Skip to main content

yes indeed, the Olympics are a corporate feeding frenzie. China is perfecting the merging of government and big business power/interests. Scary... Lets not imitate them.

KLEIN: "The communism, Stalinism, market Stalinism, authoritarian capitalism, I think this is an incredibly efficient, actually, a scarily efficient way of organizing society that's actually being celebrated here, which is a hybrid of some of the worst elements of authoritarian communism—mass surveillance of the population, total lack of civil liberties, lack of a free press, lack of democratic rights, authoritarian central planning, all harnessed not to advance the goals of social justice, even in name, although there may be some lip service still paid to that, but to advance the goals of global capitalism. So it is Stalinism meets global capitalism. And it works. China is the most successful capitalist economy in the world: 11 percent growth, year after year after year. It is the most successful economy in the world. And that efficiency, that success, is intimately tied, I would argue, to the suppression of democratic rights. It's not successful despite the fact that it's not a democracy, despite the fact that you don't have independent trade unions; it is successful in large part because of that, because workers can't organize independent unions..."

It is crucial we realize capitalism and democracy are not tied together, but often at odds with one another.

More at http://therealnews.com/...

Originally posted to SteveAnderson on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 05:22 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The New World Order. (6+ / 0-)

    A few at the top weathy beyond belief while the masses toil at a subsistence level. Slavery without the "fringe benefits".

    CHRISTIAN, n. One who believes that the New Testament is a divinely inspired book admirably suited to the spiritual needs of his neighbor. A. Bierce

    by irate on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 05:30:47 AM PDT

  •  thanks for the article...where's your tip jar? (5+ / 0-)

    I have said for years that if China can do what Hong Kong did but maintain its own political system (whether we like it or not) they will dominate the world.

    They are finding a balance between capitalism and authoritarian rule. They'll be more tweaking over the next 10 years in terms of workers rights, environmental standards and safety but the centralized government system will never change. And maybe it shouldn't. While the Chinese will be marching into dominance in the coming centuries, god forbid we're here still having a debate about universal health care.

    Third world America anyone?

    Give Em Hell!! OBAMA 08

    by mdmslle on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 05:33:51 AM PDT

    •  Perhaps we should also distinguish (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      truong son traveler, brentmack

      between authoritarian and autocratic.  Authoritarian rule can be based on the authority that is derived form competence and expertise.  It's the autocrat that tends to have neither and relies on the use of force to impose his/her rule.

      How do you tell a predator from a protector? The predator will eat you sooner rather than later.

      by hannah on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 05:40:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Perhaps we shouldn't waste time (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sagesource

          Trying to find new words to gloss up the shiny shell built around the brutal realities of dictatorship.

          Whether you call them authoritarian, or autocracies, or whatever, dictatorships are still dictatorships: the absolute rule by an unaccountable power structure in which the murder and imprisonment of millions is a necessary core part of the structure, even if hidden behind neon lights and cheering crowds.  The Olympic stadium is built upon blood and bones.

          In the 1920s and 1930s, many people, looking at Russia, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Austria, and Germany, began to wonder if democracy was played out.  They wondered if maybe there wasn't a more effective, efficient system, in which all those annoying things that crop up when free people get to speak for themselves didn't get in the way of the Central Planners.  They were wrong.

          World War II showed that it was democracy, not authoritarianism or fascism, that was the wave of the future.  If we can learn the lessons of history, we won't need another war to prove the same thing today.

        •  Language is not a waste of time. (0+ / 0-)

          The current regime has provided lots of evidence that they and their minions put a lot of effort into duplicitous language to get them off the responsibility hook.

          What's an "enemy combatant" and who defines the term, based on what behavior?

          The language we use does affect how we think.  Consider that the word for "world" and "peace" is exactly the same in the Russian language.  So, it was possible to translate every call for peace as a desire to rule the world.

          How do you tell a predator from a protector? The predator will eat you sooner rather than later.

          by hannah on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 08:24:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's a waste of time (0+ / 0-)

              Trying to pin warm fuzzy labels on dictators.  

              The Reaganauts did this during the last years of the Cold War.  They called any dictator who sided with them "authoritarian"; any dictator, or democrat for that matter, who opposed them was "totalitarian".

            Consider that the word for "world" and "peace" is exactly the same in the Russian language.  So, it was possible to translate every call for peace as a desire to rule the world.

               Only if you (a) don't know any Russian and/or (b) are an anti-Russian propagandist.

