China in 1980s and 1990s, when their GDP per capita was less than 500$

[Viet]

I hate to break it to you, but Vietnam's heavy industries and metallurgy just aren't on the same level as India's. When you stack Vietnam up against China, the gap is even more apparent. In fact, even China back in the 1960s and 70s was ahead of where Vietnam stands today in these sectors.

there is a saying „vom nichts kommt nichts“, from nothing comes nothing.

in the 60s, 70s Vietnam was divided, still middle of multiple wars.
I came from south Vietnam, there was no industry, no manufacturing, we were fully relying on US money and weapons.
North Vietnam had some industrial but all were bombed constantly by US airforce.
How could Vietnam have something similar to India, least China?

then USSR collapsed. Vietnam began to recover with US lifting sanctions, making peace with China. that was in the late 90s.
I saying but that is no excuse for anything.

 

[chinasun]

Before 1980, there were no rich people in China. The state concentrates all resources on the development of education and industry. At that time, the heavy chemical industry was already in a full range of categories, leading India in science and technology for 10 years, with a literacy rate of 65.5. At that time, China was very poor, but the wealth of overseas Chinese exceeded France's gross domestic product.Since 1980, overseas Chinese and overseas Chinese have invested a total of about 330 billion US dollars. Charitable donations are about 3 billion yuan a year.

 

[AViet]

Pyongyang, the capital of North Korea, is the cleanest and most organized city in the world—does that mean North Korea is the richest country on Earth?

They are surely among the most civilized people on earth. In addition, they have very high average IQ, higher than Germanic people like German or English.

Civilization and richness, more often than not in human history, do not come together.

Even if there was a very poor leader on top, like Polpot, Hitler or Idi Amin, in normal conditions, the country would still be clean and organized, at least much cleaner than most countries in the world,

 

[AViet]

Two countries with different histories.
Central asia was part of the Soviet Union, thus have same level of development and aesthetics as former Soviet block.

Present day Bangladesh until the end of British India, was a countryside argricultural part of the larger Bengal province, with its civlizational and economic center in Calcutta (Present day India). When BD became independent, not only was it separated from its historic capital and socioeconomic center, but it had to start virtually from scratch with a argrarian population and unfavorable geostrategic location.

have you come to conclusion that communism can build a much better, sustainable society compared to democracy?. I can see that from your words.

When the uS left the Phillipines, the Phillipines also inherited high level of "development" (probably not the same development in Uzbekistan) and aesthetics. Manila looked more like New York with a lot of cars, trams, big buildings etc. rather than any Asian city at that time. Phillipines was the second richest country in Asia for a few decades.

India was much the same.

But that "development" seems not sustainable.

 

[Yellow is Okay]

there is a saying „vom nichts kommt nichts“, from nothing comes nothing.

in the 60s, 70s Vietnam was divided, still middle of multiple wars.
I came from south Vietnam, there was no industry, no manufacturing, we were fully relying on US money and weapons.
North Vietnam had some industrial but all were bombed constantly by US airforce.
How could Vietnam have something similar to India, least China?

then USSR collapsed. Vietnam began to recover with US lifting sanctions, making peace with China. that was in the late 90s.
I saying but that is no excuse for anything.

North Vietnam did have some industrial capacity back in the day, but mostly it churned out basic construction steel, nothing too advanced. Even now, Vietnam's Hoa Phat is Southeast Asia's largest steelmaker, but their dominance is limited to construction-grade steel. When it comes to specialized, high-strength steel for things like shipbuilding or automotive frames, they fall short as do other countries in Southeast Asia. That's part of why countries like Thailand struggle to move up the value chain. Just look at South Korea's POSCO, which, after the Korean War, received a lot of tech transfer directly from Japan to master specialized steel production.

 

[Alter_Ego]

have you come to conclusion that communism can build a much better, sustainable society compared to democracy?. I can see that from your words.

You didnt really read post did you my man? Youare comparing apples to oranges.


Communism is just a extreme form of collectivism. It has positives and negatives. IMO the neagtives outweigh the positives. China isnt communist per se. Its a one party meritocratic system that applies state directed development strategies. The market in China and Vietnam is as capitalististic as it gets.

When the uS left the Phillipines, the Phillipines also inherited high level of "development" (probably not the same development in Uzbekistan) and aesthetics. Manila looked more like New York with a lot of cars, trams, big buildings etc. rather than any Asian city at that time. Phillipines was the second richest country in Asia for a few decades.

Know very little about Philipine history so no comment from me.

India was much the same.

But that "development" seems not sustainable.

Deng Xiaoping said " Its dosent matter the color of Cat, as long it catches mice". China found a mixed hybrid system that suited its nation and history. A one party system wouldnt be allowed in any modern Western European country, or USA.

Free and fair voting system is essential for emancipation and freedom. But what the West needs to look more into is how to create a more effective governance within this democratic system.

 

[AViet]

You didnt really read post did you my man? Youare comparing apples to oranges.


Communism is just a extreme form of collectivism. It has positives and negatives. IMO the neagtives outweigh the positives. China isnt communist per se. Its a one party meritocratic system that applies state directed development strategies. The market in China and Vietnam is as capitalististic as it gets.




Know very little about Philipine history so no comment from me.



