Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
Mon Jun 17, 2013, 10:46 AM Jun 2013

China’s Great Uprooting: Moving 250 Million Into Cities

The government, often by fiat, is replacing small rural homes with high-rises, paving over vast swaths of farmland and drastically altering the lives of rural dwellers. So large is the scale that the number of brand-new Chinese city dwellers will approach the total urban population of the United States — in a country already bursting with megacities.

This will decisively change the character of China, where the Communist Party insisted for decades that most peasants, even those working in cities, remain tied to their tiny plots of land to ensure political and economic stability. Now, the party has shifted priorities, mainly to find a new source of growth for a slowing economy that depends increasingly on a consuming class of city dwellers.

The shift is occurring so quickly, and the potential costs are so high, that some fear rural China is once again the site of radical social engineering. Over the past decades, the Communist Party has flip-flopped on peasants’ rights to use land: giving small plots to farm during 1950s land reform, collectivizing a few years later, restoring rights at the start of the reform era and now trying to obliterate small landholders.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/16/world/asia/chinas-great-uprooting-moving-250-million-into-cities.html?_r=0

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
2. I once had an interesting conversation with a chinese communist.
Mon Jun 17, 2013, 11:17 AM
Jun 2013

I asked, why the People's Party wouldn't simply switch to democracy. What could possibly be the downside to that for the chinese people.
He delivered the argument that there's a huge gap of education within the chinese society. The intellectual argument against democracy is that huge parts of the population have so little education that they simply can't be trusted to make an informed democratic vote.

Maybe the enforced urbanization of China is their first step to turn their country from a Third-world-industry (with pollution and low-quality-products) to a First-World-industry (focused on knowledge/education and quality).

 

WinkyDink

(51,311 posts)
3. "they simply can't be trusted to make an informed democratic vote" = EXACTLY what Republicans claim
Mon Jun 17, 2013, 11:19 AM
Jun 2013

about Obama voters.

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
4. It's a valid point, though.
Mon Jun 17, 2013, 11:33 AM
Jun 2013

An informed voter knows enough to let professionals handle medical decisions instead of letting politicians squeeze themselves between a woman and her doctor. Or actually listening to them when they say that the "fetus-feels-pain-after-20-weeks"-number is made up.

An informed voter knows that even the largest of pipelines will never provide tens of thousands of permanent jobs. (What would those people do all day?)

An informed voter knows that something is off when the weather keeps getting crazier year by year for a full decade.

An informed voter knows that something is fishy when 8 years of trickle-down-economics turn into a recession.

An informed voter would accept the fact that the bad guy with a gun used to be a good guy with a gun.

An informed voter would accept the fact that not everyone to the left of Rush Limbaugh is a communist.

 

WinkyDink

(51,311 posts)
6. Only if true. I submit that, in both countries, the "uneducated" still can figure out who has their
Mon Jun 17, 2013, 04:33 PM
Jun 2013

interests at heart.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
7. If that's true, then why do repukes ever get more than 1% of the vote?
Mon Jun 17, 2013, 04:39 PM
Jun 2013

I'm not sure it's a given that "the uneducated" can figure out who has their interests at hart, though certainly some do, many others do not.

 

byeya

(2,842 posts)
8. About 20 or so years ago, the Chinese leadership wanted the communal farms abolished.
Mon Jun 17, 2013, 04:44 PM
Jun 2013

The move was opposed by a significant minority of the workers on the farms and by a minority of the party cadres. Legions of party functionaries were went into the contryside to convince all to fall in line with the new directives and by various means, they did. It was not totally popular.
Some cadres realized that they could make a lot of money by speeding the process along and buying choice land, which they did.

 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
9. In the US, farmers are down to 1.9% of population - China has a long way to go
Mon Jun 17, 2013, 05:16 PM
Jun 2013

1900 - 41%
1930 - 21.5%
1945 - 16%
1970 - 4%
2002 - 1.9%

In 25 years 3 of 4 farmers were moved off the land. (Well actually they retired, sold out, etc. and weren't replaced.)

http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/259572/eib3_1_.pdf
The 20th Century Transformation of U.S. Agriculture and Farm Policy

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»China’s Great Uprooting: ...