Archive for the Income gap Category

Economic disparity worsens children’s growing pains in China [People’s Daily]

Posted in China, Economy, Education, Employment, Holidays in China, Income gap, Uncategorized on June 1, 2013 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Xinhua writers Zhou Yan, Pan Qiang and Li Meijuan (Xinhua)
May 31, 2013



As the world’s second-largest economy prepares to celebrate Children’s Day, many adults are recalling the good old days of growing up in the 1970s and 1980s, when few families were rich but children were probably happier.

Today, however, “a happy, carefree” childhood seems out of reach for city and rural children alike.

In 10 years, city kids like Wei Yufan will probably be studying at a university in Beijing, eyeing well-paid jobs in big companies.

By then, Luo Tingxi may have become a skilled worker on a factory assembly line or in a coal pit. He might also be married with two children.

If the economic disparity is not lifted by then, growing pains will persist for those on both sides.

While city children fight pains inflicted by demanding parents, rural children’s pains often reflect the fast-growing, unbalanced economy, which could backfire and hamper further economic growth, warned Liu Fuxiang, deputy education chief in Yanchuan County of northwest China’s Shaanxi Province.

“The yawning rural-urban income gap has worsened disparity in many other sectors, like education, in particular,” he said.

Rural children, he said, perform far worse than their urban peers on major tests these days, but not because they are not clever or diligent. “They are victims of an unbalanced allocation of teaching resources.”

The rapid urbanization drive has drawn an influx of rural workers to cities and boomtowns, where more schools have been built. “Many rural schools in remote, sparsely-populated villages were closed down and children from several villages have to share one school,” said Liu.

As many migrants have taken their school-aged children with them to cities, most village schools in the underdeveloped areas of Yanchuan County are more like daycare centers for left-behind children, orphans and handicapped children, he said.

Troubled by insufficient funding and teachers, it is also hard for these schools to offer many subjects. “Some schools only teach reading and arithmetic. Gym class is all about frolicking and running around,” said Liu. “Many children just wait for the nine years of compulsory education to end soon so they can take a job in the city.”

The consequences of the disparity could be severe, as poverty could twist the youngsters’ value systems. “The children are our future,” he said. “Our future will be gloomy if they are not educated properly.”

“Children in poverty tend to admire the material abundance in cities and even worship money,” said Yang Yuansong, a rural school teacher known for “Left-behind Children’s Diaries,” a collection of tear-stained diary entries written by rural children whose parents work in faraway cities.

“When young migrants in their village return home with fashionable clothing and stylish haircuts, their value system changes and they long to see the wide world for themselves instead of concentrating on their schoolwork.”

Yang said reminding them of the importance of learning and keeping their dreams alive is essential. But often, their parents are not home and schools do not have enough teachers to offer them the proper guidance.

Ding Xueqian, a rural school teacher in Gansu Province and a deputy to the local parliament, has called for more funding from the central and provincial treasuries to boost education in remote rural areas.

“It’s important to train adequate teachers and build safer classrooms for countryside schools,” he said. “By narrowing the gap between rural and urban education, we can expect to provide quality education to rural students and reverse the widespread prejudice that ‘going to school is useless.'”

Full article link:


Grotesque gaps in income undercut social harmony [People’s Daily]

Posted in China, Corruption, CPC, Economy, Income gap, State-owned Enterprise (SOE), USA on November 6, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Wan Lixin (Shanghai Daily)
15:40, October 30, 2012

A COMPREHENSIVE report in 2010 titled “China’s Wealth Gap Is Testing the Limit of Social Toleration” is still compelling reading for policy makers today.

Authored by a Xinhua team, the report pointed to the danger of accelerating concentration of social wealth in the hands of the few, and the yawning gap in income across difference regions, between urban and rural residents, and among different professions.

The report cited professor Chang Xiuze from an institute under the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), who revealed that although estimates for the Gini coefficient (a statistical measure of income or wealth inequality with a value ranging between 0 and 1) for China differs, the ratio given by the World Bank is 0.47, which is above the warning level of 0.4, and is climbing fast by the year.

Two figures hint at the nature of the gap: The urban residents are earning 3.3 times more than their rural cousins, and the senior executives (officials) of listed state-owned enterprises are earning 128 times more than the average wage earners.

An expert from Beijing Normal University found that in 1988 the top 10 percent was earning 7.3 times more than the bottom 10 percent. In 2007 that figure went up to 23 times.

Real estate, mine owners and securities are just some of the sectors openly known to be generating exorbitant profits.

It has been recently reported that in 2007 in Shanxi Province a state-owned coal mine valued then at 200 million yuan (US$32 million) went to private owners for 375,000 yuan. Now the mine is worth 3 billion yuan.

The report concludes that fabulous riches are being made in the nonrenewable resources sector.

In coal-rich Zuoyun County, in Shanxi Province, where per capita peasant income was below the national average, there have emerged in recent years hundreds of coal mine bosses with a net worth to a tune of hundred of millions [sic] yuan.

Real estate is another sector. We need not be surprised that in the just-released Forbes 2012 list of 100 Richest People on China’s mainland, 16 are in real estate.

Another fortune list identified Wu Yajun as the world’s richest self-made women [sic] billionaires with estimated personal assets at 38 billion yuan. You can bet the self-made tycoon was actually made by real estate developments.

* Income distribution *

“Although our [sic] social toleration of the wealth gap is growing, the consequences would still be unimaginable if inequality and unfair distribution were allowed to worsen at this pace,” said Yang Yiyong, an researcher with an NDRC institute, who was cited in the Xinhua report.

Towards the end, the report made an impassioned call for initiating reform in income distribution “as soon as possible.”

Today, two years later the government is still talking about coming to grips with these thorny problems.

At a Cabinet meeting on October 17, it was revealed that a comprehensive plan for reform in income distribution – already eight years in the making – will come out soon, in the fourth quarter of this year.

In a recent interview with International Finance News, professor Liu Jiping from the China University of Political Science and Law said that the distribution reform initiative has already suffered many delays.

“If the plan fails again this time, it would become the only legislative proposal in the current term of government that has been promised to the people but failed to be worked out,” Liu added.

In an interview on Tuesday, Chen Baosheng, vice president of the Party School of the Communist Party of China, stressed that the Chinese people have high hopes for the coming national Party congress, and affirmed the correctness of open discussion about political reform.

“We are confronted with many problems and challenges in political reform, and there is no avoiding it. There can be no solution without pushing through with the reform,” Chen added.

As the widening divide between the haves and have-nots is a global problem, the situation in other countries can shed light on the solution of the problem in China.

In his “99 to 1: How Wealth Inequality Is Wrecking the World and What We Can Do About It” (Berrett-Koehler, 2012), author Chuck Collins offers a history of how today’s economic situation in the US evolved, makes an impassioned plea for deflating the superrich, and provides a political prescription for economic equality.

According to the book, since the 1980s, the superrich one percent of the population in the US has become vastly richer.

Today the 400 richest American people together possess more wealth than the 150 million poorest Americans.


The one percent rigs the economic system in five ways to perpetuate the widening gap:

1. “Political influence” – Politicians serve those who contribute most heavily to their political campaigns. The one percent donates lavishly.

2. “Charity sector influence”- Some people in the one percent make charitable donations to tax-exempt organizations that conduct lobbying to further the interests of the wealthy.

3. “Media influence” – The one percent owns a large segment of the media and uses it to promote views that its members support.

4. “Organizing others in the one percent and leveraging networks” – Superrich individuals know how to use their connections and coordinate their activities to maximum political and social effect.

5. “Partnering with Wall Street game riggers” – Corporations underwrite think tanks and advocacy groups (for example, the US Chamber of Commerce) to influence those who make the economic rules.

“Today, the dirty secret about how to get very wealthy in this economy is to start with wealth,” Collins concludes.

Naturally the gap will make social stratification entrenched, in a country famously known for its intolerance of aristocracy [ha ha].

On a practical basis, you cannot serve in the US Senate unless you can raise approximately US$15,000 a day to cover your campaign expenses.

So the easiest way to gather this money is to solicit members of the superrich one percent, who will then demand that you safeguard their interests and deliver on their agenda.

In [sic]solving this problem, the book prescribes higher minimum wages, reforms in campaign finance, and elimination of the wealth-power nexus.

Article link:

New Gini figures show instability risks in China [People’s Daily]

Posted in China, Income gap on September 26, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Du Liya (Global Times)
September 17, 2012

The widening gap between rich and poor continues to pose a challenge to stability in China, with the latest figures showing that the Gini coefficient reached 0.438 in 2010, which exceeds UN warning levels.

