Thoughts on Murphree’s lecture “Ghosts of Political Economics Past: China’s international innovation system

Just got out of the talk by Professor Murphree, and I got to say it was enlightening to say the least when discussing the reasoning behind the economic and social structure in China.

He began the discussion by outlying the nature of China’s ultramodern versus ultra traditional systems that can be literally viewed in many of the cities within the state. Chinese economics are locally based which tends to create problems such as duplication of investment and short terminism.

It’s intriguing, because China’s past is filled with innovation and technology (such as gun powder, printing, methods of telling time via the stars and other celestial bodies, to name a few), but the question rises why China didn’t surpass the west in modern science and technology? There are several theories outlined, including Confucianism, Imperial Government, Chinese language (as a barrier), Geography, and most intriguing Peace Theory which claims that because China lived in relative peace until the 19th century, there was little incentive to innovate or produce technology on a massive scale, however Europe since the medieval ages has been consistently under existential threats of various kinds pushing it to modernize at a more rapid pace, eventually overtaking and surpassing the Chinese. Starting in the 19th century there was numerous pushes towards Chinese modernization, initially beginning with ideas that called for upheaval of western influence, maintaining Chinese traditions while utilizing the knowledge and technologies produced by the Western powers. These didn’t work so well, and eventually a clash between two western systems of government emerged, nationalism vs. communism. As we al know communism eventually emerged the victor, and proceeded to remake the identity of the Chinese as a people and a state.

Socialist science and technology (the soviet system) took hold in the 1950-1966, which initiated a comprehensive economic planning, reorganization of universities where education was the only thing allowed, not innovation or the aquiring of new knowledge. Instead, the Chinese Academy of Sciences was developed and controlled by the government. This made it very efficient for the Chinese to develop one thing at a time, (such as nuclear weapons), but caused them to spend literally all of their readiness and procurement budget in producing these short term goals.  In 1966, Mao initiated the cultural revolution, which threw science, knowledge and growth of any kind into an all new low. Scientists were the lowest class of society, students executed professors, universities were closed for a decade. It was complete shit.

Then thank goodness, the Reform era came along under Xiping, which refunded the CAS, brought the scientists and engineers up to the working class which allowed them to work and innovate freely, Reintigration of R and D into universities were established. Foreign collaboration occurred, and a more open market was allowed. This is still tricky though for the Chinese government however in regards to who should control the economy. Should it be the state, or the market? Every now and again it sways one way or the other, the party still controls the government, so whatever the party morphs into in the next decade or so will be very influential in what the Chinese economic system will lol like. The new era (today) is characterized by widespread industrial parked, massive R and D, being second only to the United States, Technology standards are changing and industrial reforms are occurring (although still very central and state owned). Attempts to establish a taxation system that awards innovation of the companies in China.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *