Anti-Capitalist Chronicles: The Significance of China in the Global Economy 

Support the anti capitalists, on a capitalist platform that shuts down free speech. Great....

@@survivalizer hmm, naysayer huh? How are these people to operate if not by making money off it? Would u rather PAY THESE PEOPLE directly? Or would u rather watch Trump rally reruns?

@@survivalizer shuts down free speech, what speech are u referring to?

@@tinafoster8665 If you havent seen the fallout from the sargon banning, you're completely out of touch.

@@survivalizer OHHHH, I see. So you're basically 1 of these "I'm "awoke" but NO ONE ELSE IS" types. Hmm. N this reference u gave is non sequitur

Of course. Most of them don't know a thing about history or economics and just interview other Think Tank officials and diplomats who make their currency in puffing their chests.

Well said.

That's totally true. So great that you had such a wise teacher.

Maybe a Universal Basic Income is necessary for the future as the future of labor and work gets redefined and removed.

PLEASE correspond with me here or preferably Facebook, I AM VERY INTERESTED IN HOW TO MAKE the USA more like China n REDUCE MILITARY TENSION.

But there are things about China that are not good, the 3 families in 1 apartment is not good but there are worse fates, and I'm sure the Chinese authorities are making residential flats a top priority but the construction of buildings takes time. I'm wondering about the construction of apartments in China, houses in the USA are framed with 2"×4"s which is basically 20 year lifespan. Are the Chinese building apartment buildings to last at least 200 years? My bf says this is possible using steel, glass n stone (NOT concrete) with wood INNER construction

Hhe seriously wants to do construction IN China

@Michael R. Pence OHHHH by all means, LET'S FOLLOW the Roman empire's example, ARE U FREEKIN serious? U do kno we have FREE WILL rite, n THERE ARE people working on DEATH TO THE CORPORATOCRACY?

Ironic.... 99% of people in USA believe that we are a "Capitalist" nation. While the 1% investor class know that we have rigged "upward succession" with exclusive-socialism for Kleptocrats. I say it's ironic, because people are people regardless of Nation. If 99% in one country can be so "in the dark" then so can those in another because both country's "Ruling Classes" are controlling all of the information that _trickles down_ to the general populace.

Agree. Just check who is behind Southeast Asian booms now.

I read this five times. The sentences still don't make much sense to me and they certainly don't connect to form a coherent whole. No intention to shit into anyone's coffee, but it is a mystery to me how 23 people upvoted this...

Fascinating Professor Harvey. if china is so good you should move to china and live there why do you live in united state and push your communist agenda let someone from china tell you how china is.

US didn't push china around in the Korean war. that was a first non win for US. the first gulf war was a wakeup call for china to modernize its military. and china has countered effectively every move by the US.

wikct2 So true!

Well said. But being powerful enough militarily is necessary but not sufficient for economic success. China also has strong and focused leadership, sound economic policies, ......

@@josephdewuhan yes. I also jump directly into military power. In between is diplomacy of course. What I believe is that 'sound economic' pressuposes liberty to do so. In Geo Politics is definitively military might plays a huge role (only later economic leverage after an economy is developed an the military option becomes less important)

You also love the internet? Me too! What plant is that in your profile photo? If it is a Dandelion, that is an amazing coincidence, because I have founded a non-profit organisation named DandelionLabs. If you feel like emailing me, my email address is my name at gmail dot com.

Noted! Forwarding the suggestion to Prof. Harvey.

Like Israel (a fact also lost on many) the U.K. is nowadays no more than a wagging tail on the dog of U.S.- led capitalist imperialism.

Agreed here in merseyside liverpool we used to be the 2nd most important maritime trading port in the UK importing raw materials for manufacturing. Now it's a shadow of it's former self relying on the service economy.

@@democracyatwrk Thank you :o)

@@novosprospectus882 And what do you think is happening to us here in the States? At lease you people in the UK know your empire is long gone. We here in the US of A still act like Roman Empire not noticing that roads , schools , bridges , are falling apart. We had a Gov shut down for a just a month and that was enough to cause people trouble. These were well paid GOV workers too. Not fast food. The United States is living on fantasy. I envy Germany for not getting rid of their good paying unions jobs.

We will release the next video next week! Stay tuned, and get early access on Patreon: www.patreon.com/davidharveyacc

fxck the next ep, this one has revealed to light for CA tech.

Brilliant analysis! The Chinese have beaten us at our own game which is unfettered technological competition. This is the basis of evolutionary theory in that competition and survival of the fittest yields the highest fitness and adaptation to the environment. Telecommunications is the golden ring of the information age, whoever controls the exchange of data controls the world, and this is why the US is fighting back against Huawei. This is a battle to control information, read it, change it, delete it and deny it. The open systems interconnection model (OSI model) dictates control at the lowest level of the telecommunication network: The physical, data link, network and transport layers of the Internet - the hardware, basic operating system and data transport functions. Information security dictates that you must control these basic functions communications or the whole of communications is at jeopardy.The US simply cannot allow the Chinese to dominate the lower levels of the OSI model and control all communications. This also forms the basis of freedom of navigation of the seas - whoever controls the physical layer controls the local network, and higher layers of the model control larger areas of the network. AI is a new area of competition and is highly dependent on the Internet for communications of course. Without secure communications there cannot be secure AI. This presents a critical problem for the CCP. In order to be granted access to the network they must be 100% secure. There will come a point where they will be denied access to the network because they are not trusted. AI operates at the application layer of the OSI model and will be useless unless the rest of the layers are secure. This will be a turning point in history and Canada is at the center of it as usual. Now is the time for this battle MUST be fought. What is at stake is the very freedom that our democracy depends upon. Freedom of speech. The CCP does not protect freedom of speech, and it does not allow freedom on the Internet. If China controls the Internet and the secure communications that are essential to it then all of mankind's freedoms are at stake

@@thegeneralist7527 great comment besides the freedom stuff. The west only protected "freedom of speech" when it was the sole purveyor of information globally. Now that we're entering a multi polar world, the facade of free speech is going to crumble and enter real politic just like every country that was subject to the west's b.s very soon.

@@Gaiafreak6969 Thanks for the reply but I must disagree. We take freedom for granted because we have it, but its legacy goes back to English common law. Freedom encompasses many things, most basic is freedom of thought in the Orwellian sense. You can see this in the CCP "reeducation" camps trying to bring people back into line with the communist ideology. Also the freedom to be who you want to be, do what you want to do, freedom of religion and the freedom of association. The CCP does not grant the Chinese people any of these basic freedoms that are enshrined in the UN declaration of human rights. This is why Huawei cannot be allowed to dominate the Internet infrastructure. It is a direct threat to the most basic value of western civilization.

There is nothing mystical about it. It's an authoritarian state that can grow rapidly by being the world factory while ignoring pesky issues like the environment and workers rights.

@@Camcolito That's a closed preconceived explanation which means you'll learn no lessons from the world's fast growing dominant economy, but it has nothing to do with why I said it's a mystery to the western hemisphere. It's not only a mystery now but always has been. The ability to combine communism with aspects of capitalism and then to convert that into not only a cohesive, successful but also a dominant world economy in such a short space of time is something we should all learn from. It's something that has never been done before.

@@samebar Not really, the Soviet Union did something similar - convert a peasant backwater into an industrial powerhouse in rapid fashion. And they did so through similar means - careful central planning and absolute control bulldozing any objections or worker rights. It's a very effective way to expand GDP. China is just a modern version. Westerners looking to China as the great socialist savior are deluded. It's a profoundly anti-democratic state capitalist colossus.

@@Camcolito That's way off the mark. The Soviets did it by the eradication of capitalism under heavy duress from other world powers through sanctions and threat of invasion....the precedent to which was a foreign invasion in while it was in it's infancy. The threat materialized and it didn't take a crystal to see it as it came from a leader who was rising to prominence in the 1920's just before Stalin started the first five year plan, a leader who had planned an invasion of the USSR in his book Mein Kampf published in 1924. After World War II the Americans applied Nuclear pressure for the USSR to expand, but they did it by cutting themselves off from the world market and without private ownership. The Chinese recognized this wasn't working for them so they included themselves in the world market and allowed private ownership, which has now put them in a dominant position in the world market, playing the western powers at their own game, something the USSR never did. As a consequence the living standard of the most populated country in the world has risen immeasurably while the western hemisphere is stripping it's workers to swaddle it's ruling class while it's infrastructure falls apart. You should really watch this video before arguing your case against comments on it's thread.

@@samebar So what are you saying, that China has been very successful by allowing but carefully managing (through an absolutist state) capitalist exploitation of its own population and the crushing of any dissent? And that is good news for socialism how?

@Soul Mission Bernie is like FDR--- TRYING TO SAVE capitalism from itself. Unfortunately, the current MAIN tenet, raison d'etre, (American) CAPITALISM'S MAIN feature today is A PSYCHOTIC GREED that forgives anything, AS LONG AS it makes the capitalist extremely rich. How rich is extremely rich? Well that's where the psychosis is--- NO LIMIT. NO BARRIERS to how that money's made. Do u kno, crystal meth IS ON the "big board" : it's just called "XYZ group or whatever

@Soul Mission Bernie's Sanders socialism is not socialism at all. Just some socialistic policies. But it is right move. It will save capitalism or help to make transition. Otherwise some doomsday Sci-Fi movies will be reality.

@Soul Mission - What Bernie is advocating for is an FDR-style democracy. It's what America embraced after the Great Depression that lasted until the 1960's & 70's. The middle class prospered during this time and we had a healthy and stable economy.

god damn right we do!!

@@duggygee6387 yes that's true, SOME made it into the "middle class" but they were ALWAYS vulnerable n always WILL b vulnerable to the psycho class. The Depression WAS NOT an actual depression, it was an END of free spec which was in a way good, FDR HIRING BIG JOE KENNEDY to recommend laws to stop people from getting rich LIKE HE did. Beyond that, the "depression" was THE FED CALLING ITS MONEY HOME.This was done for various reasons but MAINLY as social "shock" into ACCEPTING THE NEW industrial farming paradigm : from MILLIONS of small producers to AGRIBUSINESS USING FUEL POWERED TRACTORS rather than a farmer with a mule. MILLIONS uprooted to STEAL BILLIONS FOR THE FEDERAL RESERVE n the criminals who own it.

Ending the capitalist mode of production exchange & distribution should be the focus if we want to survive.

Alasdair Church none of those bad. It’s the top down management without democracy in the workplace that has led to the current problems. Workers don’t send their own jobs over seas. Absentee investor owners are a terrible idea. Workers should decide how much profit to pay taxes on or how much to invest back into a company.

As a Marxist I don't believe that the goal of our movement should be mere reform of capitalism but as a pragmatic socialist I understand that incremental changes can & should be made - which is why I'm an active member of UK Labour & Corbyn supporter. Capitalism itself is while a historically-necessary precondition for the creation of a post-scarcity productive capacity (China being a case in point) upon which socialism can be built, just has exploitation in its - if you will - DNA.

@Daddy AF If voters would stop voting in Billionaires that might give us a fighting chance. The votes vote for the rich and wonder why they do stuff for rich people.

Alasdair Church I see the ultimate goal as knowing quality and value and having the skill and craftsmanship to create a society embedded in nature. Billionaires know how to accumulate money and review metrics and data. They aren’t so great at making things with their hands that will last. Money is not the goal.

Africa already has faster and more modern railways then anywhere in North America !

qz-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/qz.com/africa/1001477/kenya-has-faster-mobile-internet-speeds-than-the-united-states/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCCAE%3D#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fqz.com%2Fafrica%2F1001477%2Fkenya-has-faster-mobile-internet-speeds-than-the-united-states%2F

Kenya has faster Internet than America. Check the link I sent.

Shouldn't be surprised!

No surprise! China build the rail and the net for the Africans.

@shinvergil777 hahaha

I found something quite interesting here: English has only one word "politician" for whoever does politics. Chinese uses 政治家 for good politician with vision and responsibility; 政客 for someone chases short, personal power. The same for scientist, and other occupations

this is flat out false, Chine has huge diversity within itself, it has multiple languages and it has a decentralized administrative system. They are currently discriminating against muslim population of western China and has a lot of religious differences within, you're just projecting what you think a growing and powerful economy should be (homogeneous in race, history and heritage) instead of looking at reality. China is a very complex country, saying they have "shared racial/history/heritage" is just introducing those factors (especially race/heritage) as economically imprtant when their not.

ip desperado precisely!!!

If people truly read Marx, people would know that his work is a guideline, not a step by step guide on how to reach socialism. Western leftist and other dogmatic Marxist are not Marxist at all. They are just something of a cult that praise big communists personality.

If he only makes the paper looking good, he definitely will pay for that later. Remember that, as he said, other majors are his competitors to climb up.

Do you mean Tesla?

For how long? I'm guessing a decade at most.

I agree, and I hate people like Richard Wolff and David Harvey singing China's praises as a beacon of socialism.

@BLAIR M Schirmer I'm a fan of Wolff, and Harvey. I think they have almost everything right. Wolff uses China as an example of 'rapid growth under socialism' all the time. This is very misleading and harmful in my opinion.

