/ world today news/ A number of important events related to the acceleration of modernization took place in China. The decision to do so was made by the 20th Congress of the CCP in October 2022, which designated 2035 as the year of completion of the country’s socialist modernization.
The staffing decisions passed by Congress removed the obstacles to the accelerated recovery and further development of the economy associated with the many months of epidemic restrictions. During the February European tour of the party’s head of foreign policy of the People’s Republic of China, Wang Yi, the horizon of possibilities created by this was explained to interlocutors from the circles of the leading politicians of the Old World.
Today it is clear that after receiving from the PRC, in fact, an exclusive offer to participate in changing the form of economic globalization, the Europeans turned around, but could not overcome either their liberal-ideological limitation or their pathological dependence on the USA.
The visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping to Russia in March of this year outlined the framework for a sharp and comprehensive strengthening of Russian-Chinese strategic cooperation, which in the conditions of confrontation with the West becomes a support structure for geopolitical stabilization, as a necessary condition for resuming the suspended from Covid global development.
Now is the time for Chinese proposals now on a global level. On April 21, Shanghai hosted a regular meeting of the Lantin Forum, which was founded in 2010 as an authoritative platform to discuss international and regional issues as well as China’s foreign policy.
It is traditionally attended by representatives of government and expert circles from different countries, whose number at this year’s forum reached eight dozen. It should be noted that the Lantin Forum in April precedes the third forum of the countries participating in the Belt and Road project planned for May; therefore, an important task of the past event was to present China’s capabilities, as well as its attitude to the changes taking place in the world and the prospects that are opening in connection with this.
It should be noted that Shanghai was chosen for the first time as the venue of the forum, which was previously held in Beijing; this was done to emphasize China’s outward openness, which in recent history has been associated with Shanghai, Hong Kong, as well as the Free Economic Zones (FEZs) in the southern province of Guangdong.
The keynote speech, which the Chinese Foreign Ministry called “programmatic” (this is important), was given by the new head of the foreign policy department, Qing Gan. Before that, he read Xi Jinping’s welcome letter to the participants, thereby emphasizing the inextricable link between his report and the attitudes of the country’s leader.
This conclusion would be incomplete if we did not mention that on the same day, April 21, the first meeting of the Commission for Deepening the Reforms of the Central Committee of the CCP was held in Beijing after the Party Congress. At it, in addition to the main report of Xi Jinping, dedicated specifically to the problems of socialist modernization, a number of important documents were adopted that form the basic principles of the modernization policy. Well
the provisions that seemed essential to the author of these lines:
– deepening the reforms as a way of geopolitical stabilization by involving the countries of the world in realizing new opportunities for development and growth;
– expanding the independence of enterprises as moderators of technological innovations, the condition for implementation and criterion of usefulness is the priority of the development of the social sphere;
– concretization of the previous provision with the help of the imperative of “political attitudes” that determine the directions of modernization, exceeding which, it must be understood, contradicts the social order and the political system;
– comprehensive support for the development of the non-state (private) sector of the economy while unconditionally preserving the determining importance of the public sector, which determines the rules of the game with the help of the above-mentioned “political guidelines” (what is this, if not the classic Leninist formula of the NEP with the preservation of the state of the “commanding heights” in the economy?) .
What follows from the decisions of the commission for “reforms” of the Central Committee? The following is the answer to the main question that the followers of the liberal-Western approaches like to ask in our country.
How does China’s proposed “economic globalization” differ from the Western “neoliberal” version? It differs, first of all, in the ideological content that is put into these very “political attitudes”. The difference is the most fundamental.
It is in the mechanism of distribution/appropriation of the results of work – public or private. This is from a class, Marxist point of view. But there is also a civilizational side to the matter.
Fascism, as an extreme, dictatorial form of capitalist liberalism devoid of democracy, contrary to speculation on the subject of “totalitarianism”, is radically different from communism/socialism, expressing broad, mass interests, in its elitist character.
