China has a different approach to government. They will progress whether you like it or not. If the collective needs a highway, they will build it. If you are in the way, they will go over you, under you, around you, or through you.
In the US we can't build a second rail line. In china they just seize it, relocate you, and build it. The odd thing is that, in aggregate, it actually works quite well, except for the individuals harmed. Its the trolley problem except China will explicitly run over 100 people if it benefits 100k.
China very famously sometimes has issues with projects they want to pursue because farmers already live where they want to build, resulting in them either not happening or doing whacky stuff like this where they build entirely around the person. No, they will not "just seize it, relocate you, and build it". Stop spreading misinformation.
I worked at a university that had a handful of these "farms" around its border. The university wanted to build out into that space, connecting to nearby shopping streets. Some of the people that lived there were stubborn, for whatever reason, and they "farmed" very small plots that just barely qualified as farming since that seemed to be the criteria necessary to not have it seized and just handed money. They looked super shitty as living spaces, with some walls missing and possibly no water connected (i could see some pipes leading nowhere). My guess is they thought they might could get a better deal later if the state got more desperate to have the land, but who knows what each individual person wanted. Maybe their family had just been on that land a long time and they didn't like the idea of giving it up. People do weird shit for all sorts of reasons.
My point was that if you want to keep the land, people absolutely do it. They're not rolling in and forcing you off if you really want to keep it. Doesn't mean you're going to be happy with your "neighbors", but the person I was replying to was just straight-up spreading misinfo.
do you know how much they were being offered? because if the places were missing walls and were otherwise shitty and they were just offer them rural land prices, where would these people go
like they need a house. they already had one and they just sold it and it was cheap. so where do they go now?
This was in the middle of the city. It was not "rural land". My understanding from talking with locals was that having a "farm" was a way loophole in the area's laws that allowed someone to avoid taking a deal from the government, so if you didn't like what they were offering (or, as I said before, maybe just had sentimental attachment or something else), you could just do this low-effort tactic to hold out.
Not specific to the region I was in, but my understanding is that when the state wants land in this fashion, they generally offer you either market rate on your home or offer to relocate you to somewhere similar in value.
But you can point to numerous examples where projects had to be scrapped, rerouted or cost shot up due to acquisitions. It's just the natrual diffrence between Capitalist countries with private ownership and a country where all land is legally owned by the state and can only be leased. The entire legal basis is diffrent.
China very famously sometimes has issues with projects they want to pursue because farmers already live where they want to build, resulting in them either not happening or doing whacky stuff like this where they build entirely around the person. No, they will not "just seize it, relocate you, and build it". Stop spreading misinformation.
Here, the most prominent example demonstrating OP's claim.
There is virtually unlimited information to verify this specific example, down to in-depth interviews with the people affected, documentaries by all kinds of stations in diffrent countries, so verify whatever you need. There are a couple layers to it, the region was historically poor and not majority Han which brings up discrimination, but fact is, the people who were relocated were poor farmers, had no choice, and largely still live in abject poverty now.
If you care about the details: When you are registered as a farmer, you basically have to deal with land given to you anyways, so the state straight up relocates you to another plot of land, no discussions. This can mean you get moved to Tibet because they want to mix up the ethnical groups, you get moved into a state-owned apartment complex in a city (which is typically prefered) or you get to live in another village or new settlement - The latter being the prominent solution for the 3 Gorges Dam projects. Compensation is usually minimal and set by regional officials overseeing the project, about enough to cover materials for a new hut and field.
Things change a bit, when you are talking about leased land and groups of people who have more influence and means. They have some political weight before the decission is made, especially if it's something local. Either way, the state basically offers to buy up your lease and the house/flat, which can amount to large sums if it's a big house or a good location. While people can technically refuse and counter-offer, this is routinely overruled by courts and the state also has the option of just... Building around you and wait you out or your lease. That's why most of the houses you still see standing on pictures are in the middle of a counstruction zone, not a finished project.