    •  I wouldn't be so certain... (0+ / 0-)

      ....of guaranteeing all that goes on. Remember, when you have a rising, educated middle class, you also have people who are more and more interested in civil rights and liberties (while poor people are just concerned with surviving). Eventually, there's going to be pressure on the Chinese government to reform and give more social freedoms. Either that happens (if they're smart) or there'll be massive protests and/or revolution. While, thus far, the Chinese government has a pretty firm grip over the population, one billion, two hundred million people can be hard to control.

      •  Political Freedoms will come (0+ / 0-)

        metal prophet is right. In 1993 I met with the number two person in the Chinese central bank. He outlined all that has happened in the past fifteen years. The Chinese government had watched, with horror, what happened during the end of the Soviet Union and wanted to make sure it did not happen in China. The first steps were economic freedom, then more local political freedoms, followed a generation later by gradual changes in the national political process. So far everything he said has turned out to be true and I think that individual rights and political freedoms will come in time, but very slowly. This is not a defense of China and it's lack of civil liberties, just some insight from a senior Chinese official.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 07:42:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Read her article at Huffington Post or (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        esquimaux

        The Nation on China Police State 2.0

        Billions and Billions of dollars were spent on security for Beijing. 300,000 cameras: iris scanners, "anti-riot robots" and facial recognition software. The cameras are everywhere. Street corners, buses, cafes, schools and work. The software lets authorities know if more than a group of 5 gather together.

        The internet is blocked or tracked.

        In the last year with all of this in place protests have dropped by about 1/3.

        Social freedom will not happen because it will not be allowed to happen.

        •  You can do this for a time, yes (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sagesource

          But in the end, it gets to be too expensive to maintain. Look at what happened to the Soviet Union. I'm not saying it's inevitable that tyranny will be overthrown. But I am saying that sometimes what looks to be an unassailable position is a lot less so in truth.

        •  Right.... (0+ / 0-)

          ....there's a billion people there and they're going to track every group of larger than 5.

          Did you even read what you wrote?

          China's government is safe just as long as the economic expansion continues. After that -- and expansion never goes on forever -- watch out.

          "And if you vant a second opinion -- you are ugly too!"

          by sagesource on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 08:23:11 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Read if you want a picture of what's going on. (0+ / 0-)

            China's All Seeing Eye

            The workers at FSAN don't just make surveillance cameras; they are constantly watched by them. While they work, the silent eyes of rotating lenses capture their every move. When they leave work and board buses, they are filmed again. When they walk to their dormitories, the streets are lined with what look like newly installed streetlamps, their white poles curving toward the sidewalk with black domes at the ends. Inside the domes are high-resolution cameras, the same kind the workers produce at FSAN. Some blocks have three or four, one every few yards. One Shenzhen-based company, China Security & Surveillance Technology, has developed software to enable the cameras to alert police when an unusual number of people begin to gather at any given location.

            •  You are still not making sense (0+ / 0-)

              What good are cameras if there are so many no one can absorb the information?

              Britain has gone into CCTV for crime prevention in a big way, with very poor results:

              But according to Detective Chief Inspector Mick Neville, who heads the Metropolitan Police's Met's Visual Images, Identifications and Detections Office (Viido), billions of pounds have been spent with almost no results to show. Only three percent of crimes have been solved using CCTV footage, and offenders aren't afraid of being caught on video.

              There's something very American, though, to think that the mere presence of technology is a solution. I'd suggest that the same mechanisms are in place here as in similar Western situations: the guy selling the cameras is making a sh*tload of money.

              "And if you vant a second opinion -- you are ugly too!"

              by sagesource on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 09:04:00 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Did you read the article? (0+ / 0-)

                In it one of the examples she uses the Lhasa riots in March to show you how the police are using the cameras. And it's been very effective.

                •  One riot in one place.... (0+ / 0-)

                  ...rioters of a different ethnicity from the Chinese, and the information on the "efficacy" from the police. Riiiight... you seem very credulous when it comes to China.

                  "And if you vant a second opinion -- you are ugly too!"

                  by sagesource on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 09:35:34 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Hmmmmm (0+ / 0-)

                    In April 2007, officials from 13 provinces held a meeting to report back on how their new security measures were performing. In the province of Jiangsu, which, according to the South China Morning Post, was using "artificial intelligence to extend and improve the existing monitoring system" the number of protests and riots "dropped by 44 per cent last year." In the province of Zhejiang, where new electronic surveillance systems had been installed, they were down 30 per cent. In Shaanxi, "mass incidents" -- code for protests -- were down by 27 per cent in a year. Dong Lei, the province's deputy party chief, gave part of the credit to a huge investment in security cameras across the province. "We aim to achieve all day and all-weather monitoring capability," he told the gathering.

