1【原创】温家宝讲述的天下大势 53 同人于野 2007-02-27 00:18:05
　　我们这些"业余政治家"每天上网看新闻看评论，真正追求的就是把握天下大势。比如你经商，把握了天下大势才能知道往哪里投资是正确选择；比如你做官，把握了天下大势才能在政治斗争中选对边跟对人；比如你像我一样不经商不做官整天就喜欢上网扯淡，也只有把握了天下大势才能说几句有谱的话不至于让人特别笑话。这就叫"识时务者为俊杰"。
　　
　　然而天下大势可不是那么容易把握的。比如陈良宇就没有把握好，再比如布什就不知道现在世界上的战争游戏是应该怎么玩的。特别对于一般普通人来说，所谓天下大势就是四个字： 轻重缓急。都说台湾该打，那么是应该现在马上打呢，还是等等再打？目前中国最紧迫的任务是不是打台湾？都说现在韩国太讨厌，那么是中韩合作大于分歧呢还是分歧大于合作？都说要支持自主创新，那么当下中国是提高铁路技术研发水平更紧迫呢，还是迅速提高铁路运力更紧迫？像这样的问题如果不从定量角度深刻了解中国国情，感情用事是不能做出正确判断的。民间科学家不能证明哥德巴赫猜想，业余政治家不能治国。
　　
　　今天温家宝不知何故发表了一篇文章《关于社会主义初级阶段的历史任务和我国对外政策的几个问题》，为我们讲述了天下大势。显然他是中国最有资格谈论天下大势的两个人之一。最近李长春贾庆林刘云山有时候也爱在报纸杂志上发表几篇文章，但我仔细研读了温家宝这篇，绝对不是那些八股官样文章，而是一篇真正把握了天下大势的治国方略。这篇文章所提供的思想在去年的六中全会上已经开始提到过，从这个角度说"新意 "不足，否则的话此文的重要性不亚于诸葛亮的隆中对策。
　　
　　下面我谈谈对此篇雄文的理解，希望抛砖引玉。
　　
　　- 1： "社会主义初级阶段"。我理解这个词最初被创造出来完全是因为要进行"让一部分人先富"的经济改革，而这种改革是不符合"原教旨主义"社会主义学说的，因此发明了这个词。也就是说"社会主义初级阶段"本来针对的是我国经济制度。而温家宝这篇文章所强调的可不是经济，指出" 不光要讲生产力的不发达，还要讲社会主义制度的不够完善和不够成熟。"
　　也就是说我国改革的重点从经济体制转向社会制度，法制。从"先富"转向"共富"。从"效率优先"转向" 逐步实现社会公平与正义，极大地激发全社会的创造活力和促进社会和谐"。这是一个非常重要的战略转折。
　　
　　- 2：但是经济建设仍然是中心。发展才是硬道理。国内有的极左派认为最好全面反思改革，甚至干脆再来一次文化大革命来彻底清除腐败，这种思想是错误的，是不知道什么是大局。中国的大局不是那几个腐败分子，而是在这个战略机遇期必须通过经济建设来迅速提升国力。特别强调的就是" 战略机遇期"。现在世界的大形势是，我们有机会发展。
　　
　　- 3：中国发展的最重要阻碍是什么？腐败？民主？人权？台湾？美国？错！那些问题都是"软"的问题，是人可以解决的问题。中国发展的真正阻碍是资源和环境。没有资源，没有生存空间，就算你制度再好也没用，这叫巧妇难为无米之炊。从2004年开始中国对世界资源的需求已经开始令人恐惧了。有识之士纷纷担心中国为了发展会不会侵略别国来掠夺资源呢？温家宝明确回答了这个问题：" 中国在发展中会遇到资源、能源、环境等瓶颈制约，但经过多年努力，我们已经找到了一条全面协调可持续的发展道路。这就是树立和落实科学发展观，建设资源节约型、环境友好型社会"。
　　这个战略做起来绝对比说要困难得多，其难度甚至超过"和谐社会"，超过反腐败。只要看看最近的新闻就知道，我国经济建设什么指标一般都比预定计划完成的好，只有环境指标完成不了。所以这里总理说归说，中国也许已经"找到了"这个可持续发展的道路，但真正"走上"这条道路是非常困难的。最大的问题就是怎么在不牺牲经济增长速度的情况下走这条路。
　　
　　- 4：对外政策。中国过去几十年都是"闷声发大财"，温家宝的意思是说这个政策不会改变，叫做"不扛旗、不当头"。文章特别提到现在" 国际社会对我国的期待会日益增多"，但是这个方针不能改变。然而我仔细研读之下发现还是有"微调"的，这个微调就是" 我们应当保持良好的精神状态，增强对外工作的主动性和进取性"。这一段落的真正精华所在就是中国已经决定要在对外关系方面有所作为。甚至提出"世界新秩序 "的"最高目标"是和谐世界，请问除了老大谁敢给江湖立规矩？我理解美国现在衰落之后，留下一个巨大的权力真空，中国众望所归，不做老大也不行。中国真正的想法不是不做，而是不张扬。
　　
　　- 5：文化。这篇文章提到文化，把它跟内政建设和对外关系相提并论，特别提到要" 从全面建设中国特色社会主义的战略高度"来搞文化和交流，这非常引人注目。我理解中国要通过文化来左右世界。
　　
　　阅读温相雄文，一定要记住"大局"这两个字。这篇讲的是当下治国的大道理，而我们整天关心的什么长白山钓鱼岛高铁陈水扁都是小道理。温家宝说"小道理都归大道理管着"。文章甚至根本不必提台湾，台湾绝对不是我国当前的最重要问题。
　　
　　最后我想猜测一下为什么温家宝会选择在这个时候发表这篇文章？可能跟即将到来的"两会"有关，也可能为了在十七大以前进一步统一思想。基本可以断定这篇文章就是未来十七大的主题。我猜测，之所以要发表这篇文章，很可能是因为有些官员还不太理解这个天下大势。
　　
　　读懂这篇文章就把握了天下大势。建议大家好好读。最后补充一句，所谓“以正治国，以奇用兵”。让国家长治久安靠的不是什么奇思妙想阴谋诡计，而正是这种看似平淡的雄才大略。

