对于管制市场经济的中国思想的进化－中国式思维或美国式思维

－符合君子理念的社会资本主义的可能性－

（申请清华大学高级管理人员工商管理硕士（EMBA）专业学位论文）

培 养 单 位 ：经济管理学院申 请 人 ：刘立健指 导 教 师 ：李稻葵 教授

二零一五年十一月

对于管制市场经济的中国思想的进化－中国式思维

或美国式思维刘立健

2014286016

The Evolution Of Chinese Thinking on a

Regulated Market Economy –

China vs. U.S. Thinking

––

The Prospect of “Junzi Socio-Capitalism”

––

Thesis Submitted to

Tsinghua University

in partial fulfillment of the requirement

for the professional degree of

Master of Business Administration

byBenjamin LAU

Thesis Supervisor : Professor David Daokui LI

November 2015

关于学位论文使用授权的说明Statement on the Thesis Use Authorization

本人完全了解清华大学有关保留、使用学位论文的规定，即：清华大学拥有在著作权法规定范围内学位论文的使用权，其中包

括：（1）已获学位的研究生必须按学校规定提交学位论文，学校可以采用影印、缩印或其他复制手段保存研究生上交的学位论文；（2）为教学和科研目的，学校可以将公开的学位论文作为资料在图书馆、资料室等场所供校内师生阅读，或在校园网上供校内师生浏览部分内容。本人保证遵守上述规定。（保密的论文在解密后遵守此规定）I entirely understand Tsinghua policies on reserving and using degree

thesis. That is, the university has the right to reserve the copy of the thesis and allow students to search and borrow it. The university can publicize the whole or part of the thesis content and reserve the thesis by means of filming, microfilming and other copy methods.

(Classified degree thesis must comply with this policy after it is declassified)

作 者 签 名Applicant

导 师 签 名Advisor

I

日期 Date 日期 Date

II

摘 要

摘 要此硕士论文从一个至今仍具争议性的课题切入，针对中国应该采取什么样的

管制型市场经济与中国是否应该跟从美国式市场模式的问题对中国思想将如何发展进行深入探索。

本文的讨论与今天众多讨论中的核心问题相关。另外，本文也将讨论另一个从人类文明的开始就已存在并持续至今的课题：关于人性本质的问题，人性究竟是善良的，或者人性正如诸多著名经济学家和哲学家所说的，是自私、贪婪和被自我利益驱动的。再来，此论文也将讨论关于人类在市场环境中彼此互动的交易方式和政府在其中所应该扮演的角色。

对于这个课题和这些问题的兴趣是启发于笔者在清华－ INSEAD 高级工商管理课程学习时与一些教授的交流，这包括了笔者的论文导师李稻葵教授（李稻葵教授是笔者《国际经济》课程的教授）、笔者的人生经历、个人观察、华尔街的工作经历以及众多关于“中国世纪已到来”的文章与头条新闻。

在 2011 年中国政策辩论会（2011 Munk Debate on China）中，笔者论文导师李稻葵教授与尼尔·弗格森（Naill Ferguson）对抗亨利·基辛格博士

I

摘 要（Dr. Henry Kissinger）与法里德·扎卡里亚（Fareed Zakaria）以“21 世纪是否是个属于中国的世纪”为核心问题进行激烈辩论。紧随着笔者的导师李稻葵教授就此课题在辩论结语中分享的中国发展蓝图，此论文将探讨对于管制型市场经济的中国思维的进化，并加以探索中国是否可能跟从美国式市场模式的问题。 笔者以历史为鉴，尝试对未来进行预测并回答以上的问题。

李教授在 2011 年中国政策辩论会种的总结中，说到：

“美国在世界独霸的成功不是中国的梦想，不是中国的理想，也不是中国能力范围内能够做到的。这不是我们儒家文化中的基因。理解了这些前提，我希望你们能够考虑另一个视角。把过去五百年的西方哲学、西方视角给忘掉。把国际关系看成是胜败者的概念给忘掉。相反的，以传统中国哲学家的视角，以儒家的视角看待问题。儒家提倡一个个人与外界和谐的和谐世界，提倡一个各个国家相互合作解决国际争端的和谐世界。我希望你能用这个视角来理解当今中国经济与社会的变化。”

