Worswick,
I rarely post to this thread, but I disagreed with your earlier post about China, primarily because of it's tone, but also because it fails to recognize the changes that have been made in recent years. My 2 cents on your latest post:
>"I'd like to know: Is there a body of law in China that relates to remediating trade disputes between Chinese and an investor in China who thinks he has been nicked by his Chinese partner? Who thinks that he has been cheated or been not told the truth in initial "discolsure statements"?
Every investor in a Chinese company sees this warning: "The legal system in China relating to foreign investments is both new and continually evolving and currently there can be no certainity as to the application of its laws and regulations in particular instances. China does not have a comprehensive system of laws. Enforcement of existing laws or agreements may be sporadic and implementation and interpretation of laws inconsistent. The Chinese judiciary is relatively inexperienced in enforcing the laws that do exist, leading to a higher than usual degree of uncertainty as to the outcome of any litigation. Even where law does exist in China, it may not be possible to obtain swift and equitable enforcement of that law."
In other words, there are risks when investing in China. It is changing and changing fast, using the successes and failures of others as models.
>"Is there any "transparency" what so ever in China in financial statements issued by Chinese banks, or companies? How do you get information that verifiable as an investor in China?"
I might point out that the recent bank failure in Japan disclosed they had understated 'bad loans' by 1/3.
>"The Chinese army sits at the center of the political elite in China and they are determined to affect a "world role" and a forward position in world politics. The Chinese army answers to no one except itself. Can anyone in China who runs up against the army get "justice" in any court you know of."
This is a major problem for Zhu Rongi and for the changes the leadership desires in China. They must have the support of the Army and therefore must be careful in attempts to reduce it's power and corruption. However, I believe, and I may be wrong, that you have overstated the current objectives and influence of the Army.
>"Population. Basically, it seems to me that the 100 million young, mostly uneducated "country" young men migrating to the Chinese cities won't find work and that these 100 million pissed off young men -without Chinese women because of "male preference" in Chinese famlies - will form the core of a generation of discontent in China that is difficult if not impossible for China to deal with. This underpopulation of dispossessed will eventually turn to traditional tong like criminality and drugs; it will be one of the largest destabilizing forces to the rest of the world, as this group of young men seeks a larger and larger sphere of influence. Meanwhile, in China 99.99% of this group will supply a permanent drag on the economy and it will form the center of hitherto undreamt of urban slums prey to Hitler-like xenophobic visions of Chinse superiority.
I consider this paragraph is just short of racism. I must have known the right Chinese and read a different history book than you. I definitely have developed a different opinion of the Chinese peoples than you. I know them as being hard workers, too willing to accept adversity, and obstinate in their pursuit of long term goals. A different culture and a different history, but they have the same desires and objectives as any of us - a decent life. You object to comparisons with the US, but I think your judgement of China ignores our own problems with 'criminality and drugs' (much worse) and the hypocrisy of our own 'visions of superiority'. What conditions would exist here if we had 2.2 Billion people?
>"Finally, at the root of the Chinese ethos, is a particularly Chinese distrust of anything outside the family. This creates an anti-democratic, ruthless, cynical, humorless and anarchistic society where power is everything and individuals are night soil."
This is absurd. I will presume you meant 'totalitarian' society instead of 'anarchistic'. It was not the "distrust of anything outside of the family" that led China into communism, it was starvation. As you well know, the country was raped and totally decimated by the Japanese after WWII. Anyone able to provide food and shelter, anyone able to organize, anyone able to lead, would have been accepted. Unfortunately, it was Mao. History shows that the Chinese peoples are a sharing society with the capacity to build a prosperous nation with the right leadership.
>"It did happen and was allowed to happen because of characteristics innate in the Chinse character that made it possible. Mass hysteria. Greed. Lack of individual will"
This is racism and rediculous. You make the victim responsible for the rape. The 'mass hysteria' of a peoples being raped, killed, and plundered. 'Greed' of a peoples known for communal sharing. 'Lack of individual will' of persons living in a society without freedom or individual rights. All of it "inate to their character"!! You insult the thousands of Chinese that risked their lives to escape, those that have suffered in the collective farms, those that have died rather than succomb. The bigotry of this statement causes you to lose any credibility you might otherwise have. Do you also apply the same logic to the Jews? Africans? Russians? Other racial or ethnic groups that have lost individual freedoms?
While you denigrate China and it's peoples, don't forget that 60 years ago it was Japan that was commiting atrocities, ignoring human rights, seeking global dominance, all for a Manifest Destiny in the name of the Emperor. Prior to this, China was open to world commerce and society only to be invaded by Europeans in their attempts at looting and plunder. An absurdity of history is that the US aided Japan and Germany, but ostracized and ignored China after WWII. Was their isolationism a result of societal factors or was it forced on them? Which country has now opened it's doors to foreign investment and commerce, which is demonstrating the isolatative greed that you attribute to China?
I am one of those that believes China will surpass Japan. Because of the events in Japan, it will now be far more difficult for them, but they are used to adversity and in the initial stages of their reformation. Because of this, their growth will continue, but at a slower pace. The same things that have gotten Japan into so much trouble will cause their problems to continue. I have the same opinion of South Korea.
I don't doubt that you have an extensive knowledge of Chinese (likely far more than my own), but I believe you have chosen to ignore many aspects of that history in your statements.
JMHO,
Ron
|