关键词(Tags): 战略机遇期 资源 环境 和谐社会 温家宝
同人于野 选转。铁手 荐,最后于2007-02-27 01:11:01改,共3次;

2说得好 roy7255 2007-10-18 01:00:40
支持这样的认识。

2每次看到“社会主义初级阶段”这些说法就想笑 1 定定 2007-02-28 10:48:45
社会主义初级阶段就是资本主义吧

2花。人口与资源环境问题是大问题。 唵啊吽 2007-02-27 19:26:04

2【文摘】AP的相关报道 唵啊吽 2007-02-27 18:37:50
Democracy up to 100 years away, China's Premier says
SCOTT MCDONALD

Associated Press

BEIJING — Communist leaders have no plans to allow democracy in the near future because they must focus on economic development before political reform, China's No. 3 leader said in comments published Tuesday.

Democracy will emerge once a “mature socialist system” develops but that might not happen for up to 100 years, Premier Wen Jiabao wrote in an article in the People's Daily, the main Communist Party newspaper.

For now, China must focus on “sustained rapid growth of productive forces ... to finally secure fairness and social justice that lies within the essence of socialism,” Mr. Wen wrote.

The Premier said the country is “still far from advancing out of the primary stage of socialism. We must adhere to the party's basic guidelines of the primary stage of socialism for 100 years.”

Mr. Wen's comments, which appeared as the government prepares for its annual parliament session, come amid pressure by activists for an end to the ruling party's monopoly on power but made no reference to those demands.

The communist government has carried out limited political reforms in recent years, allowing non-partisan elections for the lowest-level village leadership posts. But the ruling party controls policymaking, and harasses and jails activists who call for multiparty democracy.

Mr. Wen said China would develop its own democratic policies and that a socialist system was not contradictory to those policies.

“A highly developed democracy and a complete legal system are inherent requirements of the socialist system and important symbols of a mature socialist system,” Mr. Wen said.

China's ceremonial parliament, the National People's Congress, opens Monday and is expected to discuss property and tax law changes.

China's economy has boomed in recent years, growing at double digit rates, but the expansion has been uneven. Communist leaders acknowledge that a growing wealth gap was threatening to undermine political stability and their control of the country.

Mr. Wen said that while economic development was the central task, that had to be done while building a harmonious society — the government's catchphrase to describe efforts to help the hundreds of millions who have not yet benefited from China's rapid economic growth.

3环球邮报上的讨论 1 唵啊吽 2007-02-27 18:40:45
gulu Ng from Canada writes: I agree that economic development must go before political reform. but 100 yrs is too far away.. how about make it 50?
Posted 27/02/07 at 3:16 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Law Reform from Toronto, Canada writes: Yes, the Chinese system isn't perfect, but it's not easy managing a country with 1.2 billion people. Just look how screwed up the Americans are with less than 30% the population of China.
Posted 27/02/07 at 3:32 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Vern McPherson from Toronto, Canada writes: 100 years ? That's about how long it will take me to go shopping at a Walmart.
Posted 27/02/07 at 3:51 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Andrew Burke from Canada writes: Law Reform: Perhaps India could mimic China when it comes to economic reform and China could mimic India when it comes to political reform?
Posted 27/02/07 at 4:15 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
X. T. from Waterloo ON, Canada writes: Andrew,
Then they both get screwed. :-D