The index, which represented the first local release of these figures in five years, was published by a Chinese NGO, the International Institute for Urban Development on Friday, as part of the Blue Book on China’s Social Management.

The Gini coefficient, an index measuring inequality of income with a scale of zero to one (zero being totally equal and one being totally unequal), suggests that a country with a figure higher than 0.4 has dangerous levels of wealth inequality. According to reports in the Beijing News, the figure went from 0.275 in the 1980s to 0.438 at the end of 2010.

The report pointed out that the new index indicated that there have been risks of instability associated with the great achievements of the reform and opening-up policy, such as the increasing gap between the rich and poor and intensifying contradictions between government officials and the public.

“The widening gap will bring instability as the poor are eager to fight for equality. The index sends a warning to the government to pay attention to the large income disparity,” Xia Xueluan, a sociological professor at Peking University told the Global Times.

No official statistics have been released by the National Bureau of Statistics since 2000. The bureau offered an explanation for this in a monitoring report in 2011, which said that the Gini index couldn’t be calculated as the incomes of urban and rural residents are calculated separately.

A report released by the China Development Research Foundation in July said that the Gini index was 0.45 in 2001 and rose to 0.48 in 2007.

“In some developed countries such as the US, whose Gini index sometimes reaches 0.4, contradictions in income distribution are eased step by step through increasing taxation on the wealthy and improving the welfare system to help the poor,” said Ding Yuanzhu, a professor at the Chinese Academy of Governance, adding that China could learn from them in some way…

[Excerpted by Zuo Shou]

Full article link:

Wealth doesn’t trickle down – it just floods offshore, new research reveals [Guardian]

Posted in IMF - International Monetary Fund, Income gap, Oligarchy, U.K., USA on July 25, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

A far-reaching new study suggests a staggering $21tn in assets has been lost to global tax havens. If taxed, that could have been enough to put parts of Africa back on its feet – and even solve the euro crisis

by Heather Stewart

21 July 2012


The world’s super-rich have taken advantage of lax tax rules to siphon off at least $21 trillion, and possibly as much as $32tn, from their home countries and hide it abroad – a sum larger than the entire American economy.

James Henry, a former chief economist at consultancy McKinsey and an expert on tax havens, has conducted groundbreaking new research for the Tax Justice Network campaign group – sifting through data from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and private sector analysts to construct an alarming picture that shows capital flooding out of countries across the world and disappearing into the cracks in the financial system.

…Despite the professed determination of the G20 group of leading economies to tackle tax secrecy, investors in scores of countries – including the US and the UK – are still able to hide some or all of their assets from the taxman…

…Using the BIS’s measure of "offshore deposits" – cash held outside the depositor’s home country – and scaling it up according to the proportion of their portfolio large investors usually hold in cash, he estimates that between $21tn (£13tn) and $32tn (£20tn) in financial assets has been hidden from the world’s tax authorities.

"These estimates reveal a staggering failure," says John Christensen of the Tax Justice Network. "Inequality is much, much worse than official statistics show, but politicians are still relying on trickle-down to transfer wealth to poorer people.

"This new data shows the exact opposite has happened: for three decades extraordinary wealth has been cascading into the offshore accounts of a tiny number of super-rich."

In total, 10 million individuals around the world hold assets offshore, according to Henry’s analysis; but almost half of the minimum estimate of $21tn – $9.8tn – is owned by just 92,000 people. And that does not include the non-financial assets – art, yachts, mansions in Kensington – that many of the world’s movers and shakers like to use as homes for their immense riches…

Full article link here

New plan to reduce income inequality in China [People’s Daily]

Posted in China, Economy, Income gap on June 8, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

by Lan Lan

May 23, 2012

A new income-distribution framework is set for approval to redress the growing gap between rich and poor, government officials said.

The framework comes at a time when the most affluent 10 percent of the population make 23 times more than the poorest 10 percent.

In 1988 it was seven times.

The framework, eight years in the making, has been tabled for approval by the State Council and is likely to be introduced in the second half of this year.

“If low-income families cannot afford a decent standard of living, rich families will not enjoy any sense of security. That is a problem for the world, not just China,” Yang Yiyong, director of the Social Development Research Institute under the National Development and Reform Commission, said in an interview with China Daily.

