Chapter Two: Government Under God
Introduction
- Government
- Government
comes about as people begin to move from hunter-gather societies and
settle down in communities to farm, etc.
- How
do all these people near each other get along?
- From
a Latin verb, “to steer a ship”
- Definition:
Government is the authority and power to control, to direct, and to rule
the actions and affairs of others.
- Source
of authority: Sovereign Godà human institutions
- Obedience
to government is based upon obedience to parents (Fifth Commandment) [Ex.
20:12; Deut. 5:16]
- Purpose:
original purpose – punish evil and reward good
- Two
earmarks of any civilization: written code of law and org. form of civil
gov’t
- Laws –
rules people follow in living together
- Ten
Commandments – states principles of morality that form the basis of good
government
- Natural
law (“law in hearts” [Rom. 2:15]) and revealed law
- Noetic
effects of sin require that Bible be final authority
à Christianity and Government
- Christianity
takes Greek and Roman ideas and improves on them
- Idea
of history is a Jewish idea
- Creation
à
fulfillment (linear)
- Other
religions: history is cyclical, so why bother to improve things?
- Christianity
brings Jewish innovations to a wide audience
- Judaism
not primarily an evangelistic religion
- Liberty
comes from idea of grace
- God
loves us enough to give us liberty (free will)
- Liberty
is God-given, not government-given
- Community
comes from the Trinity
- Different
persons – in community, but distinct
- Not
swallowed up in mass movements, but individuals
- Responsibility
to community is limited
- Our
ultimate allegiance is to God, not government
- We
have the right to fight against policies that dishonor God
- We can
resist the temptation to try to create a paradise on earth
- This
is an idea that goes back at least to the Tower of Babel
- 20th
century and into 21st: 100s of millions have died in this
misguided quest to create the kingdom of God on earth
- We
know that the only perfect world is the one that awaits us when we die
We are all unique and valuable in
the eyes of God because we are created in His image
- Against
all forms of tyranny (communism, totalitarianism) that crush the human
spirit
- Favors
societies where people are free to develop their God-given gifts
- Only
God knows all, so we must be humble about things not mentioned in the
Bible (such as exact form of government, just wars, etc.)
- Free
speech
- Free
association
- God's law limits
liberty to prevent anarchy, and confines governmental power to inhibit
tyranny
- Free speech also serves
as a check on sinfulness by exposing abuses of power
Forms of Government
- God
ordained government, but not any particular form of government
- Every
form of government derives its authority from God (Rom. 13:1-7)
- All
forms of gov’t fall into two broad categories: autocratic or democratic
- Theocracy
– “rule by God or his representatives”
- God
rules through Moses
- Puritans
attempt it, but was short-lived
- Sort
of one under Islam – sharia law
- But
repression can’t last forever
- Michael
A. Ledeen, “Iran’s Next Revolution,” Wall Street Journal (5 June
2002)
à Ayatollah Ebrahim Amini, deputy leader of
the Council of Experts--perhaps the most powerful institution in Iran--publicly
warned [in May] that the country was on the verge of insurrection.
à “The Iranian regime has recently provided
chemical weapons to the Palestinian terrorists, and in honor of Khomeini's
anniversary it has just contributed 314 missiles to Iranian-sponsored
terrorists in Afghanistan. Iran's intention to assault our soldiers is not a
secret; hardly a day goes by without a leader of the regime pronouncing it.
While some of the details of Iranian terrorist activity in Afghanistan and
elsewhere in the region are not known, we know enough to justify serious action
against the regime in the name of self-defense.”
- Autocracy
– “rule of one whose will is supreme
- Ruler
makes and enforces the laws
- People
have little say in government
- Examples:
Sudan, Iraq, Libya, etc.
- Monarchy
– “rule alone”
- People
of Israel ask for king (SaulàDavidàSolomonàdivided
monarchy)
- Absolute
monarchy: ruler has unlimited power
- Good
and bad absolute monarchs
- King
David
- Cyrus
of Persia
- Charlemagne
- Pharaohs
of Egypt
à Book is wrong that
Elizabeth I is an absolute monarch (p. 20)
- Most
absolute monarchs have power checked by other forces – customs,
families, churches, and social classes
- Constitutional
monarchy: ruler’s power is limited by a consitution
- England
and the Netherlands
- Real
power in hands of a prime minister and a parliament
- Dictatorship
– “ruler acquires his power other than through constitutional authority and
rules with absolute authority”
- Two
forms: traditional and totalitarian
- Traditional
- Power
usually through military conquest
- Usually
comes when a government is overthrown
- Julius
Caesar, Napoleon, Franco of Spain, Nero (persecutes Christians)
à Book is wrong that
Hitler was a traditional dictator (p. 21)
- Totalitarian
- Control
all aspects of society
- Most
extreme form of authoritarian government
- Mussolini,
Hitler, Stalin, Chairman Mao in China
- Democracy
– “a government in which people have influence in their government”
- Is
this an accurate definition?
- The
most unstable form of government –
- Why?
The tendency to “mob rule” and tyranny
- Huge
question: How do we use our freedom?
- Forms
of democracy: direct and republican
- Direct
- People
rule directly by popular vote
- Ideal
is ancient Athens (myth)
- NE
Town Meeting
- Republican
(or Representative)
- People
rule indirectly through elected representatives
- Roman
Republic, nearly 500 yrs (509 B.C. to 27 B.C.)
- Weaknesses
- Majority
still rules
- Legislators
bribe people with gov’t pork
- History
– democracy usually ends in anarchy and tyranny
- Constitutional
Republic – “People and their representatives are limited by a
constitution”
- Founding
Fathers shun democracy because of man’s sin nature
- Power
is no safer in hands of the people than in hands of a single ruler
- “Golden
mean”
<<
Classical Discussion of Government
Plato
- Plato
is an idealist – he doesn’t begin with the way governments actually exist,
but the way they should exist
- Wisdom
is the fundamental virtue, which leads to justice
The Republic
- His
state is aristocratic
- The
philosopher-kings who are wise and virtuous direct the state
- The
warriors must defend the state
- The
producers (subdivided into various groups of arts and skills) must attend
to the material production of those things that are needed by the state.
- The
philosopher-kings are in charge
- restrain
the warriors from their irrational impulses
- restrain
the passions and greed of the producers
- Practically
speaking, education is restricted to the warrior class, from which the
(philosophers) were elected to the head of the state
- He
denied the family and the right of private property to the philosopher and
warrior classes.
- Attachment
to one's own family and greed for material goods could be grave
impediments preventing these two classes from fulfilling their duty
- Private
property and the family find place only in the class called producers
à the precursor of
present-day Socialism and Communism?
- In
Republic, Book 8, Socrates/Plato says that gov’ts are like fruit –
they get more and more rotten with each generation
- Aristocracy degrades into:
- A timocracy - ruled by those who seek honor, then
- An oligarchy - ruled by those who are more concerned
with accumulating money than buying goods and indulging their appetites,
then
- A democracy - ruled by those who are more concerned
with buying goods and indulging their appetites than with accumulating
money, then
à debt-ridden America?