Posted 27/02/07 at 5:21 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Brendan Caron from Vancouver, Canada writes: I take it that what he is saying is that for the next hundred years Communist China will live the hedonistic materialism way until they learn how to share.
Posted 27/02/07 at 5:56 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
James CHIPMAN from Canada writes: 100 years to global domination , now thats looking ahead . So any chinese person that is 30-40 years old , their great grandkids might see some form of democracy , MIGHT !!! Oh well , guess it cant be all that bad , at least they got a plan for the next 100 years , our government cant look past their next term in office.
Posted 27/02/07 at 6:46 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: The trouble is, it is easy for other world leaders to catch on to the idea that a country is an economy first and a society second. This is why trade needs to be linked to human rights and democracy.

The Chinese economy will destabilize if they do not find ways to become more democratic and take care of their most vulnerable citizens - especially protecting them from corruption. This leader just wrote a licence for all the corrupt officials in China to carry on abusing citizens. Let's hope that Harper doesn't decide that we should hold off on democracy for the sake of the economy as well.
Posted 27/02/07 at 7:41 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
john chuckman from Toronto, Canada writes: Well, this puts China on the same footing as the United States.

I can't see democracy taking any less time to arrive there.
Posted 27/02/07 at 7:46 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Edward Thomas from Kingston, Canada writes: Wen Jiabao, a geomechanical engineer by training, needs to read more history books. Emerging middle classes have never been patient about gaining political influence. Telling them they will not see any political power in their lifetimes isn't a very smart move.
Posted 27/02/07 at 8:17 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
thomas ip from Shenzhen, Canada writes: Who cares whether or not any country is a democracy or not as long as money talks. Isn't it what it is all about?
Posted 27/02/07 at 8:56 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Eric H from Canada writes: So this means Taiwan will be free for at least another 100 years.
Posted 27/02/07 at 8:57 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Watson Jones from United States writes: No democracy in the US? Get real. It is in Canada where things are rammed down the throats of citizens. When is the last time there was a popular referendum, perhaps the most basic form of democracy, in Canada? (Though in fairness, I guess that would be Quebec separation). They happen all the time in US. My guess is that many of these commenters don't like popular referenda anyway, since they represent the will of the majority of people, but clearly they are democratic institutions and represent an additional check on the power of government. Many US states also vote for judges, so you don't get ones who care so much more about criminals than honest citizens. Again, you may not agree, but this is indeed democratic. Finally, though there are many more examples, US votes on all representatives--senators are not appointed. To suggest that the US is somehow less democratic than Canada is just plain silly.
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:04 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
robert marshall from Scarborough, Canada writes: All these who gain power are afraid to loose it
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:09 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
thomas ip from Canada writes: No, Taiwan will not be free (at least economically) until it returns back to China.
Remember who said 'To be rich is Glorious'.

4特别喜欢这一句。 俞天任 2007-02-28 03:07:58

算说到点子上了。

5就是随口发泄嘛 bot 2007-02-28 09:51:16
实在不知道高明在哪里。

这个称得上clueless

4这帮家伙都被洗了脑，全一根筋啊。 同人于野 2007-02-27 19:19:00

5最近看了一篇文章 1 唵啊吽 2007-02-27 19:40:28
加拿大皇后大学的民主研究所策动了乌克兰的民主革命。文章不反对武力在国际上推行民主，认为伊拉克是计算错误。称台湾为国家。这些是大学教授啊，你说能洗多少学生的脑吧。

6关于加拿大是中国贪官天堂这个问题老兄有什么理论没有？ 同人于野 2007-02-27 19:43:50

7我用了一个木桶理论 1 唵啊吽 2007-02-27 21:04:02
http://www.cchere.com/article/743020

8这才是说道点子上了！佩服老兄！高！！！ 同人于野 2007-02-27 22:24:58

4续 唵啊吽 2007-02-27 18:45:44
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:10 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Rob Misek from Whitby, Canada writes: If their priority is the economy over human rights for the next 100 years I suspect the environment is farther down the priority list.

