Connect with us
//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Latest

Xi Jinping’s 3.5 hour speech before the 19th CPC National Congress is actually a succinct introduction to China’s road-map for the future

Xi Jinping’s speech was longsighted, but most importantly thoroughly doable, based on China’s impressive track record.

Avatar

Published

on

Chinese President Xi Jinping has addressed the opening session of the 19th Communist Party Congress. Thus far, the most ubiquitous comments about the speech relate to its monumental length, which ran over three and a half hours.

While enduring such a lengthy speech is not particularly easy, in hindsight, Xi’s speech represents a markedly succinct summary of China’s contemporary achievements while offering an easily understood road-map for China and indeed her partners, for the remainder of the 21st century. When trying to condense and synthesise over 100 aggregate years of past successes and future planning, listening to three and an half hours of a speech is actually far briefer than the copious policy documents and analysis that one might otherwise have to read in order to garner such essential information.

Because of this, many western mainstream media outlets have decided to hide the full speech, blaming its length for the fact that in reality, many such “journalists” do not wish to confront China’s rise to its position as a foremost superpower in the modern world.

Here, you can watch the full speech. Below the video I shall illustrate what I felt were the most important points:

Xi Jinping’s address was framed by the theme of his Presidency: the further development of Marxism with Chinese characteristics. This essentially means embracing traditional Chinese cultural and socio-economic habits within the context of the market socialist economic pioneered by Deng Xiaoping who was Chin’a paramount leader from 1978-1989.

The most revolutionary aspect of the speech included a commitment to build on China’s industrial, infrastructural and financial progress to make China an ever more prosperous country internally. While words like “luxury” still carry some stigma in the context of a Communist Party, in reality, Xi was promising just that.

As Chinese workers have laboured tirelessly to transform China from a struggling agrarian economy to a thriving economy that will soon fully overtake the US in terms of total economic power (in many other areas, China has overtaken the US some time ago), Xi illustrated that now it is the time for Chinese men and women to enjoy more of the benefits of the wealth they created.

To achieve this, Xi spoke of several stages of developing “great modern socialism”, the natural outgrowth from the market socialism of Deng.

Practically, this will require two things. First of all, One Belt–One Road will help to connect the Chinese model of economic growth with other dynamic and growing economies throughout multiple global regions. The outward looking concept behind One Belt–One Road is critical to Xi’s idea of a China that will be not only open but more open than ever before. By sharing the Chinese experience with others and linking economies of the world, China is creating a world in which developing countries can enhance their productivity while crucially maintaining full political independence. Secondly, Xi has a wide ranging programme designed to pivot China’s internal investment from primarily infrastructure based projects to projects which improve the micro-management of daily life. In many ways, such programmes at an urban level, are already well under way.

China’s reticence to intervene in the political issues of foreign countries was in fact a recurring theme of Xi’s speech. This was designed to reassure China’s new partners, but it also is part of a wider declaration that in the Chinese dominated 21st century, this will be an organic economic dominance and a dominance in terms of available resources, but not one of imperialistic, political nor ideological dominance. In many ways, there is no better place to assure partners of China’s lack of interest in exporting ideology than during a Communist Party Congress. In this sense, it was made clear that China’s ideological dialectics are meant only for China and not partners. In a single phrase, one could summarise this as: “Great modern socialism in one-state and One Belt–One Road for all independent partners”. To put it another way, “Many political systems, one common goal of prosperity”.

Between the present day and the year 2020, China will work to solidify economic and social gains for the last decade, something which will be capped-off by the completion of the modernisation project for the People’s Liberation Army in 2020, as well as enhanced efforts to totally eliminate rural poverty and expand modern agriculture and industrial sectors outside of China’s modern urban regions.

Between 2020 and 2035, China will work to build a country that is “prosperous, strong, democratic, culturally advanced, harmonious, and beautiful”. In more practical terms, this means a country wherein real Chinese living standards continue to increase, while conditions remain free of the peaks and troughs that have plagued western societies in recent decades.

While capitalists often criticise socialist countries for lacking sufficient luxury items and leisurely pursuits for citizens and where inversely many socialists criticise capitalist countries for making culture inaccessible and stable living impossible, Xi’s  programme looks to offer both stability, consistently liveable residential and working environments, while also enhancing the ability of ordinary people to enrich their lives with cultural activities and the new avenues of social enhancement made possible through modern technologies which China has both braced and pioneered.

In this sense, China is preparing for an economic and social reality in the age of industrial mechanisation. Where many western entrepreneurs such as Elon Musk have advocated a standard “living wage” for citizens, in order to cope with increased mechanisation,  Xi’s proposals effectively guarantee the shared and even distribution of China’s immense wealth through a programme of direct investment into people and their social environments. In this sense, rather than pay citizens an arbitrary wage, China after 2035, will move increasingly to develop a society where wealth is transferred across society in form of manifold investments, something that will be enacted harmoniously with the coming age of  mega-mechanisation.