- A tyranny - ruled by a person who seeks political
power in order to have the means to satisfy each and every appetite to
its fullest
- Each type of regime is dominated by a person with a certain
kind of soul
à adapted from Marc Stier’s Plato Notes
Plato on Democracy
(excerpted from Marc Stier’s Plato Notes)
- The soul of a
democratic person is purely appetitive in nature. He or she
- Seeks to satisfy
his bodily desires of all types: food, sex, drink, shelter
- Not just those
desires that are necessary to life
- But also for
comforts and luxuries
- Including
poetry and music that, we saw above, are in part, sensual pleasures
- Is changeable
and flits from the satisfaction of one desire to another.
- A democratic person
is attracted to all kinds of appetitive goods.
- They
all provide pleasures of different kinds
- And
the democratic person does not want to miss anything
- A democratic person
is undisciplined
- His
or her spirited part of the soul is weak.
- He
or she finds it very unpleasant to
- resist
any desires.
- Accept
any difficulties or unpleasantness
- And
does not have any vision of an ideal or distinctive or higher life
that would lead him or her to sacrifice some pleasure or accept some
discomfort
- So,
a the democratic person will pursues a new activity only to a
certain point. For pleasure in most activities, after a time,
makes some demands upon us
- Many
activities can be understood in a way that makes them charming and
pleasant at first.
- The
surface charm and pleasure can, however, become boring after a time.
- To
keep them from becoming boring, one must advance in the activity,
developing one’s skills and abilities along the way.
- But
the advanced learning this can sometimes be difficult and challenging.
It requires discipline to overcome these difficulties and meet the
challenges.
- Democratic
people, however, lack this discipline.
- Examples
of such activities include:
- Studying
a subject
- Learning
about one of the arts or becoming an artist
- The political aims of
democratic people:
- Their most
important aim is for freedom
- They want freedom
to engage in any activity to satisfy their desires.
- They want to be
free from both
- Legal compulsion
from the government, which threatens them with punishment
- Political and
social condemnation from their friends and neighbors, which threatens
them with derision
- For democrats,
all desires are equal.
- Thus democrats seek
to undermine the political and social norms and expectations
that lead people to satisfy certain kinds of desire and stay away from
the satisfaction of other kinds of desires.
- Democrats are, and
encourage people to be shameless because they think that no one should
be ashamed of satisfying any of their desires.
- Democrats call
shamelessness courage, because it helps to undermine political and
social norms and expectations
- Thus Jerry
Springer, Oprah Winfrey, and Geraldo Rivera are, for people with a
democratic soul, the shock troops of freedom today
- Their secondary
aim is money.
- A democratic citizenry
likes to receive benefits from the polis, but does not like to pay
taxes.
- Does democracy serve
everyone?
- How it hinders the
aims of
- The rich
- Democratic
cities often try to levy high taxes on the rich so as to redistribute
money to the poor.
- The spirited
- Spirited citizens
want the polis to attain great things. This requires citizens to
sacrifice the satisfaction of their own desires in order to serve the
common good
- Democrats do not
want to do this, however.
- So democratic
citizens are reluctant to follow the ideals proposed by more spirited
people
- The philosophers
- Seek to encourage
young men and women to recognize that:
- There
are truths beyond common opinion
- And
a better or worse way to live.
- But democratic
citizens deny both of these claims
- How democracy helps
- The Rich
- It gives them
freedom to make money
- It gives the poor
the resources to buy what the rich make
- The spirited
- It gives them an
opportunity to attain their own ideals and to win a following.
Although this is difficult, it is not impossible
- The Philosophers
- It provides freedom
- Can a purely
democratic political community survive? Is it possible for a political
community to be indifferent to the ideals, or lack of ideals, of its
citizens? A democratic citizenry can undermine a political community
- Because democratic
citizens are motivated by appetitive pleasures and are undisciplined, they
will not be willing to do some of the difficult and sometimes painful
things that are necessary if a political community is to survive and prosper.
For example, they might be reluctant to
- Fight in wars
- Take care of their
children, which requires a great deal of effort and sacrifice on the
part of parents
- Develop new forms of
business and economic activity, which can be difficult and risky
- Democratic citizens
undermine the income and wealth of political communities
- They seek much from
the political community in benefits but are reluctant to pay taxes
- This can lead to a
political community becoming financial overextended
- They might tax the
rich so heavily that the rich are unwilling to invest their funds in
new productive activities.
- A democratic
citizenry undermines the culture of a political community
- They reject forms of
art and entertainment that are the least bit difficult or challenging
The Laws
- Plato’s
last work
- He
revises some of his earlier views about property as expressed in The
Republic
- Property
should be divided among the citizens as fairly and justly as possible
à notice that it is
still government giving to people, not people having right to property (Locke,
Jefferson) as a natural right
- The
best form of gov’t – pratically speaking – is a mixture of democracy and
monarchy
- Wisdom
tempers/moderates freedom
- His
concern is about the rule of law – embryonic view of no man as above
the law, not even the ruler
- Concedes
that laws are necessary for mankind because man would be no worse than
savages without them
Aristotle
à Criticizes Plato’s
utopianism
- Can’t work because of “the wickedness
of human nature”
- Critcizes Plato’s ideas on abolishing
marriage and private property
- Marriage:
- Says
it would cause more trouble than it’s worth
- If
everyone is called “son,” then love would become watery – kids would be
neglected apart from the nuclear family unit
- We
can only truly love and have affection toward something that is your own
- Weird
argument: adultery is a virtue, so it would be wrong to abolish marriage
- He
says we have to work with the way people are, not the way we’d wish they
were
- Private
property:
- Plato’s
communism really annoys Aristotle
- Says
it provides no incentives for excellence
- Profit
and ownership are necessary for excellence
- When
everybody owns everything, no one will take care of anything
- Would
lead to anger against lazy people
- Property
should be private, but owners should be trained to let it be used in
common
- Benevolence
and generosity (virtues) – impossible w/o private property
- Against
state subsidies for the poor
à Insight from
Aristotle: technology will lead to the downfall of slavery
- Also
says Plato (Laws) doesn’t limit roles of ruler and subjects
- Critical
of a ‘top down’ form of government
à Is Plato the first Democrat and Aristotle the first
Republican?
- Agrees with Plato that best states must
serve the interests of all
à
James Madison (Federalist No. 51): If people were angels, no government
would be necessary
- his
political theories work from the assumption that the polis is the
most sensible form of government
- koinonia
= "a sharing in common."
- the polis
is characterized by koinonia
- Aristotle
thus perceives no conflict between individual and state.
- The
duty of the state is to provide citizens with material goods
- individual
and collective defense and security
- possibility
of self-development
- educate
people
- does
not describe an ideal form of the state
- more
a realist than Plato – he describes the forms of gov’t that actually
exist
- Three
basic forms of government (along with three “corruptions”)
- monarchy
(gov’t by one person) -- the character and power of monarchical
government consist in its unity
- degeneracy
results in tyranny - tyranny is unpopular and usually overthrown.
In Aristotle's opinion, it is the worst type of government
- aristocracy
(gov’t by a few/”the best”) -- its character and power consist in the
qualities of the persons who govern, and these should be the best -
confers benefits on the basis of merit
- degeneracy
results in oligarchy - the ruling faction governs solely in its
own interests, disregarding those of the poor
- polyarchical
government (government by many) -- its character and power lie in liberty
- degeneracy
results in democracy - literally "the rule of the
people," as a type of government in which the poor masses have
control and use it to serve their own ends. This involves the heavy
taxation and exploitation of the rich, among other things.