We can thank Wen for clarifying that the only way to affect human rights and environmental progress in China is through trade and sanctions.
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:13 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Joseph Sis from Ottawa, Canada writes: I am a Canadian (not from Chinese origin) who recently returned from a two years stay, working in China. What an eye opener ! I can't say enough about how great and how comeptent the leadership of that country is, as compared to the slowly rotting so-called 'democratic ' system in the west. How big is the difference between a de-facto one party system (officially China has more than one party) and the de-facto two party system in most of western democracies? How democratic is our choice when lobbyists and special interest groups hold the strings of elected officials who need millions, tens of millions or even hundreds of millions to win elected office. Instead of escaping our problems to criticize China, let's learn humility from the chinese and improve our system first ! Competence and integrity of government is what matters to citizens. The Chinese central government is facing equal challenges to our Federal government in a push and pull game with the provinces and local authorities, they are succeeding in achieving steady progress on all fronts, progress doesn't mean Perfection, it may take 100 years of steady progress to achieve an almost perfect system, I think that's what Mr Wen meant, not 100 years to reach the mediocre democracy that we can't stop bragging about. Finally in my 2 years of living and working with Chinese I never felt that anyone was holding back their opinion on any topic, political or otherwise, nor did I meet anyone who was yearning for a western democratic system. Exactly the opposite, they generally laugh and think we are clueless when they read or hear the nonsensical western perspectives about China and the Chinese. Westerners who write their articles while sitting in five stars hotels in Shanghai or Beijing are truly clueless, even more, those sitting behind desks in ....USA
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:15 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: Watson Jones: In our last popular referendum Canadians were asked whether we would like to change Stockwell Day's name to Doris Day. Over a million people responded in the affirmative - democracy in action and an excellent demonstration of how referenda work.

It is difficult for me to read about democracy in the United States given George Bush's non-election. Are you sure your name isn't Chad?
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:16 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: Joseph Sis: According to Amnesty International 10 million political prisoners are currently in jail in China. They are not accorded due process of law and can be executed and tortured at any moment. Orphans (especially girl children) are left to die a long agonizing death by starvation in state-run orphanages if they are thought to be too weak to survive. And on and on. Terribly efficient, but so were Hitler and Stalin. Sure, there are a lot of great things in China - but lack of democracy and corruption of officials shame all Chinese.
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:23 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Aussie Expat from Toronto, Canada writes: Joseph Sis: Why did you come back then? Seems like a paradise on earth living in China.
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:23 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
thomas ip from Shenzhen, Canada writes: I totally agree with you Joseph Sis.
The western countries are so hypocrtical when it comes to human rights. Which country sold black people as slaves and which country took the land from the native people?
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:23 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Chris Lalonde from Singapore writes: If you look at some of the posts made at the G&M (ex. Canadian posters who'd rather cheer for the Taliban than our troops), you'd think that we're not even 100 years from democracy but rather ZERO progress from the stone age!
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:30 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
J.C. Davies from Canada writes:
'I am a Canadian (not from Chinese origin) who recently returned from a two years stay, working in China. What an eye opener ! I can't say enough about how great and how comeptent the leadership of that country is, as compared to the slowly rotting so-called 'democratic ' system in the west'.

Back in the 1930's many tavellers returned from the Soviet Union proclaiming that life under Stalin was superior to the West. In hindsight we know those people were either fools or liars.
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:34 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stude Ham from Outremont, Canada writes: Did anybody bother to ask the chinese leaders to tell us what they saw as 'democracy'?. Even in this land of ours most people think that democracy is all about counting bits of paper. And the concept of democracy gets even worse south of the border. That's why so many were jolted by the Supreme Court's decision on security certificates. Most didn't realize that the fundamentals of democracy actually go far farther than a pencil mark on a piece of paper. Now, exactly what does the chinese leadership understand 'democracy' to be.
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:47 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Raymond Lei from Toronto, Canada writes: What I interpreted Mr. Wen's 100 years is as long as the communist party holds the power there should be no democracy. Also, the term of 100 years is symbolic which means FOREVER. However, who knows and who cares what will happen in 100 years when people of this generation already rest in peace. I believe the message Mr. Wen wants to send across is to reaffirm people that China needs social and political stability to develop its economy.
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:51 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
dman T from Toronto, Canada writes: China's idea of deomocracy is Tiananmen Square.........

5cont. 唵啊吽 2007-02-27 18:49:52
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:52 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Ragged Mouths from Montreal, Canada writes: It's unfortunate, but we are the ones to blame (in part) for this 'economy first, democracy second' rhetoric. if we had facilitated Russia's entrance into democratic capitalism, rather than just putting up fast food chains, and if Russia was wealthier right now, more countries would be willing to try 'democracy first, economy second'. Unfortunately the USSR is a good example of why China is, in this case, somewhat correct, even if the 'reasoning' employed here is, in many respects, a mask for evil.

That said, I agree with the above poster that it is downright stupid to tell the emerging middle-classes that they must wait a century for a taste of power.
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:55 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
jen andersen from vancouver, Canada writes: When a Chinese says 'a hundred years' - he means it's going to take a long time. But time is relative to an individual, it could actually mean 50 years or even 25 years. For example, when a Chinese says that he'd wish a person to 'live 10,000 years', that means he'd wish the person to live a long time and not to physically live 10,000 years. Anti-Sinoism derives from ignorance. We must understand the Chinese more and vice versa in order to take away the fear of each other. It scares me when I go to Richmond and see 10,000 Chinese.
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:56 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
L Tang from Toronto, Canada writes: Definitely misleading and losing context...

If you can read Chinese, here is the official publishing:
链接出处

The real meaning is : we will struggle for the Democratic system to several descents because of the complexity of our system...

I got lost by this G&M title, so I checked the original one, then...
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:56 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
thomas ip from Shenzhen, Canada writes: dman T: Have you any idea who engineered Tiannamen Square?
All the student leaders who were behind the revoult are now living in US and Europe.
Posted 27/02/07 at 9:58 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
dman T from Toronto, Canada writes: The people in Tiananmen square protesting were intellecutals and liberals...... liberals were killed for protesting by a thug leadership.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:00 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Beatriz Perez-Sanchez from Toronto, Canada writes: Joseph Sis, you seem to be forgetting about a few other important aspects of life in China - millions of political prisoners, the widespread use of torture and capital punishment, selling prisoners' organs on the world market (a process in which prisoners are kept barely alive until the transaction is completed), female infanticide.... My list is by no means complete. The government of China is guilty of crimes on the same scale as those committed by Hitler and Stalin. If it were not for the fact that China is such a lucrative market for the West (not to mention home to so many WalMart sweatshops) and that it has both a large population and military, the country's leaders would have been dragged off to The Hague long ago. Unfortuately, the pursuit of profit has always trumped human rights. In the case of China, it will continue to do so unless there is a real revolution in the country.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:00 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Michael Sharp from Daffodil City, Canada writes: When they say 100 years, I'm thinking they know it will be a whole lot sooner.
Otherwise, why say it?
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:03 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
L Tang from Toronto, Canada writes: Use your heads, Yours!

Do you think it's realistic that a gang (no matter how many in them) can dictated one and half billion people who can reached any information from outside world by internet, newspapers, books, magazines,letters, or technical menus from IBM or Microsoft, or at least by rumors?

And you also think this gang is idiots to be a super power in a complex scocial system of 1.5 BILLION guys?! Freak out me.

Posted 27/02/07 at 10:07 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
thomas ip from Shenzhen, Canada writes: dman T: Do you know old these 'intellectuals....liberals' are?
They are not even old enough to vote.
They only know that the greenbacks are behind them and will be rewarded with a greencard.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:10 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Ramesh Fernando from Canada writes: Wen doesn't realize when democracy will happen. It's not if Wen but when and no will know who the hell Hu was just like Eric Honecker in East Germany. It's inevitable, the Kumotiang nationalists in Taiwan thought they could rule for hundreds of years but they had to give in to democracy. With all the corruption of the Communist party, where taxes are being forced on the peasants unfairly to pay for corrupt party officials, where development is only in the cities without thinking about the countryside. Where it's an enviromental distaster, smog, acid rain, water table going haywire, soil erosion. Where State owned enterprises are being loaned all the money from banks at low interest after paying even lower interest, and all the SOEs are going to collpase. It's a domino effect. Overbuilding in Shanghai, millions of properties going without tenants. Falung Gong or someone else wil force democracy. Mark my words, it will be the peasants who will force the democracy, actually falung gong may not be part of it since it's more middle class folks who are into that. Just like the peasants supported Mao against the Chian-Kai-Shek and the nationalists, democracy will come very soon. To Joseph Sis, I assume North Korea is the most beautiful country in the world for you.
These Beijing dictator thugs are finished very soon. Just like Castro Kim and Vietnamese junta oh yeah and the burmese junta they will all go down in history as loosers to democracy.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:11 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
dman T from Toronto, Canada writes: Thomas ip - so you think its ok to butcher protesters? you are a member of the communist party and hate students from your own country. students were protesting becuase of the repressive regime you defend.

were you smiling when tanks ran over these people?
you're a clueless idiot
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:12 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Michael Palmer from Waterloo, Canada writes: 100 years - quite short actually, if you put it into context. Hitler declared his Third Reich was going to last for 1000 years...

6cont. 唵啊吽 2007-02-27 18:52:10
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:13 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: L. Tang - I really appreciate your translation of the headline. I wonder: do you think this means that Chinese leaders think that they already have a democracy?

