Comments on: India’s significance to APEC http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/11/10/indias-significance-to-apec/ Economics, Politics and Public Policy in East Asia and the Pacific Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:19:36 +1100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Suresh Jacob http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/11/10/indias-significance-to-apec/comment-page-1/#comment-76690 Suresh Jacob Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:48:07 +0000 http://www.eastasiaforum.org/?p=7795#comment-76690 India is unlikely to push for itself to join APEC which is abody that had its genesis in China but found expression in the labour party of Australia under Hawke and Keating. China's 'progress' is the result of an extrfeme form of Thatcherism. Thatcher found allies in extreme Arab and African resource rich countries that defied economic fundamentsl through their Ayn Rand forms of capitalism. Slavery and forced cheap labour being two of the critical components of succh forms of capitalism. When China introduced the cultural revolution it dispensed with up to 30 million dissidents, recalcitrants and reactionaries. The Saudis and Apartheid South Africa applied similar principles and made an economic success of their regimes. India on the other hand has a need to balance the benefits of economic gains with its inherent desire for intellectual and personal advances of its diverse population through debate, liberalism and the rights to disagree. China does not. And neither do many of its Sinophile neighbours who maintain totalitarian ruthless dictatorships under the thin veneer of ' Asian democracy' and 'Asian values' to enforce harsh labour conditions on its masses so that their balance sheets look good. It is a shame that the US and Australia have now lost the moral high ground and leadership role in the developing world where once the poor people of Asia's sweat shops saw hope and an example to emulate. Suresh India is unlikely to push for itself to join APEC which is abody that had its genesis in China but found expression in the labour party of Australia under Hawke and Keating.

China’s ‘progress’ is the result of an extrfeme form of Thatcherism. Thatcher found allies in extreme Arab and African resource rich countries that defied economic fundamentsl through their Ayn Rand forms of capitalism. Slavery and forced cheap labour being two of the critical components of succh forms of capitalism.

When China introduced the cultural revolution it dispensed with up to 30 million dissidents, recalcitrants and reactionaries. The Saudis and Apartheid South Africa applied similar principles and made an economic success of their regimes.

India on the other hand has a need to balance the benefits of economic gains with its inherent desire for intellectual and personal advances of its diverse population through debate, liberalism and the rights to disagree. China does not. And neither do many of its Sinophile neighbours who maintain totalitarian ruthless dictatorships under the thin veneer of ‘ Asian democracy’ and ‘Asian values’ to enforce harsh labour conditions on its masses so that their balance sheets look good.

It is a shame that the US and Australia have now lost the moral high ground and leadership role in the developing world where once the poor people of Asia’s sweat shops saw hope and an example to emulate.

Suresh

]]>