|

What should China learn from Africa?

Liu Tao is a Ph. D candidate of the Institute for World Society Studies of Bielefeld University.  He has been writing a series of posts on the rise of China, making his advices on China’s economic, political, and foreign policies.  His series consistently attract lots of attention from Chinese readers.  A reader, in responding to one of his post, even offers to publish his series. 

Recently, Liu Tao wrote a post, Tortuous path of Africa’s modernization – a revelation to the rise of China.

In this post, Liu Tao selects African continent as a reference, talking about what China can learn from other Third World countries’ modernization process.

Liu Tao comes up with his own theory of modernization. He believes that any country in the world has to go through three stages on the road to modernization.

In general, the three stages are,

1. The establishment of a modern nation-state. Form an effective modern nation-state through wars, revolutions and mobilization of the entire country.

2. Economic development and industrialization. Adopt a market economy, use the state’s power to develop national industry and achieve a rapid modernization.

3. The establishment of a society with functional divisions. Legal definition of the state, the market and the basic functions of all social elements’ relations.

A country is required to complete the missions of one stage before it going to the next. All countries have to go through these three basic stages before reaching modernization.

The process of the first stage, the establishment of a modern nation-state, is usually sanguinary, involving wars or revolutions, killings or genocides, just like what happened when Napoleon created new Europe and Bismarck unified German. We should not use today’s standard of human rights to measure this progress.

A modern nation-state with a powerful central government is the foundation for effective governance. Without such government, it is basically impossible to build the market economy which requires an integrated domestic market and mass production, let alone to establish civic awareness.

When a true nation-state is established, it enters into the next course, an economy-oriented stage. In this stage, a late-developed country must mobilize national power and national resources to establish effective governance, encourage the development of the market economy and foster an integrated domestic market. The country should focus on building modern industry to achieve industrialization and economy development beyond the conventional speed. The international capital flows and international trading can bring enormous risks, so a late-developed country should maintain strong controls and regulations on economic activities.

A country enters the third stage when its economy and market become mature.  To establish a society with functional divisions, it is necessary to legally protect property rights and people’s other essential rights.

Based on this three-stage theory, Liu Tao points out that Africa’s problems in developing are because many African countries have not finished stage 1 of the process.  They are not truly nation-states. That’s why they are still experiencing so much pain and violence now.

Quoting data from Gero Erdmann’s Apokalyptische Trias: Staatsversagen, Staatsverfall und Staatszerfall – strukturelle Probleme der Demokratie in Afrika (Apocalyptic three: State failure, state purge and state decay – structural problems of the democracy in Africa), Liu Tao raises up the question why the Africa continent experiences more serious state failure, state purge and state decay than many other places.  Besides other well-known factors such as tribal problems and colonial histories, he believes neo-liberalism, originating in the US, and the Washington Consensus have been disastrous for Africa.

Neo-liberalism advocates removing trade barriers, cutting taxes, and cutting welfare spending which in turn reduce the capacity and effectiveness of a country. What neo-liberalism advocates is actually the rules of game for developed countries (i.e., post-stage 3 countries) like the US, Europe and Japan. These rules are not suitable for those countries in stage 1 or 2. Neo-liberalism can only make countries of stage 1 or 2 lose their basic economic sovereignty.

Advocating liberalism is a conspiracy of the West. Beware of this conspiracy and don’t falling into this trap.  This is Liu Tao’s advice to China.

Note: Jennifer Brea has helped edit this post.

Similar Posts

  • I am half Marxist, half Buddhist – said Dalai Lama 達賴喇嘛宣稱自己是「半個馬克思信徒半個佛教徒」

    Last week’s Yazhou ZhouKan made a special report on Dalai Lama. In the interview with Yazhou ZhouKan, Dalai Lama shared his views on varous issues, including the independence of Tibet, three missions of his life, Marxism, Chairman Mao and more. The following are some excerptions from the report. 達賴喇嘛往何處去﹖ Where is Dalai Lama going?

  • | |

    小记一二

    两天前去印尼廖内走了一趟。 前段时间在网上看到不少对近期印尼发展的描述,这次亲身体会,印象深刻。感觉尽管印尼还有很多困难(雅加达正在闹水灾,已经接近瘟疫流行的边缘),它正逐渐从民主乱象中走出来,迎向发展的春天。 民主对经济发展是有利还是有害?真希望印尼可以做出个另一个正面的例子来。记得在上世纪八、九十年代的时候,印尼的人均GDP一直是比中国高的,到现在却是比中国的人均GDP落后了一大截。 昨晚参加了两个有趣的聚会。 一个是Second Life新加坡用户第一次在现实生活的会面。 这次聚会是由IdeaFactory的Eng Kiat和Nicholas组织的。IdeaFactory现在是Second Life在新加坡的临时联络处,他们透露Second Life将在近期正式进军新加坡,而且将以新加坡为中心,发展Second Life在亚洲(除日本与韩国)的业务。新加坡经济发展局(EDB)也将资助一批新加坡人到旧金山Second Life总部去培训,帮助Second Life在新加坡的业务发展。 这对新加坡本地的数字媒体开发是个很好的消息。可以预见Second Life的这个中心将刺激新加坡成立很多以Second Life业务为主的公司。对亚洲其它地区而言,Second Life离他们更靠近了一步,应该会更容易听到亚洲用户的声音。 昨晚参加完Second Life的聚会后,匆忙赶回家,正好赶上Interlocals的网上讨论。 我一直关注着Oiwan创立的这个网站,很早就在上面登记了帐号,有几次都差点想把我的翻译发给他们,只是我的little bridge比较关注文化交流上的小事,而Interlocals专注于人权,民主,社会转变等大事,感觉little bridge有点配不上Interlocals的大框架。 我是以旁观者的身份参加这次网上的讨论。看着与会者积极地讨论Interlocals遇到的问题,很为这些志愿工作者的热情而感动。这世界上真的有不少人不求名利,只为帮助人而付出。 Interlocals主要是由几个香港志愿工作者创立的。 我在新加坡也参加了一些志愿团体,但总感觉新加坡这边的本地志愿工作者缺乏真正的热情--他们的热情大多都很肤浅,暖不到人心里。奇怪的是,我感觉香港是一个比新加坡更商业化,更资本主义,更符合适者生存丛林法则的地方,但我却能经常遇到充满热情的香港志愿工作者。也许一个冷漠的地方更需要热情的人来温暖,要不然每个人都变成巨大商业机器上的一个个冷酷的零件了。 参加Interlocals网上讨论的另一个收获是,在little bridge上加上了Creative Common的声明。我以前对这个一直都不重视,总以为blog通常默认就是Creative Common的了。

  • |

    美灾难管理学院主任关于四川抗灾的紧急呼吁【转】

    原文:http://blog.yeeyan.com/2008/05/20/icdrm/ 美国乔治华盛顿大学灾难、危机、风险管理学院主任约瑟夫·巴贝拉博士关于救灾的几点呼吁: 第一:目前最关键的问题,是救援的决策者决定何时停止对被掩埋者的搜救工作。 巴贝拉博士紧急呼吁,搜救工作至少应坚持到震后14天!他提供了这样一份研究报告:《地震垮塌房屋受困幸存者时间与存活分析 (原文pdf)》(译言正在紧急翻译其中的重要部分)。 在这份被国际救援行动广泛作为参考的报告(包括911世贸中心倒塌后的救援)指出:“对英语医学文献和媒体报道进行的完整分析显示:最长的震后获救记录是13-19天;其中可靠的获救记录是14天。” 哀悼逝者、难民安置、重建家园、心理援助固很重要,需要投入资源。但现在关键的关键还是救人。救援人员,请一定要坚持啊!再坚持一周,也许十天。能多挖出一个就是一个生命啊!请大家火速把这个呼吁传递到灾区! 第二 :尸体会造成瘟疫的看法是一种误解--这与译言翻译的世界卫生组织的《灾后防疫》报告中的意见一致。而以此为原因,草率处理受难者遗体在未来会带来其他严重的心理和社会问题。应当尽可能让家属有辨认遇难者的机会。 我个人作为译者而非专业人士,很难对此作出判断和建议。但我呼吁对遇难者遗体进行清理工作的人员,如不能保留遗体,至少应对遗体进行拍照存档、保留遗物。这固然是个残酷的事实,但可以想象,这样的信息对逝者的家属会是多么重要! 第三: 不建议非专业NGO自发进行救援、难民安置等工作。但他仍旧提供了这个难民安置工作手册(英语pdf)作为参考。译言将尽快组织志愿者进行翻译。 第四:作为有二十年灾难应对经验的实践者、医疗人员和该领域的研究者,巴贝拉博士希望能够通过与我国灾难应对部门的直接接触提供更有意义的建议和帮助。 有可能接触到抗灾决策人员的读者,可以转达这一信息。

2 Comments

  1. We should not use today’s standard of human rights to measure this progress.

    When will man ever learn from history…?

    Considering the wider picture, it seems to me that China’s Big Economic Experiment is quite unique. How many other countries have thrown off communism by becoming rampant capitalists?

    这个评论的翻译(译者:Jacky),

    我们不能用今天的人权标准去衡量这些进程。

    人们什么时候才能从历史学习呢…?

    从一个更大的背景上看,中国的经济实验对我来说是非常特殊的。有多少国家曾经(象中国那样)抛弃共产主义而转变为猖獗的资本主义?

Leave a Reply

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