- Worst
type of democracy is demagoguery - everyone's voice is equal, and
the rule of the majority has greater authority than the law - the will
of the people supersedes law - a charismatic leader, or demagogue, takes
control and becomes a tyrant.
Because he speaks with the voice of the people, and because the voice of
the people is sovereign, the demagogue is free to do what he wants
- All
these forms of government are good depending on the needs of the people,
so long as the end of the state, happiness through virtue, be attained
à seems to agree with
the Bible on this point
- Considers
constitutional government, in which the (large?) middle class
(though not all) are granted citizenship and govern with everyone's
interest in mind, one of the best forms of government. It combines
elements of oligarchy
and democracy,
finding a compromise between the demands of both the rich and the poor.
Rome
·
Three
branches of government – executive, deliberative (Senate), and legislative
(several popular assemblies)
·
Polybius
[200-118 B.C.] (see handout)
o
Middle
Republic is a “mixed” government
§
Assemblies –
democratic element
§
Senate –
oligarchic element
§
Magistrates
– royal element
<<<<<
Some “isms”
- Capitalism
-
- Unlike
socialism, capitalism is the system whereby one can make the most of his
talents in the career of one’s choice
- Aspects:
- Privatization
of the means of production
- Rule
of law – gov’t and individuals are under it
- Independent
judiciary
- Private
property
- Limited
constitutional government
- Non-confiscatory
form of taxation
- Free
trade
- Overall,
the people are sovereign (Adam Smith)
- “Is
capitalism Christian? No. It neither advances existing human virtues nor
corrects ingrained personal vices; it merely reflects them. But socialism
is less consistent with several Biblical tenets for it exacerbates the
worst of men’s flaws. By divorcing effort from reward, stirring up
covetousness and envy, and destroying the freedom that is a necessary
precondition for virtue, it tears at the just social fabric that
Christians should seek to establish. A Christian must still work hard to
shed even a little of God’s light in a capitalist society. But his task
is likely to be much harder in a collectivist system.” (Doug Bandow)
à Michael Novak, “The Moral Heart of
Capitalism” NationalReview.com (16 August 2002):
“…building a good corporation is a noble human calling. It
is a calling heavily weighted with moral obligations…In the matter of corporate
responsibility, the stakes are high: the liberation of the poor through
jobs and the creation of new wealth; the success of democracy and human
rights [as we learned in Eastern Europe, people are not satisfied with
democracy if all it means is voting every two years, while their daily economic
condition does not improve]; and the project of building civil society —
that network of artistic creativity, good works, and medical research that
self-governing citizens choose to initiate by and for themselves. The
corporation is the main creator of the wealth that makes the works of civil
society achievable…In the daily life of a capitalist system, things of the spirit
— like trust — are more real than money. When they are missing, money itself
loses its value.”
- The
most significant demographic shift of this century is the rise of
history’s first mass class of worker capitalists—men and women whose
wealth-seeking activities include both wage earning and capital
ownership. Today, 76 million Americans, members of 43 percent of U.S.
households, own stocks or stock mutual funds. This represents a 126
percent increase in shareholding over 15 years. Demographically, capital
ownership, once the signature of wealth, has become widely diffused. From
1989 to 1995, shareholding increased dramatically among every age group,
income bracket, racial cohort, and occupational category for whom
statistics are available. The rate of increase was particularly steep
among laborers and farmers (106 percent), householders 34 years old or
younger (64 percent), and families with incomes under $25,000 (80.4
percent). (source)
Sidebar: How the Puritans Learned Capitalism
(Excerpted/based upon Robert A. Peterson, “The Pilgrims in Holland” Freeman
[November 1988])
·
“Once they were free, the Dutch embraced much of what we would call
a free market philosophy and set up a limited government. In the
early 1600s, Holland was the most liberal society in Europe.”
·
Petitioned Leyden gov’t to settle there, and
permission was granted
·
No
government handouts
·
Offered the
Pilgrims freedom to worship and to succeed or fail in the Dutch
marketplace.
·
Britain's
King James, hearing of the Pilgrims' arrival in Leyden, sent a letter of
protest to the town authorities. Jan Van Hout, secretary of the City of
Leyden, gave a polite reply, but made no effort to either expel the Pilgrims or
help King James capture them. The Pilgrims were free men.
·
“Because of their excellent reputation for honesty and hard work,
the Pilgrims were able to obtain loans and jobs which they needed
to set themselves up in Holland. In a market economy, there is no substitute
for keeping one's word and honoring contracts.”
·
“Most of the Pilgrims went to work in the textile industry,
something for which they had little experience. William Bradford became a
fustian worker, while others became weavers, woolcombers, and merchant tailors.
In England, almost all had been farmers, following the same patterns of medieval agriculture that their
fathers and grandfathers had followed. It must have been hard for grown men to learn
a new trade, but it was the price they had to pay to live in a relatively
free society. Moreover, it helped to make the Pilgrims an adaptable and
teachable people.”
·
“…The New England town meeting traces its origin to the
congregational church”
·
“The
Pilgrims also took advantage of Holland's laissez-faire government to set up a small
publishing house. Working near the limits of the long arm of King James,
William Brewster and Edward Winslow ran a printing press where Puritan tracts
and books were published and sent back to England. In all, Brewster published
between 15 and 20 books. Unfortunately, the Dutch could not withstand the
pressure from the English government forever and were compelled to shut down
Brewster's press in 1619. Yet they refused to arrest Brewster himself.”
·
“The Netherlands' atmosphere of religious freedom tended to have a liberalizing
effect on the Pilgrims. John Robinson, for example, was invited to debate
at Leyden University. Although he never changed his Separatist views, he did
learn that men of different faiths could live together without killing one
another…When Harvard's first president, Henry Dunster, for example, resigned because he came to reject
the Puritan doctrine of infant baptism, he settled in Plymouth. The Pilgrims
also believed in infant baptism, but they had become tolerant enough to
"agree to disagree" with other Christians like Dunster.”
·
“Despite their experience in Holland's free economy, the Pilgrims
tried a brief experiment in agricultural socialism when they arrived in
America. This experiment, based on a false reading of the Book of Acts, caused widespread
starvation. Fortunately, before it was too late, the Pilgrims saw their
error and abandoned their "common course" in favor of private
property. As Bradford later explained, " ‘This had very good success,
for it made all hands very industrious, so as much corn was planted than
otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use,
and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content....The
experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years
and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that
conceit of Plato's and other ancients applauded by some of later times; that
the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would
make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God.’"
- Socialism
–
- Various
aspects: economic, political, social, religion
- Economic:
gov’t control of economy
- Political:
regulation
- Social:
Group more important than the individual
- Religion:
Basically good but corrupted by society
- “Equality”
is a siren song
- Denies
that people have different abilities
- “Halfway
house” between democracy and communism
- French political observer
Alexis de Tocqueville was writing in the mid-nineteenth century that democracy
stands in "irreconcilable conflict with socialism." Democracy,
he asserted, extends the sphere of individual freedom; it "attaches
all possible value to each man while socialism renders each man a mere
agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but
one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in
liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude."