Yang has been closely involved in the framework’s planning. Its overarching guideline, he said, is “for the government to give up a little tax revenue, for companies to give up a little profit and for rich people to give up a little interest.”

Tax revenue grew from 7.3 trillion yuan ($1.12 trillion) in 2010 to nearly 9 trillion yuan in 2011, a 22.6 percent increase. It greatly outpaced urban income growth, 8.4 percent, and rural income growth, 11.4 percent.

Per capita income in China has just exceeded $4,000.

As part of income-distribution reform, government agencies, at both central and local levels, will be urged to pass legislation to cut taxes and regulate executive pay in high-profit monopoly industries and private companies, Yang said.

The framework will see an enlarged middle-income group and high earners will pay more in tax.

It is time for common prosperity, Yang declared, although one government plan is not going to provide all the answers to the thorny issue of income distribution in a society of 1.3 billion people.

This is not just about individual tastes or lifestyle, economists point out. It reflects a yawning gap between rich and poor that is hindering the world’s second-largest economy from making further progress and perhaps eroding its very social fabric, Yang said…

Full article link:

The struggle in China: Capitalist crisis versus planning [Workers World]

Posted in Capitalism crisis early 21st century, China, Corruption, CPC, Deng Xiaoping, Economy, Hong Kong, Income gap, Marx, Reform and opening up, Social Security system, south Korea, Taiwan, Transportation, Universal Health Care on March 30, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手

By Fred Goldstein
Published Mar 27, 2012 11:42 PM

The following is Part 2 of a series on the leadership struggle in China.

As contradictions mount in the global capitalist economy, they are reflected in China. The factional struggle in the Chinese leadership can only be understood as a struggle over which way to go forward and how to contain and resolve the mounting economic and social contradictions arising out of capitalist development.

The Chinese economy has been growing on a dual basis. First, it is based on centrally planned guidance designed to develop the productive forces and the material foundations for a society encompassing 1.3 billion people. However, since the victory of Deng Xiaoping and the “capitalist road” faction in 1978, planning has been increasingly based on the central government fostering and attempting to manage capitalism and the capitalist market as the means for national development.

The central government, through control of interest rates, credit, taxation and vast state-owned enterprises, both guides the economy toward broad economic and social goals and fosters capitalist development. The latter means class exploitation, inequality and corruption. The present political struggle is over which side of this contradiction to strengthen.

This complex subject will be discussed at length in subsequent articles. But suffice it to say that the so-called “reform” groupings in China — with the enthusiastic support of world imperialism and global finance capital — want to move away from state intervention, planning and central guidance and go further toward turning the fate of China over to the capitalist market, both internally and externally.

In our last article we covered the fact that Bo Xilai was summarily ousted from his post as Chinese Communist Party Secretary of Chongqing. This was a blow against the growing forces in the CCP and throughout China who want to combine the use of the capitalist market with social and economic planning and state intervention in order to deal with growing inequality and who emphasize the needs of the masses. In Bo’s case, this economic orientation was combined with a popular attempt to revive Maoist culture and socialist values.

In China today, the concept of planned guidance of the broad direction of the economy and its various sectors is a drastic modification from the direct economic planning initiated after the triumph of the great Chinese Revolution in 1949. At the same time, it is an attempt to retain the planning principle as the fundamental framework guiding the overall development of the Chinese economy.

Consider just some of the goals and objectives outlined by the 12th Five Year Plan for 2011-2015, and the antagonism between planning and the anarchy of the capitalist market becomes utterly transparent. This plan was developed beginning in October 2010 and was approved by the National People’s Congress in March 2011.

The government is planning to devote 4 trillion renminbi ($158.7 billion) to the development of seven Strategic Emerging Industries: biotechnology, new energy, high-end manufacturing equipment, energy conservation and environmental protection, clean-energy vehicles and next-generation internet technology. (APCO worldwide, Dec. 10, 2010)

An article in the March 4, 2011, New York Times detailed the plan’s goals, including:

* A 19.1 percent cut in the amount of energy used per unit of economic growth and a rapid expansion of the service economy.

* Building a national nanotechnology research center, 50 engineering centers, 32 national engineering laboratories and 56 other labs focusing on technologies like digital television and high-speed internet.