透过这些指令性的语句，李教授为我的论文指引了方向。II

摘 要

在这个论文中，身为学生的我尊重李老师的教诲（以及我其他诲人不倦的重要老师们的教诲），决定探索且学习更多过去的历史（包括我自己的祖籍以及中国古代历史）、中国哲学的根基与中国思想、中国价值观的来源以及坚持到当代的中国式政治管理模式的来源与其影响因素。虽然这全部课题的覆盖面小于政治辩论当天所提及的课题，但这些课题固然重要。

这些问题的重要性源于显性与隐性的理由，这些问题的本质或许是致癌性的也可能是可治愈的。中国目前的登记人口大概是十四亿而他们的生活状况对中国甚至对世界都有一定的影响。这一点从 2015 年暑期期间的金融市场波动可以看出。随着中国不断繁荣壮大，中国超越美国成为世界最大经济是个“何时”的问题，而不是一个“是否”的问题。

随着美国大选的造势开始拉开帷幕， 有番讨论正在我们所谓的先进世界发生，这个讨论有关约瑟夫·斯蒂格利茨（Joseph Stiglitz）利茨所刻画的 1%的人所有、1%的人治理、1%的人享用的经济、政治、社会情况。套用亚伯拉罕 ·林肯在葛底斯堡演说中为了向美国人民暴政民主将在美国内战中生存的名言，“一个属于人民的政府、一个由人民治理的重负、一个为人民服务的政府，不会在地球上消失。” 斯蒂格利茨（Stiglitz）的评论包含许多当前在美国可以见到的具代表性、

III

摘 要可悲的、有欠理想且被多数人视为不公平、摧毁性、无无效率的社会情况。透过以“人民”替代“1%” 并以省略号结束他的句子，斯蒂格利茨（Stiglitz）提出了发人深省的问题：什么是民主的意思？民主是否已经不再神圣、是否已被削弱是否已被政府？美国的自由市场模式是否公平有效？尽管有了林肯的名言保证，美国的明主的可持续性是否受到了自由市场下的经济失衡的威胁？

这些问题（以及斯蒂格利茨（Stiglitz）的话）可能是中国人民耳熟能详的。中国国父孙中山先生也曾经说过类似的话，孙中山先生“三民主义”的概念涵盖了斯蒂格利茨（Stiglitz）所谓“民有、民治、民享的政府”的想法。三民主义为中华民族主义、民权主义与民生主义。以“1%”的思维方式来考虑这个问题对中国来说也是事关重大的，因为中国人口的 1%就有一百四十万之多，这是一个庞大的数目。但即便如此一个更大的问题是剩余的 99%人口将面临什么样的命运。在中国，99%的人口意味着十三亿八千六百万条生命。

透过中国的视角评估事情，笔者将针对目前中国精英们对于中国未来改革的方向、以及最适合中国的市场模式与市场经济的热烈讨论来分析这些问题。一个特别的精英群体中国新自由主义派推崇自由市场主义（类似于米尔顿 ·弗里德曼、格林斯潘等人），他们相信市场比个人或少数人的群体（包括中国共产党）懂得

IV

摘 要更多以及一个有限的中国政府能够更好的服务于中国社会。

中国的新自由主义提倡的是市场与政治的改革，并倡导新的中国宪法、三权分立、民主、法制、言论自由、组织自由、宗教自由、公开选举、政府问责制以及人权担保。

此论文将分析中国著名的新自由主义学者吴敬琏、周其仁和许小年的生平、作品、思想与论据，并推进一个针对新自由主义的发展模式的反驳点。美国自由市场模式其实是由米尔顿·弗里德曼、芝加哥大学学派、格林斯潘等人推动而非隐形之手推动的，这一论点提供我们一个思辨的机会，设想这个模式能不能够最好的服务于中国社会的因素，并针对美国当前市场（与社会）的现实结果与自由市场主义理念的理想结果进行比较。

笔者透过探索西方社会当今与现代以及历史的问题，质疑这些自由市场主义对社会的贡献。如果仔细观察，我们可以发现几个路标与警示牌，警示我们不要在后毛主席时代、后共产革命时代、后文革时期，追随极端的过于矫正性发展道路。

笔者的结论是虽然这些新自由主义对中国过去 30 年的发展功不可没，但是

V

摘 要他们提倡以自由市场主义解决中国当前问题的放方案可能超越了他们希望看到的中国社会中的再平衡，因为他们从一个极端走向了另一个极端。我们希望看到的是一个走向更加和谐的社会的中庸之道。

