In the global climate of economic crisis, from Japan to the US, from Greece to the whole of the EU region, economic growth is something people are longing for, and so is political stability. As the EU countries are stressing out about the possible spread of the "Greek Spring," the collapse of the EU even seems possible. In the meantime, China has been moving steadily towards further economic success. It can be expected it is just a matter of time until the "China model" will be closely examined in the international political sphere.
However, there is a fair amount of debate on this in China itself. Those who are finicky about the phrase "China model" worry that the static connotation of the word "model" will give the impression that the Chinese way is something rigid and stagnant, and this fixed system of operation is something inorganic and exportable, which is far from the truth.
However, as I see it, the use of "model" or "way" does not make much difference. The word "model" is just a common usage in economics. It is a crystallization of something systematic, not necessarily a static entity.
Those who are against the content of the China model itself are usually great admirers of the West. They see anything different to the way the West takes as bad and as a sign that modernization is not in full effect. They question how it is possible for a country to be so unique in terms of almost every aspect of governing and public policy. Why not simply adopt the Western approach that has proved effective already in so many countries? But were it not for our tremendous tenacity to explore our own way, the country might already have fallen into pieces.
【1】 【2】 【3】