* Laying 621,000 miles of new fiber-optic cable and adding 35 million new broadband ports for a total of 223 million.

* A cap on total energy use, especially limiting the burning of coal.

* The development of well-equipped statistical and monitoring systems to gauge greenhouse gas emissions.

* Accelerated construction of sewage treatment plants, the retrofitting of coal-fired power plants with pollution controls, and the continuation of a pilot project to develop low-carbon cities.

In the previous period the state had opened 3,100 miles of new railroads and 74,600 miles of highways, completed 230,000 sports and fitness projects for rural residents, and built or renovated 891 hospitals and 1,228 health clinics.

In the realm of social welfare, the broad goals are to increase consumption from 35 percent of the gross domestic product to between 50 percent and 55 percent by increasing minimum wages, health care services and social welfare payments of various kinds.

Of course, it goes without saying that under a genuinely socialist government, workers would have their fundamental economic rights guaranteed as political rights. But those rights were largely overturned by the reforms that developed in China after 1978. Instead, in the environment of the capitalist market — with its mountains of corruption of government and party officials — the welfare of the workers and peasants has to be built up slowly and painfully through an uphill battle, which happens only through the intervention of the state. (More on this in future articles.)

Whether or not the government achieves the precise goals set out is not the issue. The point is that such sweeping social and economic goals could not possibly be handed over to profit-driven capitalists and the anarchy of the commodity market. The bosses would seek the highest rate of profit. They would never voluntarily raise wages, improve working conditions, build hospitals, clinics, rural fitness centers or anything that did not bring a profit.

– China’s response to 2008-09 world capitalist crisis –

To grasp the seriousness of the proposals to further limit planning and intervention by the state, it is only necessary to consider what happened during the world capitalist financial and economic crisis of 2008 and 2009, when the global crisis of capitalist overproduction and the financial collapse invaded China.

More than 20 million workers lost their jobs, mainly in manufacturing and predominantly in coastal provinces such as Guangdong, where special economic zones had been set up so imperialist corporations, companies from Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea, and other exploiters could take advantage of low-wage migrant labor flooding in from the rural interior.

During this period production of world capitalism dropped more than it had in 70 years. Tens of millions of workers worldwide were thrown onto unemployment lines. Most of them are still there. Bankruptcy followed bankruptcy, and the capitalist system has still not recovered.

What happened in China? When the crisis hit, China’s central planners went into motion. Plans drafted as far back as 2003 to go into effect in future years were pushed forward and implemented.

Nicholas Lardy, a bourgeois China expert from the prestigious Peterson Institute for International Economics, describes how consumption in China actually grew during the crisis of 2008-09, wages went up, and the government created enough jobs to compensate for the layoffs caused by the global crisis:

“In a year in which GDP expansion [in China] was the slowest in almost a decade, how could consumption growth in 2009 have been so strong in relative terms? How could this happen at a time when employment in export-oriented industries was collapsing, with a survey conducted by the Ministry of Agriculture reporting the loss of 20 million jobs in export manufacturing centers along the southeast coast, notably in Guangdong Province? The relatively strong growth of consumption in 2009 is explained by several factors. First, the boom in investment, particularly in construction activities, appears to have generated additional employment sufficient to offset a very large portion of the job losses in the export sector. For the year as a whole the Chinese economy created 11.02 million jobs in urban areas, very nearly matching the 11.13 million urban jobs created in 2008.

“Second, while the growth of employment slowed slightly, wages continued to rise. In nominal terms wages in the formal sector rose 12 percent, a few percentage points below the average of the previous five years (National Bureau of Statistics of China 2010f, 131). In real terms the increase was almost 13 percent. Third, the government continued its programs of increasing payments to those drawing pensions and raising transfer payments to China’s lowest-income residents. Monthly pension payments for enterprise retirees increased by RMB120, or 10 percent, in January 2009, substantially more than the 5.9 percent increase in consumer prices in 2008. This raised the total payments to retirees by about RMB75 billion. The Ministry of Civil Affairs raised transfer payments to about 70 million of China’s lowest-income citizens by a third, for an increase of RMB20 billion in 2009 (Ministry of Civil Affairs 2010).” (“Sustaining China’s Economic Growth after the Global Financial Crisis,” Kindle Locations 664-666, Peterson Institute for International Economics)

The Ministry of Railroads introduced eight specific plans, to be completed in 2020, to be implemented in the crisis. The World Bank called it “perhaps the biggest single planned program of passenger rail investment there has ever been in one country.” In addition, ultra-high-voltage grid projects were undertaken, among other advances.

