I will start here and probable not finish as I work fractional time.
Good start though.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTDECINEQ/Resources/Investing_in_Influence.pdf
"Our hypothesis is that more alternations in power mean that political connections
pay off less and so attract less investment by those seeking privileged
treatment by the state." pdf pg 1. This is inherent for a political system that shares in power between two different yet similar parties. As they check each other for corruption and for other political malfeasance. As such when there is one party we see the effects of non sharing of political corruption. By the allowing of steeling of market shares and international patents. As a one political dominant culture such as China has shown with its high use of stealing of patents and allowance of SOE's to cartel without there being any opposition to the economic and international effects that cause detriments to their country.
This is a real good article. I like it. I wish for the Chinese to feel the benefits of political power sharing instead of the detriments of the single party dominance. There is another party brewing in there. They are just very scared to come out and proliferate through root campaigns and for the most part business. As the Communist party still holds a strong very scary sway over economics and business. As we have seen in governments still struggling to deal with the transition. The Communist or powers in place much of the time destroy their competitors business very unfairly. It would be like Democrats trying to shut down Republicans business and then hand them over to the state or friendlies. Or adversely it would be like Republicans shutting down Democrats business and handing their market shares over to friendlies or the state. Folks are not happy with that on either side. That is considered war by each side. And there is an unspoken code that each shares power as it is proper to keep from hurting human life or civil freedoms over political and bouts.
However, in China any person that tries to come out against the Communist to start a new political party that could check them in power and size is usually shut down for some reason or another. Also in countries that China is fostering. We see political powers in control also shutting down their oppositions business and placing them under control of the ruling party. This is not sharing.
It might even be good as we saw in the US's political reform from a single dominant power to a freedom of politics country that each side actually fostered the other sides power so that the freedom of politics could stay high and each could have a check against their own wanton abuse of power. Which the US's forefathers and mothers understood very well. This allowed the US to create the world's highest civil rights. As when one side wishes to do something the other side checks them and brings it to the people as much as possible. Then again this does not happen in Communist China. We see still back door and very secretive laws, and the such.
It is just not China that has had this problem. The since the existence of communal politics we have seen it. Were secretive groups that were heavily persecuted had to go in secret to own something of their own and have privacy away from the communal ownership and corruption of power and politics that follow with communist political and economic models. There are stories of folks hiding in caves were they owned a small piece of a cave or an underground area where they were allowed to grow things, be themselves or even just read and write about what ever they wanted because the communist political and economic models did not allow for freedom that they wished for. As there was no way to check the communist powers that be, these people did not wish for war, so they would sit by candle light that would illuminate the caves and labyrinths and gather to speak of a place were individuals had a rights and each person in that cave dreamed of days were powers that lead would have oppositions that would check each other. However, as the Communist powers and politics of old were more into military than political power. These people just wrote and passed out books on their thoughts and ideas, to places of gathering under the guise of cloaks, sometimes just dropping it off in front of bars, schools, and libraries and running very fast. Other times, the stronger would take it to places and show themselves with no ties to the caves or the candles that illuminated them.
However, the world has come along way and places have become very close to political checks and we have seen a many good attempt at political power sharing and checking. China has moved very far in their economic reform. However, the power they still hold in the Communist party scares anyone to check them equally.
It is basic understanding of American history of roots. That the the two opposing parties could have easily gone to war with each other and one came out a victor after the such. However, again both sides decided to foster each others campaign to a political check and balance. As the leaders of both camps decided that debate and differences were just part of the individual rights and beliefs that they wanted America to be built upon. As such it was that they two parties that grew out of the American revolution grew to despise yet love each other for the balance that they held each other at for the civil and individual rights of their people.
However, I say with fear from tourist criminal charges, yet I speak at such a tone it is already probable I will be arrested when I go to vist
"Indeed, the record of democratization over the last 50 years has been impressive but also quite patchy, as a number of countries have switched back and forth between authoritarian and democratic
regimes (examples include Argentina, Brazil, Nigeria, and Sierra Leone)" pdf pg. 2
In these places we have seen many individual rights of intellectual and civil rights come and go as the powers that be wished not to share with each other but yet destroy each other physically and not properly through watching and observing and debating rhetorically to bring forth the truth of the forensics data sets as Lockean principles hold.
This worry of communist political models is what caused the first world war to be. Were the Socialist party of Germany begun to hoard resources control productivity through a centralized economic plan and then created the world's biggest and most advanced military. Thus wishing to physically destroy their their political oppositions and religious as Hitler was a religious nut. Which the Socialist party of Germany better did. Along with that the similar principles were placed upon the world societal watch groups of the Soviet Union as they also would not share power with a political rival in their own country. And hostilely used economic warfare to destroy any dissenters in countries that they held sway with.
"We test this relationship using data from 27 post-communist countries and find that governance indicators in almost all dimensions are better in transition economies that have experienced more frequent government changes." pdf pg. 2
We have seen China as a country go through many changes. Yet the Communist parties have been minimal in nature to a single dominate control over their citizens without a proper check and balance or a party that is as powerful to represent those voices that are different than the beliefs of the Communist Party. However, they have let them appear, they are just keeping them down from check and balance power.
However, as I am a lockean and do not wish for the death of my opposition yet a fair balance. I do see the benefits in a slow maturity. However, how slow should it be?