放眼中国的古代历史，此文将分享两千五百年前的伟大老师孔子如何在苏格拉底、柏拉图与亚理斯多德之前，为我们提出一些相关的答案。考虑到中国的过去以及他个人倡导的向善的人性，孔子提供了一套长期有效的理论框架。这个理论框架触及到当代经济学家、哲学家、诺贝尔银价以及其他较早的学者（例如约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯（John Maynard Keynes），弗里德曼（Friedman），格林斯潘（ Greenspan ） , 乔治 ·阿克洛夫（ George Akerlof ） 与罗伯特 ·希勒 （ Robert

Shiller））所提倡的的“兽性”中的力量与能量，也包含了这些学者针对如何设计更理想化的市场经济模式、有助于社会进步的经济理论的争辩。

孔子的思想与教诲主张善的（有道德的）政府是社会和谐快乐的必要基础，一个善的（有道德的）政府需要善的（有道德的）人来胜任政府官员的职能。要做一个善的（有道德的）政府官员，个人需要完善自己的教育、人格的个人素养人格的集体素养以便成为一个君子－一个社会可以将重要责任依托于的个人。

此论文也将放眼近代，不仅探讨中国思维在经济理论与市场模型的一些发展，VI

摘 要也探讨人类思维在这些领域的发展。笔者将探索、比较与对比中国人与美国人的价值观与政治，并推测出东西方思维中显著并深广的差异。由于在起源、文化、道德观与价值观的基础差异的不同，两种思维法式的差异难以弥合，美国式的自由市场模型（即便据争辩性地很好地服务于美国人）难以很好地服务与中国人。笔者利用真实案例尝试建立一个立场解释为什么中国可能希望避免跟从美国模式并且解释为何中国可能透过走自己的道路更好地实现自身的发展。

作者也提出了一个新的词汇形容一个符合中国实情的模式：符合君子理念的社会资本主义。直接借鉴古典中国文学与中国著作（包括儒家思想）以及当代经济思想与词汇。君子是在儒家思想中道德地位最高的楷模，而社会主义资本主义是一个当今诸多经济学家用来形容中国寻求社会主义与资本主义的中庸之道的词汇。

笔者倡导的君子是既具励志性也具启发性的。借鉴一个叫做生产可能性边界的经济概念（代表一个曲线上经济意义中最有效率的一点），笔者希望使用“君子”来修饰社会资本主义这个词汇，以便鼓励负责引领中国市场未来发展的领导者设计出一个能够使社会各个群体的生产可能性边界得到扩张的市场模式。

VII

摘 要

关键词：符合君子理念的社会资本主义；儒家思想资本主义；中国经济模式

VIII

Abstract

Abstract

This master’s thesis delves into the ongoing debate as to what form China’s regulated market economy may take, and explores the evolution of Chinese thinking on the subject of whether or not to follow the U.S. free market model.

This primary question relates to but one of several discussions taking place today that are examined within this paper. Another discussion is one that has been ongoing since, well, the early beginnings of man; namely, the question regarding the inherent nature of humanity, whether man is innately good or, as more than one famous economist and philosopher has stated, selfish, greedy and driven by self-interest. An additional discussion revolves around the manner in which mankind deals with one another in the marketplace and what role, if any, government should play.

Interest in this subject and these questions arose from the author’s recent learning experience with a number of faculty of the Tsinghua–INSEAD Executive MBA Programme, including the author’s thesis advisor Professor David Daokui Li who was also the author’s International Economics professor, as well as from the author’s experience, observations and insights from his work experience on and with Wall Street, and from the numerous accounts and headlines suggesting the ‘Chinese Century’ has arrived.

Following a blue print advanced by the author’s thesis advisor as part of his concluding remarks at The 2011 Munk Debate on China (where Professor Li was paired with Niall Ferguson in arguing against Dr. Henry Kissinger and Fareed Zakaria on the question, “Does the 21st Century Belong to China?”), this paper explores the evolution of Chinese thinking on a regulated market economy and asks the question of whether or not China might follow the U.S. free market model? In attempting to peer into the future and address this question, the author looks to the past.

In his summation at The 2011 Munk Debate on China, Professor Li advises that,

“It is not the dream, not the aspiration of China, not the capacity of China, to emulate the success of the United States in the dominance of the world. It is simply not in the genes of our Confucian tradition. That being understood, I urge you to think about a different perspective. Forget

IX

Abstract

about the past five hundred years of Western philosophy, of Western perspective. Forget about looking at international relations in terms of winners and losers. Instead, look through the lens of traditional Chinese philosophers, the Confucians. The Confucians advocated for a harmonious world in which individuals are at peace with the outside world, and with each other, and countries are working with each other to solve international conflicts. I urge you to consider this perspective to understand the ongoing changes in the Chinese economy and society.”