@【a s d f】 【j k l ;】 He uses it as a throwaway reply to idiotic right wingers who say socialism never works and capitalism delivers the goods etc. He says China is growing at such and such percent per year, much more than the West. This is misleading as it implies China is socialist - it isn't. It's an absolutist state. Workers control nothing in China.

@na na Just because a country has some collectively-owned (i.e. socialist) companies doesn't make it a socialist socio-economic system. There are collectively-owned companies around the world, including the United States. Spain has the largest workers' coop in the world, Mondragon Corp., but the country is still capitalist. Take a look at these statistics: www.statista.com/statistics/252924/employees-at-state-owned-collective-owned-and-private-enterprises-in-china/. You'll see how the number of private enterprises is the only one increasing in China.

@na na The question is not how much government intervention a country has, no matter whether it is to help corporations or to help the society. It's really a lot simpler. You only have socialism if the workers own the means of production and participate democratically in every decision affecting their lives. This has never been achieved so far by any country at the society level, (except maybe to some extent by Israel back in the times when the kibbutz was their preferred way of production). Not until the workers's coop model of enterprise is the dominant economic model and workers and communities make all the decisions.

lower wages do not matter if costs of living are lower. that can be publiic healthcare, housing education, childcare .... Income (wages) are lower in wealthy European countries as well - if you look at "wage before deductions ans you see it on the slip" - and it does not look better after the deductions. However you have to see the other labor related costs for the company, the 5 weeks paid vacations, the paid sick leave (maternity leave is paid for by a fund, all companies have to pay into it).

They have STATE CAPITALISM to a degree and capitalism with a lot of state intervention. All under a dictatorship - capitalism can co-exist with that just fine. Stalin, Mao and the Western ideologues hating on "Marxism" had all their reason to present it as fact that Marx meant that the government should play a great role in "socialism". Marx hardly mentions the government. Socialism = the workers own the means of production. That is NOT the state, and it also does not mean options to shares. It means that whoever works in the company has a say and a vote (the same voting pwoer) at least in important things (incl. what happens with the surplus = profit). And if they leave the company they do not take a share with them, or can sell it or pass it on the the heirs. That is why Lenin called the system (as they had it in the 1920s) in the S.U. State Capitalsm and as an intermediate stage to the fulfillment of the Revolution. Marx and Socialism was paraded around all the time, these were good brands after all. The bureaucrats top down decided what was going to happen (which also gave them influence over the citizens, their livelihood, who would get a good job. The government owned the means of the production. Directly after the Revolution (the czar was toppled, but not killed, he and family were under house arrest). A lot of co-ops formed, they were called Soviets. But that was too much grassroots democracy at the workplace and when the Bolshevics got increasingly more power, October Revolution, and despite losing the democratic elections - they ended those fledgeling attempts. Can't have dictatorship in the political sphere and democracy in the workplace. The peasant might get ideas. (Stalin the successor of Lenin on the other hand declared the Revolution had reached its goal, just some work around the fringes was still needed). Examples for socialism co-ops (like Mondragon in Spain) or the Kibbuzim system. Or when a community has their own communally owned power plant (and they do have ownership and cannot sell their share to outsiders - orgs can be set up that way to avoid that someone can buy their way into the org and destroy it).

@佛地魔王蘇貞昌 forgive me but isn't China already a communist nation?

等各方面赶上美国再说吧，人均GDP也好，国民素质也好

G Kuljian Though they’ve been the biggest polluter in the past they’re going to have lower emissions than the US in about 5 years due to how quickly they’re developing green infrastructure, despite having over 3 times the population of the US. Right now and in the near future Brazil by deforesting the rain forest and the US for so many reasons are the biggest threat to our climate.

@@markhaus China forest coverage grow every year. That is the consequence. Check fact.

+ G Kuljian "We're about to witness the environmental results of all of this growth." Who doesn't? Manufacturing produce pollution, what a surprise that is! Every developed counties are guilty of it.

not really. China has already grown the largest forest on earth. Air pollusion around the country has been greatly reduced. You can see blue sky in Beijing now. Among the 20 most polluted cities, only two are in China, and at least one of them not really caused by factories. Always update your facts, don't stick with stereotype.

@@godessworshipper4663 A cursory search for carbon emissions by country shows that to be totally false. Here's just one title from 2018- China Emits More Carbon Dioxide Than The U.S. and EU Combined.