I am also curious how long you think it will take for a multi-party system to come to China. I hope China uses a different electoral system than ours when the time comes.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:14 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Alfred Dreyfus from Canada writes: For centuries the Chinese have thought and planned long-term. A hundred years is nothing to those who don't have to worry about an election every four or five.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:15 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: Watson Jones The fact that you just posted a text book definition of how the US system should work and why it's democratic was the first reason I suspected your post.. Then I realized you were actually from the US, of all the things Americans get divided over (guns, healthcare, education) them believing that their system is a democracy (if not the most superior) is by far the main thing they can agree on.. While you may disagree with the Canadian system, you need to do a bit of actual research on your political system.. The out of control lobbying and spending, the fact that judges don't rule based on what is right but what is popular, and subjecting minority rights decisions to referenda (which are nortoriously unreliable).. You call a referendum democratic, but when you give a complex problem to people who are not prepared/informed correctly to make a decision it is democracy in name only.. It's well known that people will often vote on a referenda as a way of supporting or punishing a government.. Partisan politics skews numbers even further.. combine this with the fact that you can't put a minority rights issue (gay marriage for example) up to a referenda, it's a MINORITY issue, of course they aren't going to win referenda, they're the minority.. that's what government is there for, to make the hard decisions, after weighing all the facts and understanding the consequences.. That's why we choose capable leaders to run the country in our best interest.. Don't get me wrong, I believe democracy is the best system available to us.. just don't kid yourself that the US is that great, or even that democratic (the last 2 presidential elections brought that into serious question, don't believe me let's have a recount.. oh wait you can't, because a Republican party suppoter makes the voting machines but won't allow anyone to verify the code and there's no paper ballots).. please do some research on referenda man.. ones not financed by the US government ideally.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:17 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
John Melnick from High River AB, Canada writes: Remember folks that this is the country that our attaining our Kyoto targets is supposed to set an example for. We lead and they shall follow.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:19 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
thomas ip from Shenzhen, Canada writes: dman T: I may be a clueless idiot but I am not naive.
Do you know how many 'intellectuals.....liberals' were killed in Ohio when they tried to protest against the Vietnam war?
So you think the students got a better deal in the US?

Posted 27/02/07 at 10:23 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
The Loyal Canadian Work Farce from Canada writes: In 25 years the gap between the rich and poor in China will be like the distance between Mars and Pluto. Just ask the leaders of North America's liberal econom....er...liberal democracy.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:24 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Vern McPherson from Toronto, Canada writes: Watson Jones from United States writes

And what was it you had rammed down your throat recently Whatty ?
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:25 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: thomas ip

Let's not forget that nifty little thing called the Cultural Revolution.. where you know 50 Million people were murdered.. for being liberals, and artists and you know being generally educated and realizing a faux communist fascist regime was not in the best interest of the people..

Oh and was it you that brought up the slave trade? I'm not sure but let's not forget who owned the slaves in Africa before they were sold to the Euro's.. The other tribes in Africa.. they have been warring and making slaves of one another for alot longer than we ever did..
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:29 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Jack Smith from vanvouver, Canada writes: There are handful of so-called political criminals in china, Some are of them maybe wrongly charged like those people who are wrongly held because of national security reason in canada, but most of them commited actual crime.

Open your own eyes before you talked about millions as number.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:34 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Jack Smith from vanvouver, Canada writes: Stubborn Ox

You posted so many numbers withour proof at all. Where did you get those wierd numbers? Even most anti-china or anti-china government person cannot imagine about that kind of number.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:35 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: 'but most of them commited actual crime.'

of course they did.. they spoke out about the government.. got together in too big of a group.. worshipped a god other than the party leader etc..

those are all crimes in China.. so technically you are correct...

7cont. 唵啊吽 2007-02-27 18:53:43
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:37 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: So many numbers? I don't think I did.. I posted the 50 million killed in the cultural revolution.. other than that I don't believe I even used any..
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:38 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
X. T. from Waterloo, ON, Canada writes: Vickky Angstrom from Calgary:
Where did you get the source again? I do not think China has the capacity to hold 10 million in jails! I see you, like many Canadians and Americans, know absolutely nothing about anything in that part of the world. And I say it again, one of the best ways for these people to start learning geography is waging wars against some remote tinpot countries.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:40 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Eric Li from Calgary, Canada writes: This G&M article is written by someone who can read some Chinese characters but has NO ability to understand the meaning of a Chinese article and definitely does NOT understand the Chinese culture. The '100 years' appeared once in '我們必須堅持黨在社會主義初級階段的基本路線１００年不動搖，堅持改革和創新，使中國特色社會主義永葆蓬勃生機'(We must keep the socialist INITIAL STAGE for at least 100 years). 社會主義初級階段(the initial stage of socialist) was first introduced about 30 years ago by then Chinese Communist General Secretary ZHAO Ziyang. The use of “initial stage” paved a path for both the economic reform and the political reform achieved during the last 30 years. It is true that the Chinese leader does not talk very often about “democracy and political reform” . But the China's No. 3 leader’s paper did emphasise that “we should steady conduct the POLITICAL REFORM and socialist DEMOCRACY CONSTRUCTION at THE SAME TIME when we do economic reform” (我們在進行經濟體制改革的同時，穩步推進政治體制改革，社會主義民主法制建設不斷加強，人民的政治生活日趨活躍，人民在政治、經濟、文化、社會等方面的權利得到了較好維護。)
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:40 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Johnny La Rue from Victoria, BC, Canada writes: And to think people crap on Cuba for being socialist and look the other way when China admits to being the same. If Cuba manufactured western-bound goods (benefitting from workers getting less than a dollar an hour) and have Wal Mart make billions from it they'd be a 'good' socialist, too. Interesting parallel.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:41 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: I realize I shouldn't have posted those deaths as all the 'cultural revolution' but rather deaths attributed to Mao in his quest to set up his ideal marxist state..