The lesson is that while the anarchy of production of world capitalism invaded China, the rational and meticulously developed plans drawn up for social use overcame the anarchy of the capitalist market. This not only protected the masses from a protracted, massive unemployment crisis, but it actually continued the process of raising the standard of living during a time when hundreds of millions of workers throughout the entire capitalist world were left helpless and traumatized by the crisis of capitalist overproduction.

In Marxist terms the principle of planning, established by the Chinese socialist revolution of 1949 — even though it has been watered down to the practice of “guidance” — overcame what Marx called the law of labor value, the very law that governs the operation of capitalism itself. The Chinese leaders were compelled, and had the capability, to use rational planning based on satisfying human need to overcome the disaster brought about by their own policy of relying on the world capitalist market.

To be continued.

Goldstein is the author of “Low-Wage Capitalism” (2008) and “Capitalism at a Dead End” (2012) published by World View Forum. Both books as well as his articles and speeches can be found at
Articles copyright 1995-2012 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

Article link:

2012 highlights acute ideological struggle in China’s Communist leadership [Voice of Russia / Strategic Culture Foundation]

Posted in China, Corruption, CPC, CPC Central Committee (CPCCC), Income gap, Premier Wen Jiabao on March 30, 2012 by Zuo Shou / 左手


China needs political transformation…China’s Prime Minister Wen Jiabao said in a statement that the world press has described as sensational.

Wen Jiabao made his statement during a press conference following the Chinese Parliament session on March 14th…

..[he] said in his address that the growing market economy gave rise to some fresh problems, such as the unfair distribution of benefits, corruption and moral degradation.

The mass media interest in Wen Jiabao’s address was also stirred by the fact that he is due to step down as a party and government leader following the Chinese Communist Party congress in autumn 2012…

…Some news media in the West have linked Wen Jiabao’s statements to the apprehensions for a flare-up of China’s Jasmine Revolution, similar to those in North Africa and the Middle East. But the conclusion, as well as the suggestion that the West has brought pressure to bear on China, are hardly relevant, says the Head of the Centre for Oriental Studies at the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Diplomatic Academy, Andrei Volodin, and elaborates.

“China is a big country that has never tried to follow in the West’s footsteps; it lived as it saw fit and cared about its own interests, Andrei Volodin says. China is currently transferring from one paradigm of political development to another. The transfer will prove gradual and will give rise to some minor, but consistent changes. The Chinese will, of course, take account of the experience of the so-called Arab Spring, or Arab Revolutions. But this kind of experience can only serve to critically reconsider the current Chinese experience.”

Meanwhile, some conclusions have already been made from the Chinese Premier’s address. The Secretary of the Party Committee of China’s major city Congqing, Bo Xilai, was sacked on Thursday, March 15th. He is known as a leader of the Communist Party’s conservative [sic] wing. The Chinese Conservatives see excessive liberalization as destructive to the nation. Left-wing ideology is still in demand amid the growing social disproportions. This may certainly affect the handover of power to the fifth-generation leaders, Deputy Director of the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Far Eastern Studies, Professor Sergei Luzianin says, and elaborates.

“A large group of new left-wingers has emerged from China’s party elite, and from the ruling class, in general, Sergei Luzianin says, a group that feels that the current degree of bourgeois liberalism threatens the nation. The new left-wingers call attention to mass-scale social protests, especially those that have to do with land possession. They claim that the liberal policy is pernicious and has run its course. When commenting on the union of capitalism and socialism, they tend to lay emphasis on socialism.”

Professor Luzianin believes that the resignation of Bo Xilai is the first, but by no means the last one in the ongoing standoff between the ideologists of two different ways of China’s development. The acute political season will be obviously geared by preparations for the 18th Congress of the Chinese Communist Party. The Congress will give rise to the process of changing political leadership. The Congress agenda will feature a discussion of the way that the fifth generation of leader will decide on as the best one for China to follow.

Edited by Zuo Shou; article’s original title: “China: is change inevitable?”

Full article link: