Chinese Work Ethic

[Idilinaa]

The 1980s is when they started opening up the market but the 70s is when they started burning bridges with the Soviets and building bridges with the west /japan

China did not become a full part of the global economic system until 2001 when they entered the WTO

China after the 2000s was an economic superpower that rivaled America

It was really in the 2000s when China’s economy exploded, with annual GDP growth around 10%. The turning point was opening its markets, joining the WTO, and securing permanent normal trade relations with the U.S. in 2000, which unlocked massive foreign investment.


You can see the major difference starting from that moment:

And then Boom!!

This triggered what became known as the ‘China Shock,’ when Chinese exports flooded Western and especially U.S. markets. It wiped out an estimated 2 million American jobs, devastating U.S. manufacturing. The effects are still felt today , you can see the legacy of it in U.S. politics and even in Trump’s rhetoric:

The ‘China shock’ of trade in the 2000s reverberates in US politics and economics – and warns of the dangers for fossil fuel workers

Large-scale job losses in the US due to trade with China will lead to enduring demographic and political aftershocks without the implementation of policies that promote widespread job growth.

theconversation.com

https://www.cato.org/publications/china-shock#introduction

 

[The truth seeker]

It was really in the 2000s when China’s economy exploded, with annual GDP growth around 10%. The turning point was opening its markets, joining the WTO, and securing permanent normal trade relations with the U.S. in 2000, which unlocked massive foreign investment.


You can see the major difference starting from that moment:
View attachment 371206
View attachment 371207
View attachment 371208

And then Boom!!
View attachment 371209

This triggered what became known as the ‘China Shock,’ when Chinese exports flooded Western and especially U.S. markets. It wiped out an estimated 2 million American jobs, devastating U.S. manufacturing. The effects are still felt today , you can see the legacy of it in U.S. politics and even in Trump’s rhetoric:

The ‘China shock’ of trade in the 2000s reverberates in US politics and economics – and warns of the dangers for fossil fuel workers

Large-scale job losses in the US due to trade with China will lead to enduring demographic and political aftershocks without the implementation of policies that promote widespread job growth.

theconversation.com

https://www.cato.org/publications/china-shock#introduction

Every American election since 1992 expect for 2020 has gone to the anti establishment candidate


Go Watch 1992 presidential debates and the 2016 debates clintion and Trump are giving the same populist energy



American manufacturing and the rust belt was killed by incompetent politicians China is just a scapegoat

No, trade with China did not kill the U.S. economy

A new comprehensive review finds the negative effects of trade with China have been significantly exaggerated.

reason.com

 

[Testo 21]

Child labour

 

[Barkhadle1520]

The 1980s is when they started opening up the market but the 70s is when they started burning bridges with the Soviets and building bridges with the west /japan

China did not become a full part of the global economic system until 2001 when they entered the WTO

China after the 2000s was an economic superpower that rivaled America

Wish Siad wasnt a retard, the west was where the money was

 

[Idilinaa]

Every American election since 1992 expect for 2020 has gone to the anti establishment candidate


Go Watch 1992 presidential debates and the 2016 debates clintion and Trump are giving the same populist energy



American manufacturing and the rust belt was killed by incompetent politicians China is just a scapegoat

No, trade with China did not kill the U.S. economy

A new comprehensive review finds the negative effects of trade with China have been significantly exaggerated.

reason.com

This actually makes a lot of sense. If you think about it, Korea and Japan’s manufacturing didn’t disappear after China’s entry into the WTO. Both became service and consumer based economies, much like the U.S. Japan retained its heavy industries (cars, electronics, machinery), while Korea’s chaebols (Samsung, Hyundai, LG) held on to high-value manufacturing even as services grew to make up the larger share of GDP. Same with US high value manufacturing (aerospace, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals) survived globalization.

What actually happened is the change in global supply chains: low to mid-value manufacturing shifted to China while Korea, Japan, Europe and the U.S. moved up the value chain or leaned further into services.

We’re now seeing the same pattern with China itself moving into high value manufacturing (EVs, semiconductors, advanced batteries), while low to mid value production shifts to India, Vietnam, or Mexico. What China hasn’t yet fully developed, though, is the consumer-spending and services side of the economy.

You have to become a consuming nation to be a rich country, not just producing.

 

[Idilinaa]

Wish Siad wasnt a retard, the west was where the money was

He was actually pretty pragmatic. By the 1980s, his administration had caught onto the same trends as China by strengthening trade ties with the U.S., decontrolling markets, privatizing industries, removing export monopolies, and trying to attract foreign investment. To some extent, it worked: incomes rose, agricultural production improved through market integration and liberalization, and there was a surge of business activity as the private sector expanded. Consumer goods flooded the market.

What really derailed this trajectory was external and regional pressure. Mengistu and Israel lobbied on Ethiopia’s behalf to discourage the U.S. and the West from supporting Somalia. At the same time, Mengistu’s displacement of Ogadenis and Ethiopian Muslims into Somalia forced the Somali government to go into a budget deficit and then to cover the deficit they had to print money. This triggered inflation, and soon afterward Somalia had to borrow and accept IMF/World Bank structural adjustments (came with austerity measures: cutting subsidies, reducing government spending) which continue to devalue the currency and create hardships.

As a result, the initial rise in private sector activity and incomes was undermined by rising inflation and debt pressures. However, many Somalis were able to keep afloat, as investments, higher wages, and private sector growth roughly kept pace with the rising prices up to a certain point.

 

[Barkhadle1520]

He was actually pretty pragmatic. By the 1980s, his administration had caught onto the same trends as China by strengthening trade ties with the U.S., decontrolling markets, privatizing industries, removing export monopolies, and trying to attract foreign investment. To some extent, it worked: incomes rose, agricultural production improved through market integration and liberalization, and there was a surge of business activity as the private sector expanded. Consumer goods flooded the market.

What really derailed this trajectory was external and regional pressure. Mengistu and Israel lobbied on Ethiopia’s behalf to discourage the U.S. and the West from supporting Somalia. At the same time, Mengistu’s displacement of Ogadenis and Ethiopian Muslims into Somalia forced the Somali government to go into a budget deficit and then to cover the deficit they had to print money. This triggered inflation, and soon afterward Somalia had to borrow and accept IMF/World Bank structural adjustments (came with austerity measures: cutting subsidies, reducing government spending) which continue to devalue the currency and create hardships.

As a result, the initial rise in private sector activity and incomes was undermined by rising inflation and debt pressures. However, many Somalis were able to keep afloat, as investments, higher wages, and private sector growth roughly kept pace with the rising prices up to certain point.

It was too late by the 80s, thats the whole point genius

 

[Idilinaa]

It was too late by the 80s, thats the whole point genius

Because America, UK, Israel etc backed Ethiopia who had expansionist ambitions they were forced to align with the Soviet bloc to counter it. So there wasn't much room for western alignment to match it in 1970s.

If we are talking about market liberalization in Somalia, it wasn’t a matter of being too late, it follows a trajectory. In the 1970s, the state first built the foundational institutions and industries under centralized control, brought in the capital in to the economy to kick start things. This pattern is consistent with the developmental path of many now developed countries.

For example, Japan initially relied heavily on state direction and control before gradually transferring industries to the private sector: Spoke about this before

When i see videos like that they border on historical mythology because they are devoid of any economic or structural analysis. It's more for entertainment i guess than being educational.

A better video is this one. Japan was still stuck in the middle ages during the early-to mid 1800s and was pretty feudal. Until the Meji revolution which abolished the medieval feudal structure and tried to modernize it.

Reforms that made Japan a modern state:

- Set up large industrial state enterprises in key sectors.

- Modern educational system , universal education was promoted leading to a more skilled and knowledgeable workforce capable of supporting industrial growth.

- Infrastructure development, roads, ports, electricity, communication lines

- Legal institutional and reforms to support economic and industrial development.

- Selective Westernization: Japan actively studied and adopted Western technologies, administrative practices, and industrial techniques. Japanese officials and scholars were sent abroad to learn from Western countries, and foreign experts were invited to Japan to help establish modern industries and educational systems.

- State capital was initially gained from agriculture, taxation , banking credits and postal saving schemes, becuase they didn't lack substantial capital they mainly used foreign loans to finance infrastructure projects such as ports, railroads and telegraph lines.

- They sold off state owned enterprises to private entrepreneurs after developing them into profitable ventures, which made the government recoup their loans and initial investments and kept the money inside their economy.

 

[Idilinaa]

Somalis have built an entire domestic construction industry from the ground up with complete supply chains producing cement, concrete, tiles, building aggregates, batching, pvc manufacturing etc.

This video goes through every step of that process, even showing their line up of Somali Engineers, Technical team and Laborers and caps it off by showing how building roads is their job
View attachment 371179

Somali construction companies like Buruj and Hadiid etc on the other hand are world class. They win international awards and lead the continent. It's because they are community and private sector driven so they strive hard to ensure quality.

Buruuj: Modernizing Somalia’s Infrastructure - Five Magazine

As usual, the economic infrastructure of any country has a positive or negative effect on the economic growth of that country. Buruj Construction Company which was established in 2009 has focused on taking a leading role in developing the economic infrastructure of Somalia that has been severely...

fivemagazine.so

Buruj even has the leading Technical School in East Africa where they shurn out dozens of Somali technicians every year: And Hadiid Industries has an innovation center.

Even outside Somalia, like in Kenya, Somali engineers are praised for their excellence and use of high quality modern building materials. Whilst they criticize Kikuyu constructions as being subpar in comparison:

Quality work in action:

 

[Barkhadle1520]

Because America, UK, Israel etc backed Ethiopia who had expansionist ambitions they were forced to align with the Soviet bloc to counter it. So there wasn't much room for western alignment to match it in 1970s.

Spare me the kacaan orphan bullshit, always the same thing, everything was going well, everyone was happy, until evil ethiopian backed snm pulled up out of nowhere witih evil plots against the righteous kacaan government

 

[Idilinaa]

Spare me the kacaan orphan bullshit, always the same thing, everything was going well, everyone was happy, until evil ethiopian backed snm pulled up out of nowhere witih evil plots against the righteous kacaan government

Ethiopia didn’t just pull up out of nowhere , they’ve been doing this since before independence, always with Western backing. They’ve consistently tried to destabilize Somalia and block any real political process or nation-building. The precursors to the SNM and all those other groups existed long before Kacaan.

Whatever problems Somalis had with their own government, they could’ve eventually figured it out themselves and maybe even brought about regime change down the line. Just like Kacaan replaced the civilian government, it too would’ve eventually been replaced by another form of government. But external interference completely disrupted that.

Take Korea for example , it’s had only one quiet transfer of power:

1. Syngman Rhee (1948–1960) – Overthrown
2. Yun Bo-seon (1960–1962) – Overthrown
3. Park Chung-hee (1962–1979) – Assassinated
4. Choi Kyu-hah (1979–1980) – Removed by a military coup
5. Chun Doo-hwan (1981–1988) – Sentenced to death after his presidency
6. Roh Tae-woo (1988–1993) – Sentenced to 22 years in prison after his presidency
7. Kim Young-sam (1993–1998) – Imprisoned during the term of President No. 3. As president, secured convictions against two of his predecessors
8. Kim Dae-jung (1998–2003) – Imprisoned under President No. 3 and sentenced to death under President No. 5 (later pardoned). Nobel Peace Prize laureate.
9. Roh Moo-hyun (2003–2008) – Impeached (later overturned by the Constitutional Court). Investigated for corruption after his term and committed suicide.
10. Lee Myung-bak (2008–2013) – Arrested for corruption after his presidency; sentenced to 15 years in prison.
11. Park Geun-hye (2013–2016) – Impeached and arrested for corruption; sentenced to 24 years in prison.
12. Moon Jae-in – Recent president; no imprisonment.
13. Yoon Suk Yeol – Impeachment and imprisonment likely now or successful coup

So basically, Korea had multiple regime changes, coups, and overthrows, but it still kept moving forward:

First Republic of Korea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Second Republic of Korea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Supreme Council for National Reconstruction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Third Republic of Korea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fourth Republic of Korea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It would’ve been the same for Somalia too, if it wasn’t for all the geo-politically motivated interference and economic sabotage.

 

[The truth seeker]

Ethiopia didn’t just pull up out of nowhere , they’ve been doing this since before independence, always with Western backing. They’ve consistently tried to destabilize Somalia and block any real political process or nation-building. The precursors to the SNM and all those other groups existed long before Kacaan.

View attachment 371297


Whatever problems Somalis had with their own government, they could’ve eventually figured it out themselves and maybe even brought about regime change down the line. Just like Kacaan replaced the civilian government, it too would’ve eventually been replaced by another form of government. But external interference completely disrupted that.

Take Korea for example , it’s had only one quiet transfer of power:


So basically, Korea had multiple regime changes, coups, and overthrows, but it still kept moving forward:

First Republic of Korea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Second Republic of Korea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Supreme Council for National Reconstruction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Third Republic of Korea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fourth Republic of Korea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It would’ve been the same for Somalia too, if it wasn’t for all the geo-politically motivated interference and economic sabotage.

