Hi Michael
I was thinking chiefly of the millions relocated in the 5 rivers project
a few years ago and now the new hydro-electric project creating a
similar upheaval. There were many considerations of cultural habits to
consider for the peasant way of life which I'm sure with education would
have been corrected but I'm still not convinced that a rural way of life
is worse than an urban one. Perhaps, as here, the farmers are not paid
what they should be for the food everyone else receives from their hard
work. Instead the middle men are most likely to receive the higher
returns for the distribution and the re-sale of the farm products. Which
may be just a continuation of the 'rape the environment' attitude for
better profits for those higher up the ladder of distribution.
Darryl
On 1/7/2011 11:28 AM, michael gurstein wrote:
Darryl,
In China there is forcible removal for real estate speculation
purposes but not so far as I know to move folks into the city... the
policy emphasis has been rather to control migration to keep it from
becoming overwhelming rather than specifically to stimulate it, I
believe... From a services etc. perspective urban life in China is
immeasurably (and measurably for example in terms of health and life
span outcomes) better than rural life...
Your comments though are quite correct with respect to both India and
Bangladesh where integration of rural migrants into any sort of decent
life has been extremely limited and the issue of materialism in China
diverting young people from their (Confucian) familial obligations is
apparently a concern--although perhaps more among the still largely
gerontocracy that rules China than among their younger cohorts.
My feeling is that these measures in China are more on the order of
attempts to direct social values (with the collapse of the ideological
role of the Communist Party they have few other tools other than the
media...) to forego a future crisis rather than to respond to an
immediate one.
M
-----Original Message-----
*From:* [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *D and N
*Sent:* Friday, January 07, 2011 10:35 AM
*To:* RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION
*Subject:* Re: [Futurework] China law to make children visit parents
It would appear that this is another outcome of forcibly removing
'peasants' from centuries old family farm plots to the city for
"better lives" working in factories. It is so good to have
consumer goods to block our eyes and ears to the needs of family
and the elderly in particular.
Darryl
On 1/7/2011 6:34 AM, Ray Harrell wrote:
The USA went through this issue in my parent's generation.
After the depression the families broke up to move to the corners
of the nation to work. People like my parents, basically put
the money aside for them to not have to depend upon the children
financially. What that did was to free the children to go to
work in situations like the Arts which are very fragile
economically and which the nation doesn't support in the private
market. But of course the Artists are now like Chinese parents
with little capital, no retirement, an iffy medical situation and
a predatory congress that wants to cut elderly benefits "for the
children's sake." Meanwhile the GOP and the Evangelicals also
have no discipline when it comes to birth rate. They are
against birth control and abortion but have no answer when it
comes to how these people will live or support their immense
families with a good education or them in their old age. This
is the ticking time bomb that the tea party and the GOP are
ignoring and that the Democrats are too cowardly to address.
Anyway, this is the Chinese Government's answer. At the end of
the article are comments from around the world to the story.
REH
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of
*Keith Hudson
*Sent:* Friday, January 07, 2011 4:29 AM
*To:* RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
*Subject:* Re: [Futurework] China law to make children visit parents
At 13:48 06/01/2011 -0800, Mike Gurstein wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12130140
But not only to visit parents but to care for them mentally and
physically we learn!
Now that China is copying its way, technologically, into Western
consumerism, it is also discovering our fault lines -- including
governmental inadequacy (and ineptitude) in coping with welfare
for the old and the needy. The Confucian duty of caring for
one's parents was fine with multi-generational families on their
own plots in older times, and when 95% of the population hardly
stirred more than 5 miles from their places of birth.
It is rather reminiscent of Tudor England when the same
phenomenon was occurring -- when young adults started forsaking
their parents in the countryside and migrated into the new
townships even if they couldn't find work there. In those days,
by a decree of 1536, their ears were cut off. (More exactly, one
ear was cut off. If they remained without a job or didn't return
to their parents, the other ear was cut off. If they still
persisted, they were executed.) It was a short-lived policy,
however, and the butchery disappeared within a generation.
So, I suspect, will China's neoConfucian proposal.
Keith
Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/
<http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2010/12/>2011/01/
<http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2010/12/>
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