- The planned society
envisioned under socialism was supposed to be not only as efficient as
capitalism (especially in view of the chaos capitalism was said to
generate with its business cycles and monopoly power), but socialism,
with its promise of social justice, was expected to be fairer.
- Fascism
–
- Form
of socialism in which all power is vested in a dictator and a single
political party
- Nazism
is a form a fascism
- Communism
–
- A
totalitarian dictatorship that advocates the violent overthrow of the
government and then subsequent physical and psychological oppression of
the people
- In The Road to Serfdom
Hayek also argued that there was good reason to suspect that those who
would rise to the top in a socialistic regime would be those who had a
comparative advantage in exercising discretionary power and were willing
to make unpleasant decisions. And it was inevitable that these powerful
men would run the system to their own personal advantage…Totalitarianism, Hayek shows,
is the logical outcome of the institutional order of socialist planning.
- All
power is invested in the omniscient, omnipotent, omnicompetent state
- Problem
is that w/o free market and prices, planners have no idea what people
really want and how much they’re willing to pay, so they end up with lots
of waste (wasted capital)
- Mises:
Each person in society has a small piece of knowledge relevant to the
economic system
- Hayek:
Only freedom and capitalism support innovation (which cannot be foreseen
by a ‘5-year plan’)
- Hayek:
Social problems are endemic to the system
- Denial
of Godàthe
Fallà
Good and Evilà Redemptionà
Manà
Nuclear familyàPrivate propertyàIndividual
responsibilityàIndividual immortality
- Self-perpetuating
dictatorship
- Ever-increasing
power
- Expansionist
- No
freedom to individuals, families, churches, etc.
- At
root a denial of God
- Always
depends on force and bloodshed
Sidebar: Karl Marx
à See William Henry Chamberlin, “Some
Mistakes of Marx” (1956) for a brief, incisive critique of Marxism/Communism.
- Born
1818
- Grandfather
was a rabbi
- Father
converted to Christianity because of an 1816 decree that banned Jews from
highest levels of law and medicine
- Believed
that the world was approaching a crisis point
- Said
God was hurling “gigantic curses” at mankind
- Wrote Communist
Manifesto in 1848 with Engels
- He
believed that the end of capitalism was coming, and that proletariat would
rise up against capitalists
- One
observer in 1956, “And Soviet experience and Red Chinese experience
offer the clearest proofs that dictatorships of the proletariat, in
theory, become ruthless dictatorship over the proletariat, in practice.
Absolute power in communist states is exercised not by workers in
factories, but by bureaucrats, of whom some have never done any manual
work; others have long ceased to do any.”
- He
gathered evidence to support his opinion, but he didn’t look at the
evidence first, and then draw conclusions
- If he
had, he would have seen that the working conditions of people
(proletariat) under capitalism had greatly improved from pre-capitalist
days
- Just
not true that the more capitalism there is, the more oppression there is
- Irony
is that most of his evidence was from government reports by factory
inspectors – he never actually visited factories. But if capitalists were
so intent on perpetrating abuses, then why were these reports published
at all?
- Marx
believed that capitalism could not reform itself, but it was doing just
that
- Factory
Act of 1833
- Because
conditions improved, there was no uprising of the proletariat
- One
observer said in 1956, “The capitalist system has brought to the
working class not increasing "oppression, enslavement, degeneration
and exploitation," but an increasing share of new inventions and
comforts that did not even exist for the wealthy a hundred years ago:
automobiles, radios, television sets, washing machines, as well as money
in the bank, stocks, and bonds.”
- Truth
is that the more economic freedom people have, the better the living
conditions. Some of the most backward nations in the world economically
are those that have adopted state socialism (communism).
à It seems that those who want to criticize global
capitalism are not doing the poor in the 3rd World any favors. The
case for more capitalism – not less – seems strong.
- Great
progress of global capitalism in post-World War II era:
- The rich did get richer
faster than the poor did. But for the most part the poor did not get
poorer. They got richer, too. (Virginia Postrel)
- From
1970-1998
- $1/day
poverty rate – down from 20 to 5%
- $2/day
poverty rate – down from 44 to 18%
- 300-500
million fewer poor than in 1998 than in 1970 (making at least $2/day)
- 95%
of $1/day poor live in Africa
- great
need is to integrate this part of world into global economy
[source: Xavier Sala-i-Martin, an economist at Columbia University]
·
The global
wealth gap narrowed over the last decade. The shrinking of the gap in East
Asia, the Pacific, North Africa and the Middle East ouutweighs a small widening
in Latin America and the Caribbean. Countries that opened their economies
enjoyed the biggest rise in living standards. (WorldGrowth.org) <Australian
report at www.dfat.gov.au/publications/globe_poverty/index.html>
·
Absolute
poverty rates in Indonesia (75% to 25% from 1950-1995) and India (57% to 25%
from 1973 to 1998) fell dramatically <see www.worldbank.org/poverty/wdrpoverty>
·
In
trade…exports and imports of developing countries expanded by more than 20%,
lifting their share in world trade in goods to its highest level in 50 years. (WorldGrowth.org)
à Alexis de Tocqueville: Two ways America has
inoculated itself against communism:
- property:
“The complaints against property, which are so frequent in Europe, are
never heard in the most democratic of nations because in America there
are no proletarians [landless peasants].”
- political
rights/rule of law: “In America, the lowest classes have a very
high respect for political rights, because they exercise those rights;
and they refrain from attacking the rights of others in order that
their own may not be violated.”
- As
we’ll see below, the debate about how best to produce wealth is
over – capitalism wins. The issue is now over the best distribution
of wealth.
Sidebar: The Crimes of Communism and the
“Cold War”
For further reading:
à
Stéphane Courtois et al., The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror,
Repression (Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press, 1999)
à Brian Crozier, The Rise and Fall of the Soviet
Empire (Roseville, Ca.: Forum/Prima, 2000)
à Joseph Shattan, Architects of Victory: Six Heroes
of the Cold War (Washington, D.C.: The Heritage Foundation, 1999).
- Communism
was the greatest scourge in the 20th century
- Papal encyclical Centesimus Annus,
or The Hundredth Year (1991)
- Catholic social teaching has explicitly
recognized the benefits of a market system.
- The pope’s critique of Marxism was
devastating: “The historical experience of socialist countries has
sadly demonstrated that collectivism does not do away with alienation
but rather increases it, adding to it a lack of basic necessities and
economic inefficiency.”
- More
than 150 million killed worldwide
- Stalin’s
Gulag (at least 7 million)
- Mao
Zedong’s Great Leap Forward
- Pol
Pot’s Khmer Rouge
- Still
killing people in places like Libya, Cuba, North Korea, and China
- Even
Nazism was less murderous than Communism
- Nazism
was “racial genocide”
- Communism
was “class genocide”
- Communism
has always been a criminal enterprise, not a bunch of well-meaning people
who made mistakes
- Marx
thought revolution would come to well-developed capitalist countries that
first adopted socialism
- In
Russia, capitalism was just getting off the ground, but Lenin was
impatient
- From
start Lenin urged civil war as a means to crush all “class enemies”
- War
against rich peasants, the “petty bourgeois” capitalists
- All
for the proletariat (poor peasants)
- Lenin
subsumes everything to the cause of world revolution
- No
tolerance for “the enemy”
- Terror
as a tool, a means to an end
- Total
indifference to suffering
- Dissent
was not tolerated, enemies killed
- Lenin
contemptuously called Western intellectuals “useful idiots"
- Lenin
and Bolsheviks are no democrats
- In
Dec. 1917, Bolsheviks lose parliamentary elections big time
- Lenin
just forbids parliament to gather, and that was the end of democracy in
the U.S.S.R. for decades
- Dec.