Part of Xi’s proposals to enhance the quality of living for Chinese, is to take care to always balance infrastructural development with ecological protections. As the country which industrialised more rapidly than any other in history, China has already begun embracing green technology, particularly in the field of energy creation, more thoroughly than any other. As China begins exporting its green technologies, Beijing will almost certainly become a global leader in this field.

Xi Jinping also spoke of the need to further assure that corruption will not implant itself in China, in spite of economic diversification and growth. He encouraged the party faithful to remain committed to traditional values while preparing the development of new ways of thinking and problem solving.

Will it work?

When taken at face value, all of Xi’s proposals are impressive. It would be difficult for anyone other than an ideologue to disagree with the over all scope of his lengthy speech.

Therefore, the biggest question remaining is: will China be able to accomplish these great feats?

The simple answer, based on China’s modern precedent, is a resounding, YES.

China has been able to create and benefit from a modern industrial revolution, a revolution in urban planning and living, a consumer revolution, a living standards revolution and a technological revolution, all in a period of about 30 to 40 years.

What remains for China is to merely build on these foundations which have been laid at a phenomenal speed, especially when one considers China’s large population and land mass.

Because all of Xi’s proposals involve a combination of internal investment, external partnerships which include new multilateral investment opportunities as well as a commitment to peace, the only way for China’s record of progress to become disrupted is through the intervention of a foreign entity.

While it is clear that the US intends to disrupt China’s external development through One Belt–One Road, what is also clear is that the unmistakable US attempts to do this, have traditionally ended in failure. Washington’s pivot to India, a clear attempt to scuttle the Sino-Pakistan alliance, has become a public embarrassment as the US is somewhat diplomatically distancing itself from New Dheli after it became clear that India does not think leaping into America’s Afghan disaster is prudent. This further limits India’s long term options, if New Delhi fails to join Russia and Pakistan along One Belt–One Road. Although, the US came out with some highly pro-Indian statements on the same day as Xi’s speech, the timing and nature of the remarks indicate that it may be more of a last gasp of a dead-end policy than a full revitalisation.

In terms of South East Asia, the prolonged crises in Myanmar appears as though it is being managed internally. The danger is that the US could still internationalise the conflicts in Myanmar, in the hopes of creating a roadblock to China’s partnerships in South East Asia. Elsewhere, in South East Asia though, Philippines may soon became a joint success story for both Manila and Beijing as early this year Xi Jinping hailed a “golden era” of relations between the former US colony and China, something made possible by President Rodrigo Duterte’s pivot away from Washington and closer to both China and Russia. China is also set to build a large new district in  Manila, which will act as a modern showcase for Philippines in the 21st century and beyond.

In terms of the Middle East, while the US has caused major devastation, there are now more countries willing and able to work with China than ever before. This includes countries as diverse as Iran and Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Egypt, Lebanon and Iraq, Syria and Turkey.

China’s recent opening of a military logistics base in Djibouti ,also looks to secure future partnerships in Africa. Furthermore, China’s warm relationship with Russia, means that two of the three world superpowers are on the same page, something which is entirely unlike the Cold War period when the USSR, China and the US had three very different agendas, each of which allowed a third party to exploit the other two.

Overall, the prognosis for Xi Jinping and his successors being able to deliver on the monumental promises made in today’s speech, seem surprisingly doable. China has shown the world that it can make the difficult happen with speeds that shock many sceptics and with an exactitude that confounds students or previous rising economic giants.

In this sense, it is not at all beyond the scope of reality that a 3.5 hour speech, may shape the next 100 years of Chinese and world history.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement //pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Trump Has Gifted “No More Wars” Policy Position To Bernie Sanders (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 148.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

RT CrossTalk host Peter Lavelle and The Duran’s Alex Christoforou discuss how US President Donald Tump appears to have ceded his popular 2016 ‘no more wars’ campaign message and policy position to Bernie Sanders and any other US 2020 candidate willing to grad onto a non-interventionist approach to the upcoming Democrat primaries.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

“Is Bernie Stealing Trump’s ‘No More Wars’ Issue?” by Patrick J. Buchanan…


The center of gravity of U.S. politics is shifting toward the Trump position of 2016.

“The president has said that he does not want to see this country involved in endless wars… I agree with that,” Bernie Sanders told the Fox News audience at Monday’s town hall meeting in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

Then turning and staring straight into the camera, Bernie added:

“Mr. President, tonight you have the opportunity to do something extraordinary: Sign that resolution. Saudi Arabia should not be determining the military or foreign policy of this country.”

Sanders was talking about a War Powers Act resolution that would have ended U.S. involvement in the five-year civil war in Yemen that has created one of the great humanitarian crises of our time, with thousands of dead children amidst an epidemic of cholera and a famine.

Supported by a united Democratic Party on the Hill, and an anti-interventionist faction of the GOP led by Sens. Rand Paul and Mike Lee of Utah, the War Powers resolution had passed both houses of Congress.