People's Republic of China, Mao Zedong's regime (1949-1975): 40 000 000 [make link]
Agence France Press (25 Sept. 1999) citing at length from Courtois, Stephane, Le Livre Noir du Communism:
Rural purges, 1946-49: 2-5M deaths
Urban purges, 1950-57: 1M
Great Leap Forward: 20-43M
Cultural Revolution: 2-7M
Labor Camps: 20M
Tibet: 0.6-1.2M
TOTAL: 44.5 to 72M

I just pulled those off a site I googled.. don't have time for academic searches right now but if you have any Google-Fu I'm sure you'll find the approximate numbers.. Historians believe Mao was responsible for 10's of millions of deaths..
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:43 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
X. T. from Waterloo, ON, Canada writes: Eric Li from Calgary:
Don't waste your time. G&M is heavily biased. Just look at today's another article by Omar El Akkad, about raising money for a terrorist, I mean, Uyghur freedom fighter.

I suspect no reporter with G&M is actually literate in Chinese. They just want to make up some horror stories to feed the public.
Posted 27/02/07 at 10:46 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: aw what's wrong.. everytime I stay in a thread and argue the people who seem like they are lying through their teeth just back off and stop posting..

better luck next time guys..
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:06 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Trillian Rand from Canada writes: Premier Wen Jiabao makes some interesting and valid points. For China to advance, it must create a system that allows all citizens to benefit, not just some. This is not political rhetoric, but stark reality. Almost certainly the Premier is using '100 years' figuratively, not literally, because democracy will rise from the bottom before it is imposed from the top, no matter how benevolent the government's intentions. Already large groups in China are actively encouraging democratic reforms. As the economy expands, this encouragement will become more strident.

For another aspect of the Premier's speech, go to the China Daily website: chinadaily.com.cn.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:07 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
mr motoc from Canada writes: All you boys and girls who HATE things like . . . rights . . . freedom . . . due process . . . and the rule of law -- all the favorites of sissy-pants left-wing looney types -- it looks like Communist China is THE country for YOU, for at least 100 years!

You must be so happy. Get on the web; book a one-way flight; you owe it to YOURSELVES.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:12 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
tony leong from Canada writes: well, obviously China has a long way to go with respect to human rights/democracy etc...

anyone that knows anything about the Chinese in general is that stability is very much a state to be desired...so nothing the Government says to that end ought to be surprising...

China is on course, IMO, to gradually loosen the reigns of power, but only under their guidelines and timeframe.

Watching the former USSR dissolve and then implode into the uber-rich and the poor, probably didn't give the Chinese any confidence with regard to a faster timetable a la perestroika
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:26 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
John Silverman from Canada writes: Does this mean the US will attack China? Because we all know that they often attach countries under the premise of trying to bring them democracy. Somehow I think they won't, which just goes to show they don't actually care about that and should stop using that as an excuse.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:28 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Ranald Walton from Hamilton, Canada writes: To the Chinese Dictators: Good luck on that one. It will be difficult for the elite to maintain control when a financial crisis hits sometime in the future. Probably China's biggest problem, and it is far bigger than any problem faced by the US, is its lack of political stability. Money does not like political chaos.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:29 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
david sandford from Canada writes: China seems less like socialism than a bunch of rich thugs milking a country. China's premier is more concerned about his rolls royce...