"The most direct way to break the vicious circle of weak institutions and strong
particular interests is through power alternation. With power alternation, a new set of political players comes to power; and while these players may, in their turn, be beholden
to some interest groups, it is unlikely that these would be the same interest groups that
supported the previous government."
"
“Sweet deals” may be rapidly undone—not by the caprice
of the rulers but by the popular vote. In an authoritarian system, an investor in influence
has to worry about not offending the rulers and making sure that he lives up to their
implicit bargain."pdf pg. 3
"over time. In our
Our focus is on “grand corruption,” situations where agents (enterprise
directors) purchase rules of the game that privilege their own interests, protection from
competitors, favorable judicial decisions, property rights as private goods, and so on. Such
privileged protection normally entails government actions that occur
model, influence is a durable good purchased from influential politicians." pdf pg. 8We see this in Communist China today as their opposition usually has to play nice with the communist party instead of being able to engage and entrench them in debate and proper check and balance funding of an opposition party.
For example China's car companies. Are currently being hit hard by the Chinese SOE cartels that have carted together to the sound of 16 SOE's to unfairly compete in international markets and domestic markets. As such those free enterprise car companies have had to pay political parties to take on the American car industry as the market is unfair with the Americans helping out their car industries instead of SOEign them while China SOE's hurt their domestic and international markets for the free enterprises. As such the Chinese will shut out the American cars to allow the Communist SOE's to stay cartel ed to take out American car companies in the international market while the Chinese free enterprises will be able to compete domestically for those shares the US once was able to fairly compete for. Therefore, as there is no political party in power enough to represent these Chinese care free enterprise against the Communist parties wishes. They have to bow to the Communist and pay officials to create market shares for them at home to survive.
"The direction of causation goes both ways: Corruption is lower, the greater the belief that political turnover will occur. Turnover is more likely to occur, the lower is corruption."
Thus showing how a bipolar system of politics allows more esteem for fair competition between economic entities. As were single party dominance usually side more with the entity that will benefit them. In this case of this lockique's views the Communist party benefit more from the SOE's than the actual citizens of China. As the Chinese free enterprise will not be able to compete against them. However, if we take the example above were the SOE's are tolerated as no political party represents the free enterprises. Then an unfair domestic padded economy is created at home for the free enterprises which then allows the SOE's to concentrate on the international economy while the free enterprises get a padded economy and an international economy. However in free markets unless complete ownership and individual ownership is taking from firms the free markets can't keep up with the level of protectionism from the Communist economic models or political non sharing single party.
"since it may be that a government with a different ideology than its predecessor is more likely to
challenge corrupt provision of privileged government protection by its predecessor." pdf pg. 17
This means that in the pin point application of the Communist. Those business that could not compete against SOE's with the Communist rules, may actually get a fighting chance with a proper political check and balance political party. Or, such business that received special treatment or even real good loans to the point were it caused all competitors local and international to be handicapped by up to 70% to actually receive less as the opposition may not think it fair.
China seems to be like the big bad scared beaver when it Comes to the political arena.
\Eating it all up and damming up the streams.
economically though they are like a dragon scorching market shares were ever they go.
"control of corruption (corruption isrule of law (the extent to
The two measures are
defined as the exercise of public power for private gain) and
which agents have confidence in, and abide by, the rules)." pdf pg. 25In china this corruption is still heavily relevant today especially through the faith of free enterprise to use anti-trust laws against Communist owned SOE's.
"the greater the likelihood that a large fraction of wealth would be controlled by
a small number of firms, which would tend to increase the bargaining power of firms and
their ability to capture the state." pdf pg. 30This page explains how a politically corrupt or unequal dominance can create unfair economic competition.
"We argue that the stronger was the opposition the more likely was general acceptance of democratic rules of the game, including alternation, and hence more difficult continuation of de facto one-party rule." pdf pg. 33
Thus this would lead to show that in a country that is reforming from totalitarian control to freedom. It should be easy to see basic inequalities of political freedoms that are blatantly still left over. As such the situation with China. Which jails, or shuts down any dissenters to the Communist power at which a level of rhetorical, sensible or even ability to bring together data to prove would threaten their single party dominance.
Much like if I did not rest so in a place of freedom. I would easily be picked up or economically taken out if I rested in the Communist parties regime. However, as I am in America they can easily just block my website from their country. However, as I know of key special codes and usb devices that exist for totalitarian regimes. I would suspect that there might be one person in China besides Hu and the MSS that get to read this.
"If investing in influence to obtain privileged treatment by the state is regarded like
any other economic activity, then it is clear that businesses will engage in it more when the
returns are higher." pdf pg. 40"There are many examples, in many countries, where it is a common knowledge that paying off influential politicians to buy property rights à la carte, and paying off judges to obtain favorable rulings, are more lucrative than seeking profits through strictly economic—not political—investments."
pdf pg. 40
This has been seen voraciously through the Chinese economic model based on MSS espionage to steal patents, and market shares via duplication of foreign countries products as created without properly asking. While then the Communist allow importation of technology which they then easily steal and replicate to sell back to the same inventor country for much cheaper via a duplicated company.
http://books.google.com/books?id=RiK3AyzdwN4C&pg=PA240&lpg=PA240&dq=Chinese+communist+shaing+political+power&source=bl&ots=bWOfu5FMke&sig=mdnziiGVh2a65BIaOCdOzw7XRKM&hl=en&ei=12DWTJm6FoiosAPFlPyMCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCQQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false
No comments:
Post a Comment