Deng Xiaoping said " Its dosent matter the color of Cat, as long it catches mice". China found a mixed hybrid system that suited its nation and history. A one party system wouldnt be allowed in any modern Western European country, or USA.
Free and fair voting system is essential for emancipation and freedom. But what the west needs to look more into is how to create a more effective governance withiin this system.

How can an election be true "free and fair" ever? The ruling party can always use its advantage in media, money etc. to crush opposition parties, so ruling party would always have an unfair advantage over others.

How it can be called "free" when the voters are bombarded daily with propaganda,, in the streets going to work, in their offices, in media and back in their apartments.

In late 1990s, when I was living in the UK, my apartment was flooded every days with leaflets asking me to vote for Tory or for Labour. Can that be called "free" when media controls your mind and even your decision?

 

[Yellow is Okay]

You didnt really read post did you my man? Youare comparing apples to oranges.


Communism is just a extreme form of collectivism. It has positives and negatives. IMO the neagtives outweigh the positives. China isnt communist per se. Its a one party meritocratic system that applies state directed development strategies. The market in China and Vietnam is as capitalististic as it gets.




Know very little about Philipine history so no comment from me.



Deng Xiaoping said " Its dosent matter the color of Cat, as long it catches mice". China found a mixed hybrid system that suited its nation and history. A one party system wouldnt be allowed in any modern Western European country, or USA.

Free and fair voting system is essential for emancipation and freedom. But what the West needs to look more into is how to create a more effective governance within this democratic system.

That guy just don't get it. Communism is an extreme left-wing ideology, both politically and economically. Vietnam, in the past, was a totalitarian state, but today it functions more like an authoritarian regime. The difference matters because you won't hear anyone labeling Russia or Middle Eastern countries as communist. It's about understanding that totalitarianism and authoritarianism don't equate to communism. They're about control and power, not necessarily ideology. Countries like Russia and many in the Arab world maintain strict rule but aren't communist by nature.

 

[Alter_Ego]

How can an election be true "free and fair" ever? The ruling party can always use its advantage in media, money etc. to crush opposition parties, so ruling party would always have an unfair advantage over others.

It can be controlled by a fully functioning judiciary and police force.
There are strict laws for political parties and what they can or cant do. If youre thinking of the USA, yes i think the US system is not completeley democratic (i know americans will disagree), as it allows lobbying and donations from rich people. The USA in reality is plutocracy masked a a democracy.

But in a communistic one party system the power of that party ie the party leadership, is absolute. Criticism may be allowed but only to certain point.
Go beyond that and youre executed. In a open democracy, any citizen can curse or criticize a politican right in his face, literally.

Remember that its always holly dolly fun when a economy is growing, like in China, then its easy for a one party state because very few complains. But if the economy is in trouble all that pent up fustration will create huge problem, when people cant openly demonstrate or criticize. People arent allowed to choose who they want to rule the country. It will be bloody eventually.

How it can be called "free" when the voters are bombarded daily with propaganda,, in the streets going to work, in their offices, in media and back in their apartments.

Its like when you are in mall, youre bombarded with offfers and thousand items. In the end its upto each individual to wisely choose what he/she thinks is the right choice.

In late 1990s, when I was living in the UK, my apartment was flooded every days with leaflets asking me to vote for Tory or for Labour. Can that be called "free" when media controls your mind and even your decision?

Maybe you lived in a area where it was like that.
Never happened where i live , during any elections. Heck most of the time i almost forget its even a election day. My experience is from the Nordic democracy. Others have to answer for their own country.

 

[drasticmeasure]

Question - How was china able to build cities like this in 1990, when the percapita was less than $500 ?? It seems like there is simply not enough money.

 

[Beijingwalker]

Question - How was china able to build cities like this in 1990, when the percapita was less than $500 ?? It seems like there is simply not enough money.

No money is enough if cost of everything is as absurd as that in US.

 

[r3alist]

Question - How was china able to build cities like this in 1990, when the percapita was less than $500 ?? It seems like there is simply not enough money.

The cities you see are not so numerous and expensive relative to what they had, they may not be rich though they still had something

 

[Yellow is Okay]

Question - How was china able to build cities like this in 1990, when the percapita was less than $500 ?? It seems like there is simply not enough money.

That's because their industrial capability is larger and more advanced than that of other countries with the same GDP per capita.

 

[drasticmeasure]

No money is enough if cost of everything is as absurd as that in US.

This might be the real reason. They built their cities by keeping the prices of construction and labor low and better central planning.

If you compare China of 1990s to even far richer countries of the time. Chinese cities seemed more developed. Its amazing.

 

[SaadH]

How can an election be true "free and fair" ever? The ruling party can always use its advantage in media, money etc. to crush opposition parties, so ruling party would always have an unfair advantage over others.

How it can be called "free" when the voters are bombarded daily with propaganda,, in the streets going to work, in their offices, in media and back in their apartments.

In late 1990s, when I was living in the UK, my apartment was flooded every days with leaflets asking me to vote for Tory or for Labour. Can that be called "free" when media controls your mind and even your decision?

In the US, noboby voted for the current democratic nominee for President and the incumbent president was nominated by dems through hook and crook and massive manipulation of the primary. There's no democracy in the West, especially in the US, it is controlled by the deep state. There's nothing that sets apart policy wise any of the presidents from Clinton to now.