8cont. 唵啊吽 2007-02-27 18:56:09
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:31 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Green Canada from Edmonton, Canada writes: we could have a new saying...Canada will cut GHGs when China becomes a democracy...the timeline is about the same.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:34 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Eric Li from Calgary, Canada writes: mr motoc from Canada: it might be harder for the Canadian Natives to find the differences among us based on WHEN we arrived here than HOW they arrived here.
We are discussing the meaning of a paper and nothing else.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:35 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
X. T. from Waterloo, ON, Canada writes: david sandford from Canada:
For your info, Win Jiabao has no Rolls. All high ranking state officers have to use native products, including their chauffeured vehicles. If you find they are thugs, good luck trying find a word for those in Washington and Ottawa. You may need an Oxford Dictionary.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:40 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
G. A. from Canada writes: It is easy to objectively condemn a statement proclaiming another century of Communist rule in a country with such potential, economic and otherwise. However, it is refreshing to see leaders taking a pragmatic stance to democratization. As we have quickly learned in Iraq and Afghanistan (among countless African and Latin American states), democracy requires the proper infrastructure to flourish, let alone take hold. Democracy, of course, is not simply elections, although much of the world holds the principle as such, quite infallibly. A true, Western embodied 'liberal' democracy requires an independent judiciary, free press, civil liberties, a viable welfare state, free and fair elections, freedom of religion, etc., etc...

If the leaders of China were to proclaim simple 'democracy' in 10 or 20 years - ostensibly meaning elections with some conjured up form of competition - readers might have had a more favourable response. However, when taking the full gamut of democratic ideals into consideration, the prediction of a century is certainly more feasible. We need not see another democratic promise broken any time soon.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:41 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
L Tang from Toronto, Canada writes: Stubborn Ox, I love you last name.

I can not agree more that many people were dead 'unnaturally' during Cultural Revolution ( or Cultural Lost!). The fact is that we don't know the fact.

But I suggest you forget this painful or horrible memory, like most Chinese are doing now. Like why there is baby boom in North America after war? The current Chinese crazy economic boom is in the same situation. The 60's is an unbeatable nightmare to China and her citizens.

But I think the number is not as big as millions, bcz massacre during that period is not heard; also many Chinese learned to shut up to survive quickly when they realize the mouth became dangerous organ.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:42 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Keith Petreman from Ottawa, Canada writes: Watson Jones from United States, I think to have a democracy you have to count all the votes. You can go around all day proclaiming America as a democracy but as long as the media there are controlled by fewer and fewer and as long as the referendums and elections involve systematic fraud and widespread disenfranchisement from the political system, I think it's fair game to question whether or not the US is really still a democracy.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:42 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Y Gong from Thunder Bay, Canada writes: The author of the article has a misunderstanding of the so-called '100 years', which actually counted from the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949. That means democracy is at least 40 more years away. In my opinion, this is a realistic plan.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:47 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Keith Petreman from Ottawa, Canada writes: mr motoc from Canada writes: All you boys and girls who HATE things like . . . rights . . . freedom . . . due process . . . and the rule of law -- all the favorites of sissy-pants left-wing looney types -- it looks like Communist China is THE country for YOU, for at least 100 years!

You must be so happy. Get on the web; book a one-way flight; you owe it to YOURSELVES.

I agree. Just thought it was worth re-stating.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:49 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Tony Baloney from In a cave west of Hamilton, Canada writes: I think it is absolutely wonderful that the ruling class in China is so concerned with improving the lives of the average Chinese rather than maintaining their own grip on power. I personally think they should hold off democracy for 200 years, to doubly ensure that economic progress is established. After all, look how poor the US has done under democracy.

I repeat, the ruling class in China has absolutely no interest in maintaining power for power's sake and is entirely interested only in the altruistic act of improving the lives of the Chinese population.
Posted 27/02/07 at 11:54 AM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Stubborn Ox from Calgary, Canada writes: Tony Baloney

Yeah that's exactly it, they care about the people.. It's not that the wealth is being heavily concentrated in the hands of a few along the coast while hundreds of millions live in poverty and are murdered by the army if they attempt to launch any kind of complaint or protest..

Even in highly controlled China, the west gets the news of the death squads crushing revolts of poor and desperate peasant farmers in small rural villages.. and don't forget the mobile execution platforms they converted buses into, so it's easier to go from town to town executing dissidents.. google it if you dare.. I'm not making it up..
Posted 27/02/07 at 12:01 PM EST | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Mr Fijne from Calgary, Canada writes: Finally leaders who understand that democracy is flawed: just watch Canada the world's best wallet picking people who love to cripple those who bring wealth to them! In a democracy the lowest common denominator rules and that is why the politicians have to go so low to lure the idiots to vote for them on issues they don't understand! Ahh China, a first class communist country versus Canada a second class socialist one masquerading in conservative gears... Flaherty/Layton... In Canada, 10% are paying 50% of the income tax and thus should have 50% of the voting decision! You wanna have more say in the country? Work hard and smart and you'll create more wealth for all, pay more taxes and have more say! Let's go the Chinese way!