20, 1917 – Lenin sets up Cheka, grandfather of the KGB (secret police)
- The
bloodshed and “cold war” could have been prevented!
- Churchill,
as Minister of War, in 1919 tried to support anti-Bolsheviks
- In
1919, Churchill said, “Theirs is a war against civilized society that can
never end.”
- Prime
Minister forces him to pull back, but Churchill said West would come to
regret the fact that they didn’t go after the Bolsheviks when they were
relatively weak
- Bolsheviks
prepared to go down in a blaze of glory
à What would have
happened in Churchill had been allowed to go ahead?
- Bolsheviks
have no idea that central control of the economy would be so difficult
- Large-scale
industry begins to suffer à shortages à
lines
- And
if barely capitalized Russian economy couldn’t be planned, a modern
capitalist economy would be even more truculent
- Led
to massive food shortages
- Humor
of the Soviets is one thing that keeps them going:
A few years
ago, on a routine visit to a Soviet collective farm, a Russian commissar
demanded of one of the laborers in the fields: "How was the crop this
year?" "Oh, we had a fantastic harvest-many, many potatoes. So many
potatoes, in fact, that if you piled them up in the sky, they would reach the
foot of God!" The commissar scolded, "There is no God, comrade."
The laborer retorted, "There aren't any potatoes either."
- Soon
Russians turn to exporting the revolution
- Comintern
set up in 1924
- Moscow
would support Communist uprisings and set up puppet regimes loyal to
Russia
- After
World War II, Washington and Moscow are embroiled in a “cold war” for
worldwide dominance
- Who
would prevail? Communism or democracy
- Sen.
Joseph McCarthy-
- Hearings
into Communists in government and entertainment
- Alger
Hiss, a senior State Dept. official, accused of giving secrets to
Soviets in 30s
- Julius
and Ethel Rosenberg convicted and executed
- Many
of those accused since confirmed by release of “Verona Files” in 1996
- Korean
War (1950-1953) – South Korea vs. Communist N. Korea/China
- N.
Korea, with full support ($$, training, troops) from Moscow, invades S.
Korea
- U.S.-led
U.N. troops protect S. Korea
- Thought
of invading China, which went Communist in 1949, with help of
Nationalists from Taiwan
- MacArthur’s
plan nixed by President Truman
à What would have happened? One of modern history’s
great unresolved questions
- Fidel
Castro – “Third time’s the charm”
- “As Cuba's leading trade partner, the
United States accounted for 67 percent of Cuba's exports and 70 percent
of its imports in 1958. The United States also was Cuba's main source of
both private and official capital. The U.S. Export-Import Bank, the
primary source of official U.S. loans for Cuba at that time, disbursed
$11 million for development projects in Cuba in 1958. U.S. tourists were
the mainstay of the Cuban tourism industry, making Cuba the largest
Caribbean tourism market in the 1950s.
- In part because of Cuba's close
economic integration with the United States before 1959, Cuba's economic
and social indicators ranked among the highest in the world. By 1957,
Cuba had an advanced health sector providing the lowest infant mortality
rate in Latin America (13th lowest in the world), and the third highest
number of physicians and dentists per capita, comparable to the
Netherlands and higher than in the United Kingdom and Finland. Cuba also
ranked among the highest in Latin America at that time in terms of
literacy rate, food consumption (daily calories consumed), and access to
mass media. (source)
- In 1959 there were 11 prisons. Today
there are more than 300.
- In the 1950's Cuba had 58 daily
newspapers. Presently only one exists.
à U.S. State Department compares Cuba in 1950s with Cuba in
1990s
- Tried
revolution in 1952 and 1956 (almost killed second time)
- Castro received 15 years for leading
the 1953 Moncada Barracks’s attack and was freed in 20 months
- What if he had stayed in jail??
- Secretly
allied with Communists
- Takes
power in Jan. 1959
- Seized
100s of millions of U.S. property
- Castro abolished all other political
parties, controlled trade unions and professional organizations. He took
over the press, the entire educational system. Health care, and
practically the entire economy. He eliminated private enterprise, making
individual entrepreneurship a crime. Religion was significantly
repressed initially when all private and religious schools were
confiscated in 1961, and hundreds of priests were forcibly expelled,
including a bishop.
- Fidel
Castro proclaimed Cuba to be a socialist country in 1961. Key elements
of Cuba's economic transformation were: nationalization of the Means of Production; reorganization of
the public sector for direct management of production and trade; and
centralized planning of virtually all economic activity. (source)
- Bay
of Pigs invasion fails – 1200 Cuban exiles
- Huge
mistake – JFK doesn’t allow leading with airstrikes or aircover during
operation
- Media
tips off Castro, and his troops were more than ready
- 114
killed
- 1,189
imprisoned (executed or later died)
- Since 1962 Castro’s regime has utilized a food
rationing system as a tool to oppress the people of Cuba.
- State
security Department (DGCI); Secret police (G-2); forced labor camps;
1000s informers; food testers; elimination of opponents; executions of
political opponents; women prisoners raped; child prisons where kids cut
sugarcane or make objects to be sold by the gov’t
- One source reports that, by 1970, Cuba
was receiving one-half of all Soviet foreign assistance. It was nearly $6
billion annually in the late 1980s (source)
- Article 61 of the 1976 Constitution
asserts that an individual’s rights will only be recognized if said
individual adheres to the objectives set forth by the government in its
purpose to build a socialist state.
- It is not the U.S. economic embargo,
but the lack of Soviet subsidy along with the extreme inefficiency of a
system that Castro stubbornly has refused to liberalize what has brought
about Cuba’s present deprivation.
- In
Cuba, as it was in the Soviet bloc, Communist Party members live much
better than ordinary people and have access to luxury goods. They have
their own neighborhoods. They get better jobs.
- Still
an unrepentant Communist and virulently anti-American
- In
1994, he says he’d rather die than abandon the revolution
- Anti-Castro
forces in Miami to this day
- Still
using well-meaning Americans (like former Pres. Carter) to give himself
good publicity
- He
can send to and release from prison anyone he wants. And there is no
free press to investigate or publicize his abuses.
- Castro
provides a safe haven for more than 70 fugitives from U.S. justice,
including several accused of killing U.S. police officers. Cuba's
tourist facilities -- hotels, beaches, medical clinics -- remain
off-limits to most Cubans, an internal apartheid that defeats meaningful
''people-to-people'' contact
- Foreign
investment has plummeted to $38.9 million in 2001 from $488 million in
2000. One-third of the island's sugar mills are closed. The Associated
Press reports that ''the European Union excluded Cuba from a
multibillion-dollar pool of aid because of its poor human-rights
record.'' Exiles' remittances are down. When Russia closed its spy
facility near Havana, Castro lost $200 million a year. All of this has
weakened him.