Korea like Japan was hand held by America

https://www.asianstudies.org/publications/eaa/archives/the-u-s-south-korea-economic-relationship/

 

[Barkhadle1520]

Korea like Japan was hand held by America

https://www.asianstudies.org/publications/eaa/archives/the-u-s-south-korea-economic-relationship/

Aligning with the West in the 20th century was and still is a guarantee of a country's success in the 21st

 

[Zak12]

Wish Siad wasnt a retard, the west was where the money was

Somalia was actually politically leaning towards the USSR since the 1960s, before Barre came to power. The Soviets were giving the civilian government military funding and other forms of aid.

Its true the west was better but America was giving its full blown support to Ethiopia so Somalia had no choice but to go to the Soviets. Its similar to how Arab states had to go to the USSR for support since America was backing Israel.

 

[DR OSMAN]

Somalia was actually politically leaning towards the USSR since the 1960s, before Barre came to power. The Soviets were giving the civilian government military funding and other forms of aid.

Its true the west was better but America was giving its full blown support to Ethiopia so Somalia had no choice but to go to the Soviets. Its similar to how Arab states had to go to the USSR for support since America was backing Israel.

Somalia was better off under the Soviet alliance, at least we still had a country and weren't refugees worldwide but the geopolitics of the day decided the USSR and it's immediate colonies in Eastern Europe and it's military partners which included us also felt the fall out n 91 just like all soviet allies, partners, or colonies did. We lost our common super daddy and the winning super daddy America well it's not their responsibility to pick up the left over mess which included us.

This American global world order if it's even true which I doubt, but now China is competing for the global super daddy role and displacing Americans from it's role and if we side with America and they lose expect the same treatment from China. It's better adopting a neutral stance and avoid getting into mess that isn't your concern or national problem or priority.

 

[Barkhadle1520]

Somalia was actually politically leaning towards the USSR since the 1960s, before Barre came to power. The Soviets were giving the civilian government military funding and other forms of aid.

Its true the west was better but America was giving its full blown support to Ethiopia so Somalia had no choice but to go to the Soviets. Its similar to how Arab states had to go to the USSR for support since America was backing Israel.

They had ties to both the west and the ussr, they were a gaajo republic with majority nomads and were desperate for funding from anyone to modernize the country, kacaan was a full on marxist and defined himself as the defender of Leninism

 

[Barkhadle1520]

Somalia was better off under the Soviet alliance, at least we still had a country and weren't refugees worldwide but the geopolitics of the day decided the USSR and it's immediate colonies in Eastern Europe and it's military partners which included us also felt the fall out n 91 just like all soviet allies, partners, or colonies did. We lost our common super daddy and the winning super daddy America well it's not their responsibility to pick up the left over mess which included us.

This American global world order if it's even true which I doubt, but now China is competing for the global super daddy role and displacing Americans from it's role and if we side with America and they lose expect the same treatment from China. It's better adopting a neutral stance and avoid getting into mess that isn't your concern or national problem or priority.

The only reason Somalia didnt have a smooth regime change like eastern european countries (romania being the best example) is because we are a tribal people, eastern european commie dictators killed deliberatly they didnt care about ones family, so there were no clan grievances that stepped in the way of state building and everyones anger was directed towards the deposed dictators and not themselves

Communism was a disaster for post USSR collapse African countries, if you want to win you gotta lick the boots of the west for a while like saudi did, it was the only way, kacaan realized too late after a decade of f*ck-ups

 

[Idilinaa]

They had ties to both the west and the ussr, they were a gaajo republic with majority nomads and were desperate for funding from anyone to modernize the country,

The civilian government wasn’t impoverished simply because Somalia had a large pastoralist population. It was because the Italians and British left nothing behind and actively undermined Somalia’s economy.

They built no meaningful infrastructure or useful industry beyond banana plantations. The wealth generated from livestock and agriculture never stayed in Somalia, it was extracted abroad. Colonial authorities consumed all the tax revenues they squeezed out of the population without delivering services. They also blocked Somalia from independent trade or wider economic participation.

We discussed this in detail here:

Italian colonialism set us back

More money was spent on the military than on education. Somalis maintained their economic self-sufficiency, colonial settlers were dependent on imports. Somalis were not allowed to form trade unions Somalis went out of their way to help fellow somalis when they were not restricted...

www.somalispot.com

But here is short summary

Here’s a short video summary on Britain’s even worse record than Italy:

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1959397571257843712/pu/vid/avc1/576x1024/wFE8afBWzmTtNslQ.mp4?tag=12

This is why Somalia turned toward the Soviet Union and China. Both were more willing to offer military assistance and real economic development projects.

The reasoning is straightforward: Britain and the United States had deeper interests in Kenya and Ethiopia, and they consistently backed those countries at Somalia’s expense, regardless of Somali outreach. Somalia reached out to America a lot , even the Kacaan did in the mid 70s and it countinued into the 80s.

kacaan was a full on marxist and defined himself as the defender of Leninism

The Soviets often complained that the Kacaan was only putting on a socialist or Marxist façade. To them, it looked more rhetorical than real.

If you read the government’s own policies, you can see why they thought that

I more or less cover it all here: You can read them, its a mix of diplomatic assessment and government documents:

I have argued many times before that they operated more like mixed socialist-capitalist country economically and Islamically ideologically and the perception from both the American and Soviet's side of things was that Siad Barre was not motivated by ideological application of it but more so saw it as a tool for economic development. Which is correct.

You can see this echoed here:

''we found in Mogadishu signs of capitalism which was preserved during 8 years Russian influence.

''we saw Somali leaders pre-occupied with the Ogaden war and economic development than with a brand of socialism''

''Somalia seems an unlikely convert to communism''

You can also see it in the practical application that they allowed private ownership and livestock remained in private hand and small business was left untouched. While schools, electricity and petroleum were nationalized.

They also encouraged private trade/investment and allowed Somali businesses to operate and promised to safeguard it from nationalization.

The government also built malls with dozens of shops and businesses to boost trade.

So needless to say Siad Barre was a pragmatic man motivated by economic development and not ideological considerations for socialism or marxism.

It's part of the reason why a section of the military like the SDSF turned against him in 1978 and betrayed Somalia after they cut off relations with the Soviet and they protested it. They were more loyal to the soviet and communism than the Somali nation , bunch of traitors.
They also despised the government because of lack of marxist application and ''international capitalism'' loool

Siyaad Barre encouraged free trade and private investment. In 1972 the government built a commercial mall with over 100 shops to bolster free trade in the country

. In 1976 Siyaad Barre stated the following in a speech regarding private investment.

"We have no new nationalizations in view. Our goal was, and it remains, to nationalize the firms of those who exploit the Somali people. But we have never had the intention of attacking private property as such Private property has been nationalized only when it constituted an element of exploitation”.

“No one here, for example, has ever thought about nationalizing agriculture or industry. On the contrary, we encourage private enterprise in that area. In any case, there is no question of nationalizing land, because we have enough arable land for everyone who needs any”.

It was socialist only in so far as it attempted to curtail exploitation and private abuse and was re-distrubutive, restrict wealth accumilation at the top and pro social programs. Otherwise it had many capitalist driven elements that promoted private sector development and tried to create a balance between private sector and public sector regulatory mechanisms.

1970 clarification by the government:

Some more explanation of their philosophy:

Somalia in many ways operated more like a mixed economy. You have to understand that Somalia was in an inferior position, and in order to be more forthcoming with economic/military aid, the Soviets pressured the SRC to make the economy more socialist oriented. This ended after 1977.

People also forget how badly the 1975 drought hit the country. It was a massive setback that derailed the government’s push for self-reliance.

Like I mentioned before with Japan gaining revenue from agriculture which they used to fund development/modernization, Somalia had the same potential. Just to put it into perspective, in 2013 the livestock economy alone generated $8.9 billion.

Because of the Abaartii Dabadheer, the Kacaan had to temporarily step in with price and market controls to ease the hardships and stabilize living standards. Once the drought passed, those controls were lifted.

That’s why it makes sense how Somalia managed to become food self-sufficient in the 1980s. A lot of that came down to policies like rangeland management and environmental protection programs the government had set up and the recovery and steady growth of agriculture and livestock sector.

 

[Barkhadle1520]

The Soviets often complained that the Kacaan was only putting on a socialist or Marxist façade. To them, it looked more rhetorical than real.

View attachment 371701

If you read the government’s own policies, you can see why they thought that
View attachment 371706

Not reading allat but Kacaan couldnt turn the country fully communist because marxism contradicts islam and many aspects of somali culture, he tried doing it overtime with some laws but was met but too much country-wide backclash

 

[Idilinaa]

Not reading allat but Kacaan couldnt turn the country fully communist because marxism contradicts islam and many aspects of somali culture, he tried doing it overtime with some laws but was met but too much country-wide backclash

My take is that they mainly wanted to secure Soviet support. They weren’t really invested in applying communism or Marxism in practice. That’s exactly how it came across to many foreign diplomats who dealt directly with government officials.