                    •  Good god.... (0+ / 0-)

                      ....you trust them? Would you believe an American cop who made that sort of claim?

                      ROTFLMAOAPMP.....

                      I've lived in China and I have friends with relatives in the Public Security Department. They are good at pure-violence hammering down of anything that raises its head too far, USUALLY. But they know very, very little of what goes on under the surface of society. That's a billion people, remember. Chinese cops are not supermen. They do not have access to any mysterious "oriental wisdom." They don't get much more public support than cops in the West do. And they lack the advantage of even what little public oversight the police get in Western societies.

                      In short, the Chinese ruling classes live in a dream world, and when the mega-growth stops, the dream is going to be over.

                      "And if you vant a second opinion -- you are ugly too!"

                      by sagesource on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 09:55:43 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

          •  The Golden Shield (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            esquimaux

            This is how this Golden Shield will work: Chinese citizens will be watched around the clock through networked CCTV cameras and remote monitoring of computers. They will be listened to on their phone calls, monitored by digital voice-recognition technologies. Their Internet access will be aggressively limited through the country's notorious system of online controls known as the "Great Firewall." Their movements will be tracked through national ID cards with scannable computer chips and photos that are instantly uploaded to police databases and linked to their holder's personal data. This is the most important element of all: linking all these tools together in a massive, searchable database of names, photos, residency information, work history and biometric data. When Golden Shield is finished, there will be a photo in those databases for every person in China: 1.3 billion faces

  •  Capitalism is concerned with the accumulation (3+ / 0-)

    and preservation of wealth, either by individuals or groups, for future use.

    Communism is concerned with the ownership of assets, specifically by a group (corporation) rather than by individuals or households.

    Democracy is either a strategy for selecting those who control the allocation of public and private assets (the Bush/Cheney definition) or a mechanism for the popular determination of how assets are allocated and used.

    It's important to differentiate between ownership and use.

    How do you tell a predator from a protector? The predator will eat you sooner rather than later.

    by hannah on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 05:37:14 AM PDT

    •  That's not communism (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eugene

      concerned with the ownership of assets, specifically by a group (corporation) rather than by individuals or households

      That's fascism.

      "In a time of universal deceit -- telling the truth is a revolutionary act."

      by MA Liberal on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 07:32:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The U.S. recognizes and certifies the (0+ / 0-)

        corporate ownership of assets.  That does not make the country fascist.  
        I wouldn't even argue that calling out the national guard to prevent striking workers from interrupting the corporate agenda is fascist, but it does come close.

        Closer still is when the U.S. government insists that Iran purchase nuclear fuel from U.S. suppliers or their subsidiaries rather than producing it itself.

        How do you tell a predator from a protector? The predator will eat you sooner rather than later.

        by hannah on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 08:30:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There is nothign wrong with corporations (0+ / 0-)

          owning their assets. What is wrong is when they become enmeshed in our government such that they make the rules that guide them, regulate them. That's fascism, or corporatism, a definition by Mussolini.
          I have no problem with corporations that play by the rules, rules made to protect The People, not to protect corporations.
          Capitalism, in and of itself, is not really so great. there is no creativity involved. It has to do with destruction of your competitor, not the betterment of your own product. You might "build a better mousetrap," but some corporation will come along, buy out your company and shelve your better product. then they offshore their own company and send all the jobs to China, where they only have to pay some poor schmo 50 cents an hour for 6-day workweeks.
          Regulate and force them to become competitive. Prevent them from off-shoring their companies to avoid taxes.

          "In a time of universal deceit -- telling the truth is a revolutionary act."

          by MA Liberal on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 12:48:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  ya know - sidebar point (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nio, snakelass

    China many agree applies VERY long term thinking - the fact that they were going to eventually change to a consumer  economy gave their extra large population an advantage.... that is called strategic planning or national security strategic planning.... McCommunism good point luv Naomi Klein... Pentagon Defense has been working over the population differential of China to the rest of the world for a long long time;

    Divide eight years by two oilmen in the White House and you have $4 a gallon. - Senator Barbara Boxer

    by goodacre on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 05:44:17 AM PDT

    •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Fixed Point Theorem

      http://www.3plwire.com/...