- Spiritual
revival:
- Government regulations make it
virtually impossible for churches to get building permits, so
house-churches have mushroomed and blossomed. For several years, the
government has generally been increasingly tolerant of these illegal
house-churches. One pastor reports that 1176 once illegal
congregations have been legalized in recent years as the government has
shifted from open hostility to a wary forbearance of religious bodies.
He said another 600 were pending. In some house-churches, pastors preach
to around 100 people in their apartment living-rooms. Many Cubans are
coming to Christ. (June 2002) (source)
- On 20 May 2002, Cuba's President
Castro reacted with fury to US President George W Bush's declaration
that the US embargo against Cuba will remain until Cuba has 'a new
government that is fully democratic'.
- Good news: Castro is 76
- Bad News: Brother, Raul, 4
yrs younger and head of military, would succeed him
à Truth about Castro’s Cuba: CubaFacts.com
- Vietnam
- In
1954, country divided between Communist N. Vietnam and democratic S.
Vietnam
- U.S.
urges new PM of S. Vietnam not to hold free elections in 1956 because
Communists would have been elected
- Leads
to formation of guerilla movement known as Vietcong, and they started
causing trouble in the South
- Communists
in N. Vietnam (Vietcong, est. 1957) try to undermine gov’t of S. Vietnam
- “Proxy
war” between U.S. and U.S.S.R. – more like an ‘engagement’
- Kennedy
sends first 7,000 troops in Nov. 1961 to defend S. Vietnam
- LBJ
didn’t want to lose S. Vietnam like China in 1949
- Problem
is that he couldn’t let military win the war
- Didn’t
occupy N. Vietnam after Vietcong attacks on U.S. troops
- Limited
bombing
- 16
pauses and 72 attempts at brokering a peace
- Restricted
bombing in attempt to protect civilian causalties
- Didn’t
even bomb Soviet ground-to-air missiles when being built
- Against
advice of military advisers, who wanted fast and intense bombing
- Civilian
casualties mount because Vietcong converted villages into fortified
strongholds
- Tactic
still used by Palestinians, Iraqis, etc.
- Turns
media and people against the war
- Then
the idea that the war was being fought by the poor of America
- Some historians
think that light-infantry formations were the way to go in the early
phases of the war when the North Vietnamese were fighting a guerilla war
– bombing would not have been effective because heavy industry was in
China and U.S.S.R.
- The
Chinese Government claimed in 1979 that more than 300,000 Chinese troops
were dispatched to help North Vietnam between 1965 and 1968. Soviet
intelligence data declassified in recent years appear to support this
claim. Other intelligence data from the Soviets also told us that Soviet
and Chinese anti-aircraft teams, as well as Soviet pilots, were shooting
down American planes over North Vietnam.
- First
televised war
- Media
turns U.S. against the war by focusing on those killed by Americans and
not those killed by the Vietcong
- Example
of Vietcong ‘Tet Offensive’ in Jan. 1968
- Stunning
victory for U.S. after regaining their wits from the surprise attack –
Vietcong loses over 40,000 of best troops
- U.S.
media focuses on first part of battles and not U.S. successes
- American
public urges forceful and decisive action
- Like
Afghanistan and Iraq??
- JBJ
doesn’t run again, and Nixon wants to wind down the war and focus Am.
Foreign policy on other things
- Bombs
N. Vietnamese outposts on Cambodia and Laos
- Embraces
China, which leads to peace between N. Vietnam and U.S. in 1973
à Question: If
U.S. invaded N. Vietnam with a massive ground assault, would it have drawn
China and/or U.S.S.R. into the mix?
- Other
revolutions
- Ethiopia
– coup in 1977 – famine in 80s used to weaken opposition forces – food
eaten by soldiers
- Libya
- President
Reagan begins to turn the tide against Communism in 1980s
à Excellent resource:
Dinesh D’Souza, Ronald Reagan (New York: The Free Press, 1997).
- Elected
in November 1980 on two promises: reduce government and strengthen
military
- In
1970s, Communists were on a roll – ten more countries become Communist,
had the world’s most formidable nuclear arsenal, and Warsaw Pact dwarfed
NATO in capabilities
- Moscow’s
plan for the 80s – “political neutralization of Western Europe and the
nuclear intimidation of the United States…extract political and economic
concessions from the West” to sustain and improve power of the Soviet
elites
- When
Reagan left office in 1989, this had all changed. Communism was exposed
as a terrible fraud and the world was beginning to awake from a long
totalitarian nightmare!!!!
- How
did Reagan do it? First, he calls a spade a spade – moral crusade –
“evil empire” speech – optimistic that future of the world was
democracy, not Communism
- This
would later be his “Reagan Doctrine” (1985) – support anti-Communists
- His
policy was to exacerbate social and economic problems w/in U.S.S.R. to
bring it down. Compared Soviet Union to a “sick bear” – hurt but still
dangerous
- Reagan
said that Communism “could not survive against the inherent drive of all
men and women to be free.”
- Saw
conflict as a moral one: our system was good and communism was bad
- He
didn’t see communism so much as evil but incompetant
- Unlike
many politicians of the time, he believed the U.S. could win – almost
alone in this at the time – many politicians were paralyzed by a
sort of fatalism that U.S.S.R. was destined to take over in all these
nations – as early as 1981, he said its “last pages are even now being
written.”
- Margaret
Thatcher: “They believed that America was doomed to decline; he
believed it was destined for future greatness.”
- The
doves and appeasers of U.S.S.R. were totally and completely wrong
- Plan:
outspend USSR (alt. is starvation); discourage foreign aggression
- Big
U.S. military buildup
- Curtailed
Soviet access to Western credit and (military) technology
- One
example: in early 1970s – ball bearing machinery for missile guidance
systems
- Democracy
initiative – Voice of America, Radio Liberty, etc.
à Western technology played a key role in ending the hegemony of the
state. Radio, television, the computer chip, the fax machine, the satellite -
all of these favor freedom over state control, making available to more and
more people the truth about totalitarian brutality and central planning's
dismal economic failure.
- Help
anti-Communist Solidarity movement in Poland – sanctions - $50 mil. To
Solidarity
- Sent
Pershing II and Tomahawk cruise missiles to Western European partners in
NATO to defend itself against Warsaw Pact (Soviet satellites nations)
and Soviet SS-20 intermediate-range missiles aimed at Western European
cities (could not hit USA)
- Grenada
(1983) – Reagan sends in U.S. troops to defeat Communist government
- Cuban
soldiers in guise of “construction workers”
à First time since 1917
that a Communist government was taken out by a foreign military force
à The “inevitability” of
a Communist victory was derailed
à Succeeded where JFK
had failed in the 1960s
- SDI
– announced in 1983 – immoral to leave American people defenseless in
face of possible Soviet attack w/missiles
- Soviet
missiles could reach Washington, D.C. in 30 minutes
- Massive
psychological effect on Soviets – they saw American military resolve
after détente of the 1970s
- Add
to this the 3,000 combat aircraft, 3,700 strategic missiles, and
10,000 tanks the U.S. bought during the first six years of R’s presidency
- Soviets
were convinced that we could pull it off
- Demolishes
logic of MAD: “Wouldn’t it be better to save lives than to avenge
them?”
