Yoshie wrote:
On 10/13/06, Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In my experience, if this "reform" wasn't won because of pressure from
below, it isn't as good as it looks. If it was simply granted because
of the benevolence of those on top, it can just as eaily be revoked.
It seems to me that there is no reform that isn't won by pressure from
below in one sense or another.
=========================
As I noted earlier on Louis Proyect's list, the context in which these moves
are being made can't be ignored. Apart from concerns about urban and rural
social unrest, the Chinese leadership wants to become less dependent on
export-led growth by rapid development of the home market, which requires
stimulating domestic demand. Strengthening the unions is an integral part of
the process of improving wages and benefits, beginning with the largest,
most profitable, and more politically vulnerable foreign firms. Since the
state has been and will continue withdrawing from the economy, transferring
these responsibilities to the burgeoning private sector has become
essential.
The Chinese measures are not the result of the "socialist" political
character of the regime, as some might suppose. Capitalist states have for
some time recognized the role unions can play in boosting mass purchasing
power. The most notable example was New Deal passage of the depression-era
Wagner Act which gave workers a legal umbrella under which to organize and
raise living standards which aided the recovery. A ubiquitous poster
circulated by the unions famously proclaimed: "The President wants you to
join the union!". The FDR adminstration didn't object.
