|

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

  • 中国为何支持缅甸?

    最近中国不惜动用在联合国的否决权否决缅甸问题决议草案。 据我在这边接触到的一些了解缅甸的人说,由于中国长期对缅甸军政府的支持,缅甸有很多年轻人都有反华的情绪。 跟很多中国人一样,我一直都不了解中国对缅甸的外交政策,只是偶尔听说中国在缅甸建海军基地。在印度洋建个海军基地,让人感觉是对付印度的。 另外,中国还要利用缅甸建一条从印度洋到昆明的输油管道。 所以中国支持缅甸军政府是为了与印度争夺中南半岛控制权?为了另一条石油通道? 看到万维网上有一篇对中国行使否决权支持缅甸的详细分析,角度跟我以前看到的很不一样。另外这篇文字还解释了很多人都半懂不懂的联合国表决条例。 因为国内上不了万维网,就在这里存了这篇文字,方便大家。   中南半岛风云骤变 中国为何拼命支持缅甸?【转】

  • |

    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。

  • | |

    杂锦3月17日

    木头轿车 这辆名为Tryane II 的小轿车木头壳子是采用造船技术制作,花了Friend 两千个小时手工打造。   Google创始人不懂HTML 这也许就是Google首页如此简单的原因。   男性比女性更多地注意人的胯部 这是Jakob Nielsen和Tara Pernice Coyne的一份用户体验研究报告得出的结果。

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 *