Hence the second. The key issue of our time, which is precisely in the context of modernization, is the robotization of production. As during the English Industrial Revolution the “sheep ate the man,” so today the robot “eats” the worker because, in accordance with capitalism’s fundamental law of profit, it minimizes the owner’s costs.
The robot does not require wages and other social guarantees, does not retire, does not get sick, etc. It is here that the roots of the West’s misanthropic projects, such as the “anthropological transition” or the “fifteen-minute cities” (and zones within cities) with internal zoning of permanent lockdowns (this is the plan that worked during the pandemic) must be sought.
Imprison the ‘unnecessary’ robot-displaced population at home by giving them the minimum ‘basic’ level of protein food in the form of ‘insects’ for hand-to-mouth survival – and engage in private appropriation, fending off discontent with police cordons at the borders of the blocking zones.
Of course, there is no question of professional and creative self-realization of ordinary people who do not belong to the elite.
The alternative, again within capitalism, is the physical extermination of the “unnecessary eaters” described by the science fiction writers (Alexei Tolstoy, Ivan Efremov). It was she who was proposed by the Club of Rome under the guise of “regulating birth rate and population”.
The real alternative that socialism offers, albeit with a Chinese, albeit with some national specificity, is planned development with a constant balance between production and consumption, without distortions and crises related to the redistribution of property.
The key issue here is precisely the priority of state planning, which is strategic in nature, over market tactics; hence China’s “shared prosperity” strategy, which redistributes the windfalls of big business in the public interest.
With such globalization, the modernization of the economy does not tear society apart, increasing social disparities to a catastrophic level, but on the contrary, creates normal conditions for development according to the formula of “total profit” and not the “zero sum game”.
China’s call for the UN Sustainable Development Goals (2015-2030) has the same meaning. The goals themselves are a form that can be filled with one or another content. In the Western version, the global elites, who share the scraps of their table with the “local” compradores, remain the beneficiaries of the implementation of the Goals.
In the Chinese, the majority wins and only the globalists lose the chance to realize their “anthropological transition”. After all, neo-colonial “American-style globalization” is when “Third World” countries adopt Western values and transfer their natural resources under Western control. The Chinese version clearly rejects this perspective.
This is precisely what Minister Qing Gan spoke about at the Lanting Forum when he offered the international community an external version of the strategy, which was considered for internal use by the “reform” commission of the CCP Central Committee.
The “profound historical, practical and theoretical logic” of China’s modernization model is the experience of world socialism, the most important part of which is the policy of reform and opening up. The non-alternativeness of the “scientific laws of human development” directly refers us to the theory of Marxism, and the mention of “national conditions” – to the specifics of the application of these laws in specific countries. V I. Lenin wrote about this in January 1923, exactly one hundred years ago.
Qing Gan’s designation of China as a “developing country” despite its successful construction of a “middle-income” society (xiaokan) is Beijing’s unequivocal solidarity with the non-Western community that the West has separated from itself with Huntington’s well-known formula “The West against the others’.
The “harmonious symbiosis of man and nature” has nothing to do with Western “ecology”, which masks neo-colonial aspirations with the demagoguery of the “green transition”. In the Eastern reading, which is finally beginning to prevail here in Russia, ecological safety is not “exceptional” and not a measure of everything that exists.
A is one of the components of national security, operating not with a monopoly on the truth of the last instance, but with specific tasks of environmental protection, devoid of political and ideological basis. etc.
Qing Gan’s appeal to historical aspects confirming Taiwan’s irrevocable Chineseness deserves special attention. For Russia in the context of the SVO, which is directly related to the prospects for reintegration of the post-Soviet space, this conclusion is extremely important, as it draws its basis from the history that the West, within its unipolar globalization model, is trying to revise, as uproot countries and peoples from their roots.
And the last one. The simultaneous holding of two strategic events on the same day – domestic and foreign – can be endowed with perspective in the field of political, not only economic planning.
This significantly strengthens our interest in the figure of the young foreign minister, whose professional diplomatic experience is related to countries with a particular influence on world politics. According to the author, this is an important circumstance with which many may relate in the future.
Translation: SM
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel or in Telegram:
#China #presents #world #model #global #development