With these words of instruction, Professor Li points the way–

In and with this paper, I, as student, respect the lessons of my teacher (and several other important enduring teachers from time present and past) and set out to explore and learn more of and from the past, my own ancestry, as well as the history of ancient China, the roots of Chinese philosophy and Chinese thinking and, in particular, about the provenance and import of Chinese values and the source of and influence over the Chinese form of political governance that endure to modern day; all of this, in order to address the questions raised by this thesis which, though admittedly narrower than the one posed in the Munk Debate, are important nonetheless.

These questions are important ones for reasons both obvious as well as concealed, potentially metastatic or curative in nature. China’s population currently registers approximately 1.4 billion lives (and counting) and their wellbeing has implications not just for China but also for the rest of the world, as the global financial seizures of this past summer of 2015 clearly demonstrate. As China continues to grow and prosper it is a matter of ‘when’ not ‘if’ China will surpass the U.S. as the largest economy in the world.

With the U.S. elections campaigning process currently under way, there is another discussion taking place in the so-called modernized world revolving around the current economic, political and social situation characterized by Joseph Stiglitz as “Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%...” Echoing potent words from the Gettysburg address in which Abraham Lincoln sought to assure the American people that their democracy would survive the awful costs of the American Civil War, “that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth,” Stiglitz offers commentary about the algebraic, elegiac and less than paradisiac current situation in America seen by many as unjust, destructive and inefficient to society; by replacing “the people” with “the 1%” and leaving off with an ellipses rather than completing the sentence, Stiglitz

X

Abstract

poses some far-reaching questions: over the meaning of democracy? Whether it has been desecrated, diluted, commandeered? Whether the U.S. free market model is a fair and efficient one? Whether America’s democracy, despite Lincoln’s assurances, is at risk of persisting due to economic imbalances brought on by such market model?

These questions (and Stiglitz’ phrasing) should have special resonance with the Chinese people. Sun Yat-sen, the founding father of China, credits the very same words “government of the people, by the people, for the people” as inspiration for ‘The Three Principles of the People’ – Zhōnghuá Mínzú Zhuyi, Mínquán Zhǔyì, and Mínshēng Zhǔyì (or, the Chinese nation or Chinese race, the people’s power, and the people’s welfare/livelihood, respectively). The formulation of this concept of 1% also states the ‘high stakes’ for the Chinese: 1% of China is 14 million, a large number certainly, but leaving as wide open question what may befall the remaining 99% of China’s population. In China, 99% currently translates to 1,386,000,000 lives in the balance.

Evaluating matters through a Chinese lens, the author examines these questions in the context of the debate that is ongoing among China’s elites over the shape and course of future reforms and the most optimal forms of market model and market economy for adoption by the Chinese. One select group of elites, the Chinese neoliberalists, share a free market fundamentalism ideology (akin to Milton Friedman, Alan Greenspan and others) that the market ultimately knows better than any individual or group of individuals (including, in particular, and especially, the Chinese Communist Party), and that the interests of Chinese society would be better served with a Chinese government whose role in society is very limited.

Chinese neoliberals advocate for such market and political reform with their call for, among other things, a new Chinese constitution, a separation of powers, democracy, rule of law, freedom of speech, association and of religion, public elections and accountability of government, and a guarantee of human rights.

This paper examines the lives, works, thinking and arguments of economists Wu Jinglian, Zhou Qiren and Xu Xiaonian – three of today’s most prominent Chinese neoliberals – and advances counterarguments that a template exists for the society these Chinese neoliberalists advocate; That the U.S. free market model, the design of which was very much guided by the not so invisible hand of Milton Friedman, the University of Chicago School of thought, Alan Greenspan and their many adherents, offers an opportunity for study, as a pattern of what elements might and might not ultimately best serve the interests of Chinese society, and against which we can compare and contrast the market (and societal) realities as outcomes against market (and laissez-faire) ideologies.

XI

Abstract

In inquiring as to the fulsomeness and overall beneficence to society of such free market theories, the author explores recent and modern era as well as historical problems in western society therefrom, and posits that, if one looks more closely, guideposts and warning signs are there for those considering China’s adoption of what one might plausibly argue is a relatively extreme over-correctional path for the Chinese post-Mao, post Communist Revolution, post Cultural Revolution.