- Gorbachev
aggress to deep unilateral cuts in Soviet forces in Eastern Europe
- 1986
– provides Stinger anti-aircraft missiles to mujahedin rebels in
Afghanistan; Soviets out by 1988
- 1985
– supported Contra rebels in Nicaragua to bring down Communist
Sandanistas, who were trying to export revolution to rest of Central
America
- Criticized
when two Reagan staffers use $30 mil. in profits from sale of arms to
Iran to fund the Contras
- 16,000-man
Contra army exacts free election from Sandanistas in 1990 (thought that
if they are democratically elected, U.S. pressure would cease), wherein
democrats are elected
- Reagan
also helps foster democracy in the Philippines, Peru, and South Africa
- Gorbachev
elected General Secretary in 1985
- Many
in West credited him with ending “cold war,” but this is a myth
- Deeply
committed to Communism when elected
- Wanted
to revive (not replace) the Soviet system in the face of the American
onslaught –perestroika (restructuring)
- Restructuring
so there will be renewed confidence in the Communist Party
- And
his economic reforms would lead to more $$ and better technology for
the military
- Western
liberals love Gorbachev – communism with a human face!?!?!
- Problem
is that he printed more money to pay debts, which led to massive
inflation
- Also,
even under restructuring 90% of economy was still state-controlled
- Agenda?
USSR suffers because they drink too much vodka, lacked a work ethics,
and traded in the black market!
- These
are symptoms of a systemic problem with Communism, which G. fails to
see
- Abandoned
activities that might provoke U.S. and returned to détente so that
peaceniks would reassert themselves against Reagan
- Disaster
at Chernobyl helps Gorby see that Soviet system is in crisis
- Supported
Reagan’s policy to have Soviets loosen gov’t control in order to make
economic reforms
- Glasnost
(transparency or openness) was intended to embarrass Gorby’s political opponents,
but it opened up Soviet system to sustained criticism
- Led
to widespread intellectual dissent
- Gorby
goes full-speed ahead
- 1987:
Reagan says, “Tear down this wall!”
- In
1988 at Moscow State University – ringing defense of a free society (HANDOUT)
- 1988:
Gorby proposes transferring power from Comm Party to president and
elected parliament (Congress of People’s Deputies)
- In
early 1989, real politics came to Soviet Union – Gorby, party, KGB
criticized
- In
1988, U.S.S.R. out of Afghanistan
- 1989
– Poland Lech Walesa swept into office in free elections (4 June 1989)
- Tienanmen
Square repression on the same day
- Next,
Hungary opens up – begins with ceremonial reburial of a man killed in
uprisings in 1956 that were crushed by Russian tanks – 16 June 1989 –
crowds 200,000 strong to hear pro-democracy speeches – in Oct., adopt a
new constitution allowing for democracy- free election March 1990
- Nov.
9, 1989, Berlin Wall came down after 28 years/91 days and pro-democracy
revolutions swept across Eastern Europe into the 1990s – 2 million E
Germans come over that weekend to get 100 D-Marks (35 pounds) ‘greeting
money’ and did a little shopping
- Pace
of change – as recently as Feb. 1989, E. German border guards had shot
dead a man trying to escape
- As
of June, a man could still be threatened with a long prison term for
taking part in a demonstration
- Could
see West German neighbors and countrymen enjoying freedom
- Like
U.S.-Mexican border??
- Czechoslovakia
– mobs storm the capitol on Nov. 17, but they are beaten by riot police
– students, actors, and dissidents call a general strike on Nov. 27,
1989 – 10 Dec. 1989, provisional gov’t - free elections held, and
Vaclav Havel elected president
- In
Romania, the Communist leader Ceausecu and wife captured and executed
- Amazingly,
in all this, Russians don’t intervene – a new era had come and we’re
still trying to sort things out
- Alexis
de Tocqueville: ruling elite loses its belief in its right to rule,
that “we have no right to preserve our rule by force”
- Russia,
reversing 70 years of policy, said it would never imagine meddling in
the internal affairs of a sovereign nation
- In
1991, Gorbachev himself is ousted in a coup and Boris Yeltsin is
elected president of Russia
- Presdient
George W. Bush and President Vladimir Putin
à Debate: Who won the Cold War? (Or, Why did
the collapse happen in the 1980s?)
Position
#1: U.S.S.R. collapsed of its own weight. We just had to wait it out.
Answer: Never in history
have food shortages or technological backwardness by themselves lead to the
collapse in peacetime of a great empire. Russia suffered greater food shortages
in its history, and yet still survived.
Position
#2: Gorbachev won the Cold War by dismantling the Soviet system
Answer: If he was going to
dismantle the system, why was he elected General Secretary of the Communist
Party by the Politburo? Plus, his declared goal was to strengthen the Soviet
economy and military. Gorbachev saw himself as the preserver of socialism.
Position #3: Reagan won the
Cold War
<<<<<<<
Sidebar: China’s Communist Future?
à See Jasper Becker, “How Marx survived it all,” South China
Morning Post (1 October 1999), for proof that the Chinese government is as
staunchly Communist as ever.
“Mao Zedong's determination in 1958 to reach communism overnight cost the
lives of more than 30 million, but the Great Leap Forward is now held to have
provided useful lessons.
"I call it a mistaken laboratory experiment. He needed to
explore to find the way forward," argues Professor Xu [Zhengfan, China's
most renowned expert on scientific socialism at the Marxism Department of the
People's University in Beijing], comparing it with the French Revolution.
"Competing factions also tried different ways so it was understandable
that some mistakes were made."
China's Marxists believe that - thanks to their grasp of dialectics -
everything turns out for the best. Without China's Cultural Revolution,
there would, as Deng once said, have been no reforms…
In fact, China is moving so quickly to abandon every single
requirement for a communist society listed by Marx in the Communist Manifesto
that Mr Li admits that visitors from Europe are shocked. "We are
flexible Marxists, trained by Deng and Mao, but European Marxists don't
understand us. They can't grasp why we still claim to be a socialist
country," he says.”
“One lesson
of the collapse of socialism in eastern Europe is that profitability, not
quantity of investment, is the key to sustained economic growth. Here,
arguably, lies China's fundamental problem. There is no doubt that massive
investment is being made--more than Dollars 300bn in foreign direct investment
in 20 years, and vastly bigger amounts by the state. All this shows up as
growth because the sums are spent, the workers are hired and the cement is
poured. But what about actual return in a decade or two? This is much less
clear. And what opportunities are missed by having foreigners and the state in
charge, rather than letting Chinese entrepreneurs do the job? These may be
enormous.”
->->->->->->->
“China needs
to adopt a market economy based on private property, replace its one-party
dictatorship with a democratic system, and cooperate with the international
community (Japan and the United States, in particular). Should China become
a rich country where the rights of its citizens are properly protected, unification
will become an attractive option for Taiwan.
Among the structural
problems facing the Chinese economy, stagnation of the state-owned sector
is particularly serious. Low efficiency is a common problem of state-owned
enterprises everywhere, and in China the poor performance of state-owned
enterprises has contrasted sharply with the dynamism in the newly emerging
private sector. Realizing this simple fact, the government has gradually
broadened its interpretation of "socialist public ownership."
