian diplomat he has a more realistic view of China.

Whatever you wish to call China, a socialist country it ain't.

I think China will make it to great power status. It will behave like any other great power. That is to say, it will ruthlessly pursue its own interests. "Socialism" won't enter into the equation except in the minds of retired Australian diplomats.