Lam's claim: 社會主義的確能夠維繫社會公平
Does he mean equal chances of being politically oppressed, equal chances of being starved to death (remember the great leap forward)...? What kind of equality he is talking about here?
No kidding, I am not an expert of Chinese politics, but read this short introduction to communism if you want to know the horrors of implementing socialist "heaven on earth".
Take China's rural socialist experiment as an example. The use of so called production team as a unit of production with pay unrelated to effort (instead, team members are assigned workpoints according to some arbitrary "equitable" criteria) turns out to be a big policy disaster and results in sharp fall in arigultural output.
Who suffers in the end, THE MASSES, not the POLITICAL ELITES on top. Now is that FAIR?
What about corruption, time wasted spending in line to get daily necessities(and mind you only ordinary folks, that means people like YOU AND ME, again not the POLITICAL ELITES are the ones who have to line up for stuff)....Is that fair Mr Lam?
2 comments:
其實林行止先生所言，有點語意不清。社會公平是指平均分配還是其他，沒有言明(其實公平一詞有被濫用之勢，就像公平競爭不知所指何物)。
社會主義在林文中也不知實指何種制度，如何能與「向錢看」並行不悖，又中央計劃與價格誰主分配。
First of all, I have to agree that Mr. Lam's claim of "社會主義的確能夠維繫社會公平" might have gone a bit too far and too "matter of fact" (the words "的確" did it for me).
Now I doubt, although I have no way of knowing, Mr. Lam was thinking of swinging all the way to "communism" (your "straw man"? (smile)). I suspect he might have wanted a more "balanced approach" ----- "一套在「向錢看」與社會公平間平衡發展的政策". May be in Mr. Lam's old age, he wants his cake and eat it too. (smile)
Now, I agree that the masses are the one that will end up suffering the most at the end. But political elite from around the world (the likes of George W. Bush, Robert Mugabe, and others) don't usually suffer much from of the harm they created! In fact, some say they and their friends may have benefited from the mess they created.
I want to talk about Canada's universal health care system (the socialist side of being Canadian) and some of the system's complexity including its good and bad things but the comment area doesn't have enough room. (smile)
In closing, this quote by McGill prof Henry Mintzberg reflects some of my thinking, “First of all, I am Canadian. The thing I always thought of Canada — it is one country that works remarkably well in practice but doesn’t work at all in theory.” (big smile)
May be 林行止 was aiming for that illusive "country that works remarkably well in practice but doesn’t work at all in theory".
P.S. I've never had the fortune to meet 林行止 but I think it will be quite interesting to chat with him. Mind you, I don't know what would I say ! If he were to show up in Calgary tomorrow, I might ask his thought about the recent resignation of managing editor of WSJ. After all, he and his partners did sell their baby, sort of. (smile)
P.P.S. Interesting comment by 明 re the potential confusions.
Post a Comment