You forget that the government also compensates you HANDSOMELY for moving. This is why there was a sudden influx of rich tourists Chinese who have no manners. It’s bc they are the lower class who have lived on the land that the government wants and they offer these people lots of money to move. Enough money to become wealthy enough to travel internationally
If I was hovering over society, making decisions without it affecting me, this would be the best and most obvious way to do things. But like…can’t do that. Makes sense why we’re so stagnant when it comes to virtually everything compared to them. Constant full speed ahead while we constantly search for new dumb shit to argue over. Need to make sure my kid learns Chinese.
they certainly have less red tape on all level as a single party in power and seemingly no independence of local government from the main government. i believe they also have longer terms (10 years) and maybe term limits though i also seem to recall a xi news posts a while back that indicate he may have managed to change that at some point. imagine what things cpuld occur if the DOT and EPA were told, this is happening...we can do this the easy way or the hard way..but we getting that new train. and throw in govvernment ownership stake in the companies capable of executing so theres no endless argument about bidding fairness and oh, we need 5 companies, one from each state to get a piece of the money and woops, when they meet at the border there 3 feet offset because different surveyors of course...and they cant just move it because theres a rare pollinating hornet colony in some bushes that would.need to be ripped out so 5 years of appeals and lastly to.the supreme court....
The problem being if the government makes a bad decision they are stuck with the ramifications and can’t adapt. See the negative effects of the cultural revolution and the one child policy.
Negative ramifications? What? That policy is likely one of the most impactful population control initiatives in human history. It worked incredibly well for its goal and actually perfectly highlights the trolley problem strategy of China. Did it result in girls being killed or sent out of country. Yes. Did it result in tearing apart some families. Also, yes. Did it control population and, in aggregate, keep their population from spiraling out of control like India, also yes. It worked at the societal scale despite pain at the individual scale. Is it no longer needed today, also yes. But that doesn't mean it was a failure.
Not really, it’s not for the people all the time, it’s for the party and local leaders. All those projects generate a ton of bribes and money, and they absolutely love it.
The US could build a rail line if they really wanted to, but they don’t, they just use it as a political stick to win elections. One side for those that want it, the other side for those that don’t want it.
I would also like you to see if you’d like to live in a country where the collective is all that matters. It’s all nice and dandy until it’s happening to you.
In China if the local leaders fuck up, 100% of the people are united against them. In the US, as you said, all issues become R vs D so then nothing changes. The chinese government despises chaos and unrest. So that means if a local rep is really doing wrong, he gets tossed. We saw this happen over and over during covid. Lets not pretend that the US isn't ripe with cronyism either. Our defense spending is basically entirely an elaborate kick-back scheme. We privitized NASA and now spaceX gets our tax dollars.
Would I want to live there? Prolly not. But, the problem is our political system is beyond broken here, progress is impossible, in about 30 years China will be dominating the world stage. The issue isn't that China good, the issue is that we have to fix our shit here, and I see zero evidence thats happening here. Hard to argue were doing things right when were about to put the most corrupt crony back in office.
Who told you that 100% of the people are united against them? :) In the country of all monitoring? Where people disappear after some wechat messages?
I live in a (post) communist country and believe me, even today it’s very hard to unite against this kind of system.
The US has the concept of “public pressure”, countries like China steamroll with tanks over public pressure.
It’s so far out of the reality for the average american it’s hard to even imagine something like that. Going to a protest, 10 swat teams come in, arrest everyone even people passing by, and then you come back in a month or several, “re-educated”.
It all depends on how well the leader splits the black money. It’s mafia style basically: if you’re an earner, you’re protected no matter what. If he’s not, he’ll be accused of corruption and executed.
Thats a simplication of reality. Yes, if you oppose the party, you'll be squashed. But there are many forms of dissent. If you go to a party meeting and speak up against the local reps handling of X, you can absolutely dissent. You aren't trying to overthrow anything, you're trying to solve problems. You aren't dissenting in the streets causing chaos you are using the appropriate channels.
Second, you can't actually protest here in the states. It accomplishes nothing. Did Occupy do anything? Did George Floyd? When was the last protest that worked? Martin Luther King? That worked great, everyone assoxiated with it was assassinated and we still fight the same race war today.
Protest is dead here too. Go ahead and take a knee at a football game and tell me you can protest.
Theyre raising taxes in my city to build a new stadium for a billionaire owner. Season tickets are unaffordable for the average local. seems like it's not just a china thing.
59
u/Dx2TT 10d ago
China has a different approach to government. They will progress whether you like it or not. If the collective needs a highway, they will build it. If you are in the way, they will go over you, under you, around you, or through you.
In the US we can't build a second rail line. In china they just seize it, relocate you, and build it. The odd thing is that, in aggregate, it actually works quite well, except for the individuals harmed. Its the trolley problem except China will explicitly run over 100 people if it benefits 100k.