[Thunderhawk]

Is it really that different? China's recent development and industrialization is done with existing and proven technology. The areas where they are amoungst the world leaders are areas where human labour is not applicable or where such quick work by humans would be very expensive.

[Cookie Monster]

The areas where they arearen't amoungst the world leaders are areas where human labour is not applicable or where such quick work by humans would be very expensive.

I presume you meant this.

Well I think that the idea of China as just a huge market and cheap labour is not fitting. China has a good education system with lots of student graduating in science and technology. For example, I had heard figures about the annual number of engineering students graduating in China which is dazzling. China also spends a lot into R&D. I think they are in a transition period leaving behind the times that they only copied and applied existing technology.

[Thunderhawk]

Their high end rail and train development is amoungst the best in the world - not that they have much of the high end in place. They are pouring money into coal liquifaction. They have a growing and impressive IT sector. All of these are fields were they are amoungst the world leaders and where cheap labour is generally inapplicable. This is also the only place where I can see innovation. Their industrialization was not innovative - they used a method and concepts many others had.

[Cookie Monster]

Their industrialization was not innovative - they used a method and concepts many others had.

Well it makes sense that their industrialisation is not innovative. Why invent the wheel twice. They first need to catch up and lay the foundations for R&D (institutions, personnel, financing, facilities, equipment, materials, attracting expertise, etc) before they can seriously innovate in technology.

[starman2003]

They had too much slave labour at their disposal. Technological innovation only tends to happen if labour power is expensive or if people are just plain lazy.

I don't know if that had much to do with it. Down to about the 20th century or so, labor was pretty cheap. There wasn't much difference between laborers/serfs/peasants and slaves; even out and out slavery persisted in the West until about the mid 19th century. Yet the West steadily progressed for a millennium.

[Potemkin]

I don't know if that had much to do with it. Down to about the 20th century or so, labor was pretty cheap. There wasn't much difference between laborers/serfs/peasants and slaves; even out and out slavery persisted in the West until about the mid 19th century. Yet the West steadily progressed for a millennium.

That's a good point. It should also be pointed out (which I failed to do) that the capitalist mode of production imposes ferocious competition upon the individual capitalists, at least in its early phase, and this leads to an increased pace of technological innovation as the individual capitalists seek an edge over their competitors.

[starman2003]

You know, there was already a fair amount of technical/economic advance in the west prior to modern capitalist competition. There was the medieval idea of the "just price." Usury was also discouraged but the west still advanced at least relative to the ancients.

[Potemkin]

You know, there was already a fair amount of technical/economic advance in the west prior to modern capitalist competition. There was the medieval idea of the "just price." Usury was also discouraged but the west still advanced at least relative to the ancients.

It advanced, but at a snail's pace, to use Bukharin's phrase. The West only began to equal let alone surpass the achievements of the ancient world once the mode of production had become capitalist. Capitalism can be regarded as a machine for expanding the forces of production - brutal, exploitative and socially and morally disruptive, but amazingly efficient at forcing the economic and political development of society, as Marx pointed out. Why else do you think the Chinese Communists are making use of this machine?

[starman2003]

The West only began to equal let alone surpasss the achievements of the ancient world once the mode of production had become capitalist.

Depends on what is meant by achievements. By the eleventh or 12th century, the West had already surpassed the ancients in some aspects of sailing and farming; it probably already made much more extensive use of wind and water power. By the 13th century living standards were said to have surpassed those of the best days of the Roman Empire.

[Potemkin]

But it all went tits up in the 14th century.

[starman2003]

The black death and hundred years war didn't stop progress. IIRC right after the plague "europe went insane" with new fashions or what not. And ships were further improved late in the middle ages, paving the way for the age of exploration.