But 24 hours after Sanders urged him to sign it, Trump, heeding the hawks in his Cabinet and National Security Council, vetoed S.J.Res.7, calling it a “dangerous attempt to weaken my constitutional authorities.”

With sufficient Republican votes in both houses to sustain Trump’s veto, that should be the end of the matter.

It is not: Trump may have just ceded the peace issue in 2020 to the Democrats. If Sanders emerges as the nominee, we will have an election with a Democrat running on the “no-more-wars” theme Trump touted in 2016. And Trump will be left defending the bombing of Yemeni rebels and civilians by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia.

Does Trump really want to go into 2020 as a war party president?

Does he want to go into 2020 with Democrats denouncing “Trump’s endless wars” in the Middle East? Because that is where he is headed.

In 2008, John McCain, leading hawk in the Senate, was routed by a left-wing first-term senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, who had won his nomination by defeating the more hawkish Hillary Clinton, who had voted to authorize the war in Iraq.

In 2012, the Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who was far more hawkish than Obama on Russia, lost.

Yet, in 2016, Trump ran as a different kind of Republican, an opponent of the Iraq War and an anti-interventionist who wanted to get along with Russia’s Vladimir Putin and get out of these Middle East wars.

Looking closely at the front-running candidates for the Democratic nomination of 2020 — Joe Biden, Sanders, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker — not one appears to be as hawkish as Trump has become.

Trump pulled us out of the nuclear deal with Iran negotiated by Secretary of State John Kerry and reimposed severe sanctions.

He declared Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization, to which Iran has responded by declaring U.S. Central Command a terrorist organization. Ominously, the IRGC and its trained Shiite militias in Iraq are in close proximity to U.S. troops.

Trump has recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, moved the U.S. Embassy there, closed the consulate that dealt with Palestinian affairs, cut off aid to the Palestinians, recognized Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights seized from Syria in 1967, and gone silent on Bibi Netanyahu’s threat to annex Jewish settlements on the West Bank.

Sanders, however, though he stands by Israel, is supporting a two-state solution and castigating the “right-wing” Netanyahu regime.

Trump has talked of pulling all U.S. troops out of Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet the troops are still there.

Though Trump came into office promising to get along with the Russians, he sent Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine and announced a pullout from Ronald Reagan’s 1987 INF treaty that outlawed all land-based intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

When Putin provocatively sent 100 Russian troops to Caracas — ostensibly to repair the S-400 anti-aircraft and anti-missile system that was damaged in recent blackouts — Trump, drawing a red line, ordered the Russians to “get out.”

Biden is expected to announce next week. If the stands he takes on Russia, China, Israel and the Middle East are more hawkish than the rest of the field, he will be challenged by the left wing of his party, and by Sanders, who voted “no” on the Iraq War that Biden supported.

The center of gravity of U.S. politics is shifting toward the Trump position of 2016. And the anti-interventionist wing of the GOP is growing.

And when added to the anti-interventionist and anti-war wing of the Democratic Party on the Hill, together, they are able, as on the Yemen War Powers resolution, to produce a new bipartisan majority.

Prediction: By the primaries of 2020, foreign policy will be front and center, and the Democratic Party will have captured the “no-more-wars” political high ground that Candidate Donald Trump occupied in 2016.

Do You Appreciate Reading Our Emails and Website? Let us know how we are doing – Send us a Thank You Via Paypal!

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Over 200 killed, hundreds injured in series of blasts at Sri Lankan hotels & churches

A series of bombings hit churches and hotels across Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday, killing more than 200 people.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


A series of eight explosions rocked Catholic churches and luxury hotels in Sri Lanka as Christians began Easter Sunday celebrations, with over 200 killed and hundreds injured, media reported, citing police.

The blasts started at around 8:45am local time at St. Anthony’s Church in Colombo and St. Sebastian’s Church in Negombo, a Catholic-majority town outside of the capital. The Zion Church in Batticaloa on the eastern coast was also targeted. At around the same time, the Shangri-La, Cinnamon Grand and Kingsbury five-star hotels were also hit, police confirmed.

Two more explosions happened later in the day, targeting two more locations in Colombo. All attacks appear to have been coordinated.

At least 207 people were killed, Reuters reported, citing police. More than 450 were injured in the attacks.

Alleged footage of the aftermath, shared on social media, showed chaos and large-scale destruction inside at least one of the churches.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Mike Pompeo reveals true motto of CIA: ‘We lied, we cheated, we stole’ (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 147.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris take a look at a Texas A&M University speech, and subsequent interview, with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

The former CIA Director admitted, ‘as an aside’ to the question asked, that the Intelligence agency he headed up before being appointed as the top US Diplomat had a motto “we lied, we cheated, we stole”…which, according to Pompeo, contained entire CIA training courses based on ‘lying, cheating and stealing.’

Pompeo finally speaks some truth.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Videos

Trending