Currently, it still insists to own over 50 percent of the equity shares of
large enterprises, but at the same time it also allows small- and medium-sized
enterprises to go private under the policy of "grasping the big ones and
letting the small ones free." In the end, China has no choice but to
privatize the large enterprises as well, which would amount to abandoning
public ownership completely. The Communist Party may then lose its
legitimacy to rule and find it difficult to maintain the status quo of a
one-party dictatorship. In terms of Marxian dialectics, China's success in its
transition to a market economy, and thus economic development, hinges crucially
on how the growing contradiction between the economic base and the
superstructure can be resolved….
Thanks to this
policy change, China has achieved a growth rate of almost 10% a year since the
shift to economic reform and door opening in the late 1970s. The demand for
democracy has been increasing along with incomes, however, while the reputation
of the Communist Party has been badly hurt by widespread corruption among
government officials and a rising crime rate. The "policy mix" of
economic liberalization and political dictatorship has reached its limit; the
Communist Party needs to reform itself or it will face grave consequences.
… it would be too
pessimistic to think that democracy can never take root in China. There are
already many cases in which economic development has paved the way for
democracy, as in Korea and Taiwan since the mid-1980s. Taiwan held its first
direct presidential election in 1996, giving rise to a government based on
public support. In March 2000, Chen Shui-bian of the Democratic Progressive
Party won the second direct presidential election, and a peaceful transition of
power from the ruling Nationalist Party (Kuomintang) to the opposition party
took place for the first time. Taiwan's experience shows that when the time is
ripe the realization of democracy is possible in a Chinese society. If China
continues its rapid pace of economic growth, the time will soon come when the
role of the Communist Party will be over.
… Even if China won, it would likely face
economic sanctions imposed by the industrial powers and their adverse
consequences for the Chinese economy. A Taiwan conquered by force would prove
to be a burden rather than an asset to China, as its economy would stagnate
amidst massive brain drain and capital flight.”
à C.
H. Kwan, “The Role of the Chinese Communist Party Coming to an End,”
The Brookings Institution (July 2000)
à Monique Chu, “Koo predicts end
to communism in China,” Taipei Times
(29 November 2000)
- The
Chinese Communist Party will collapse within a decade, maybe within five
years
à Gordon Chang, “China’s Critical Moment,” The Jamestown Foundation (25 October 2001)
<<<<<<<<<
Sidebar: Cuba’s Communist Future?
washingtonpost.com
Defector
Warns of 'Social Explosion' in Cuba
Former U.N. Ambassador Cites Skyrocketing Unemployment, Food Shortages in
Growing Unrest
By George Gedda
Associated Press
Tuesday, August 13, 2002; Page A09
A former Cuban ambassador to the United Nations who recently defected said
yesterday that widespread economic problems on the island could produce an
uprising against President Fidel Castro and his system.
Alcibiades Hidalgo, who arrived in South Florida on July 29, said many
aspects of daily life in Cuba could produce a "social explosion" at
any time.
"There is lot of concern among the elite that this could occur,"
said Hidalgo, who also served as chief of staff to Defense Minister Raul
Castro, brother of the Cuban leader.
One element of the unrest is what he called "skyrocketing unemployment
across the country." Food is scarce, and many Cubans must get by on one
meal a day, he said.
If there is an uprising, he said, the top brass of Cuba's military all
insist they would use force against the public to preserve the revolution. But
he noted that any high-ranking officer who declined to take such a stand would
be immediately purged.
Hidalgo said virtually all Cubans have access to the country's cost-free
health care system but many basic medicines have not been available for
years.
A slight man with a neatly trimmed beard and mustache, Hidalgo left Cuba on
July 21 with 19 others aboard two motorboats. Thirst was his biggest problem on
arrival.
To discourage his defection, security agents had trailed him virtually
nonstop since 1993, when he fell into disfavor with the authorities and was
abruptly dismissed from his U.N. post, he said.
He flew to the District on Sunday from Miami and told his story to a
reporter and others who specialize in Cuban affairs. The session was arranged
by the Center for a Free Cuba, a pro-democracy group.
Hidalgo is one of the most important Cuban defectors whose escape has been
publicly reported since Gen. Rafael del Pino fled the island in May 1987. Del
Pino was instrumental in the defeat of the U.S.-sponsored invasion at the Bay
of Pigs in 1961. Hidalgo said his defection has not yet been reported in Cuba's
state-controlled press.
Hidalgo, 56, talked for several hours about his experiences, answering
questions with little emotion and without displays of bitterness toward his
former Communist colleagues. He left behind a daughter, Carolina, who lives
with her mother, from whom Hidalgo is divorced.
Speaking in Spanish, Hidalgo said Castro, who turns 76 today, has
differences with his brother Raul, 71, who is defense minister and the second
ranking official in the Council of State and the Council of Ministers.
Although Raul is the heir apparent, Hidalgo said he drinks too much, has
health problems and doesn't sleep much. Fidel, in contrast, takes care of
himself, he said.
Raul would be less inclined toward one-man rule than Fidel, would be more
disposed toward economic reform and would show greater flexibility in relations
with the United States, Hidalgo said.
Hidalgo got to know Raul Castro well during the 1980s, when he served as his
chief of staff. The Cuban military, under Raul's direction, has become an
economic powerhouse through its involvement in tourism and other
dollar-generating activities, he said.
When Hidalgo fled the island, he was the No. 2 official at the newspaper
Trabajadores, a publication designed to appeal to Cuban workers. He said he
decided to leave because there was no opportunity to espouse views that differ
from those of Fidel Castro.
"The first right is the right to independent thought," he said.
Cuba has endured a series of economic blows over the past year. Like other
Caribbean islands, Cuba suffered a severe drop in tourism after Sept. 11 and is
recovering from a devastating hurricane that struck Nov. 8.
Hidalgo shares the Bush administration's view that congressional attempts
to end curbs on Americans' travel to Cuba, if approved, would be an economic
windfall for Cuba and a "gift for Fidel."
The U.S. economic embargo against Cuba aggravates the island's problems, he
said, but he believes Castro's socialist policies are principally to blame,
something he did not say when he was ambassador to the United Nations in
1992-93. Then he followed the party line by identifying the embargo as the
culprit.
"The truth," he said Monday, "is otherwise."
Hidalgo disagreed with Cuba's policy of using its U.N.
mission as an espionage hub. He estimated that 90 percent of the 50 to 60
personnel working there were spies, but he was not told details of their
activities.
<<<<<<<<
Christians and
Government
- Two
main responsibilities
- Pray
for those in authority
- Respect
and submit to the authority of leaders
à also a duty to be
involved (voting, etc.)
à point is to be a good
citizen
- What
about separation of church and state?
- Founders:
freedom of religion, not freedom from religion
- Character
of American people is cornerstone of American government
- Tocqueville:
“Liberty is impossible without morality, and morality is impossible
without faith”
- Notice
that there are no Christian (or religious) dictatorships
à What does the
character of Americans today tell us about the future of our system of
government?
à Are rulers of much of
Middle East “true” Muslims, or just nihilists?
Home