      EXCERPT

      China to surpass U.S. as largest consumer economy within 10 years?
      Apr 11th, 2007

         ...according to a survey of 1,200 leaders of small- and mid-sized business enterprises (SMEs) in Asia conducted for UPS.

         More than half (57%) believed the two markets would reach parity within 10 years.

      Divide eight years by two oilmen in the White House and you have $4 a gallon. - Senator Barbara Boxer

      by goodacre on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 06:48:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  They have a billion more people (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        goodacre

        The law of large numbers make it easy for China to overtake the US. They have a billion more people. As their middle class expands it is not hard to see why they would be largest economy in the world.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 07:45:37 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Where are the resources to come from? (0+ / 0-)

          They started thirty years too late, through their own political stupidity. Now not only are we in a resource crunch, they also have to compete with the rise of India.

          "And if you vant a second opinion -- you are ugly too!"

          by sagesource on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 08:42:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Mythology (0+ / 0-)

      Chinese strategic thinking is not noticeably better than that practiced in the rest of the world. Letting the Chinese people make money, when they've been doing it for two or three thousand years, is not exactly a masterpiece of planning. Keeping them dirt poor for thirty or forty years -- THAT took genius. Of a kind.

      "And if you vant a second opinion -- you are ugly too!"

      by sagesource on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 08:44:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  isn't it amazing (13+ / 0-)

    how the business community and the US Gov't have little problem with the government and human rights in China as long as they are "capitalist"?
    It puts the lie to all that crap in the 50s and 60s about the "evils" of communism.  The only "evil" was the lack of a free corporate market.

    China proves that corporations do not care about human rights or democracy or freedom.  Neither does our gov't.  All they care about is making a buck.

    The story of China since Mao died should put to rest the ludicrous notion that "capitalism" is  related to "democracy and freedom".  That is the lie we were all told since the Cold War.  Now we can see it is not true.  

  •  "Market Stalinism"? "Authoritarian Capitalism"? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SherwoodB, cruz

      There's already a good word for this type of thing.  We've seen it before.

      Benito Mussolini invented it in the 1920s.

      You know what it's called.

  •  Minor quibble. (0+ / 0-)

    I know quite a few small business owners who are working hard just trying to make a decent living (not trying to corner any market or crush any competition or dictate anything to anybody).  They consider themselves to be "Capitalists".  

    Criticisms of what is actually the rapacious behavior of "Corporatist Authoritarians" (part of which behavior includes deliberately crushing those same small business owners) - criticisms that tend to use the broad-brush terms "Capitalism" and "Business" also alienate these folks who should, in their own best interests (and in ours, electorially speaking), be on the side of the Democrats.

    Just sayin'.

    Some folks prefer a map and finding their own route. Others need someone to tell them where to go.

    by sxwarren on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 07:24:30 AM PDT

    •  Addendum. (0+ / 0-)

      One of the things I like about Klein is that she seems to implicitly recognize that the "Communism" that's actually been practiced on a large scale is actually just "Corporatist Authoritarianism" dba under another name.

      Some folks prefer a map and finding their own route. Others need someone to tell them where to go.

      by sxwarren on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 07:27:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Not really McCommunism. More like (0+ / 0-)

    plain outright fascism. We like to think of fascism as being like Nazi Germany. But fascism is merely corporatism. If you keep the masses sleepy with movies, TV shows, trinkets and toys, they will be complacent and compliant.
    Those of us who see our rights being taken away, slowly, rail against it and are called unpatriotic.
    China's merely coming at it from a different angle. We started with freedom and have moved toward fascism. They started with Communism and have moved into fascism.
    No matter how you get there, the result is the same.

    "In a time of universal deceit -- telling the truth is a revolutionary act."

    by MA Liberal on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 07:31:21 AM PDT

  •  China (0+ / 0-)

    is making a big announcement to the world that THEY are the biggest superpower-and that leaves the US at #2 at best. Wonder how many Americans are perceiving this?

  •  She's awesome (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    esquimaux

    at getting at the facts in a clear and succinct manner.

  •  We heard the same things.... (0+ / 0-)

    ...after THIS Olympics too:

    But less than ten years later....

    Not that the Chinese will be that stupid. But conjuring up a magnificent future for a totalitarian system from a pretty Olympics and a surging economy has been done before.

    "And if you vant a second opinion -- you are ugly too!"

    by sagesource on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 08:37:31 AM PDT

  •  The sad part of the story (0+ / 0-)

    is that America is going more the way of authoritarian capitalism than the Chinese are moving to an open society.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site