The author concludes that while these several Chinese neoliberalists have made invaluable contributions to China’s advancement in the past 30 years in their own respective ways, that their shared ideology and leaning towards a laissez-faire free market as China’s answer to its problems might over-shoot the rebalancing they wish for China in continuing movement away from one extreme to yet another, the other, far extreme; hopefully, there exists a ‘middle-way’ towards a more harmonious society.

In looking to the ancient history of the Middle Kingdom (Zhōngguó or China as we call it in English), this paper will share how, over 2,500 years ago, one particularly exceptional and remarkably prescient teacher, more commonly known as Confucius, long before Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, arrived at some answers for all of us. By contemplating China’s past as well as the innate and inherent good nature of humanity from his own vantage point, Confucius offers a set of perennial solutions that translate to modern day and take into account the very forces and energies that modern day economists, philosophers, Nobel laureates and other scholars of more recent vintage (such as John Maynard Keynes, Friedman, Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, George Akerlof and Robert Shiller) have termed ‘Animal Spirits’ and have continued to debate as well as formulate economic theories to account for in order to design a more ideal market economy model and thus advance society.

What Confucius thought and taught is that a good (virtuous) government is the necessary basis for a harmonious and happy society, and that a good (virtuous) government requires good (virtuous) persons to serve as government’s officials. In order to be a good (virtuous) government official, an individual needs to improve oneself through education and self- as well as shared- cultivation of one’s character in order to develop herself or himself into an exemplary or superior person (a ‘Junzi’) – a person whom society can entrust and rely upon.

This paper will also, by looking to the more recent era, explore some of the development of not just Chinese thinking but mankind’s thinking on the subject of economic theories and market models. The author will explore, compare and contrast the values and politics of the Chinese people, on the one hand, and the American people,

XII

Abstract

on the other, and suggests that there is too stark, deep and wide a divergence between Eastern and Western thinking, much of which is unbridgeable due to underlying fundamental differences in origin, culture, virtues and values, such that a free market model adopted by the U.S. (even if it were to serve the U.S. well; which allows for arguments both ways) would likely not best serve the Chinese. The author attempts to build a case, primarily using real life examples, why China might wish to avoid ‘following’ the U.S. model and why it might be better off in continuing development of her economy upon China’s own terms.

The author also offers his own suggestion by formulating a new phrase to describe the model China might be better served by: Junzi Socio-Capitalism. Borrowing directly from ancient Chinese philosophy and the Chinese classics (including Confucianism) as well as from modern economic thought and vocabulary, Junzi is the name for the prototypical person of the highest moral standing according to Confucian thinking, while Socio-Capitalism is a term used today by a number economists in describing what they view as China’s pursuit of some middle ground between socialism and capitalism.

The author submits that Junzi is aspirational as well as inspirational. To borrow (and perhaps misuse) a concept from economics called the ‘production possibilities frontier’ (which represents a point along a curve at which an economy is most efficient), it is the author’s hope that using ‘Junzi’ as the modifying adjective preceding ‘Socio-Capitalism,” will inspirit those who will be charged with responsibility for leading China’s further development of its market to design a model which will prove to expand the possibilities frontier for all.

Key words: Junzi Socio-Capitalism; Confucius capitalism; Chinese Economic Model

XIII

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Dedication………………………………………………………………………... XVII

Chapter 1 Introduction………..…………………………………………….… 1

1.1 Introduction to ‘Junzi Socio-capitalism’……………………………….… 7

1.2 Introduction to Analysis, Arguments and Conclusions…….…….….…… 9

1.3 Motivation to ‘Get It Right’ While Acknowledging the Inherent Complexities……………………………………………………………... 11

1.4 Importance of Questions Raised in this Thesis…………………………... 12

1.4.1 The Growing Influence of Chinese Thinking on Modern Economic Thought……………………………………………………………... 12

1.4.2 The ‘Challenge’ in Formulating Answers to the Questions Posed by This Thesis………………………………………………………….. 13

1.4.3 The ‘Stakes’...…….……………………………………………....… 15

1.4.4 Heaven Forbid Milton Friedman Be Proven Right…………………. 161.4.5 Coming Full Circle - It Always ‘Began’ With and In China…...…... 17

1.4.6 In the Balance: Conflict, War, Strife, Chaos…………………...…... 18

1.5 Where We Go From Here: An Outline of This Thesis Paper……………. 20

Chapter 2 A Proposed New Form For China’s Market Economy:

“Junzi ( 君 子 ) Socio-Capitalism” – A Middle Way Between

Socialism and Capitalism…………………………………………21

2.1 Too Many Words & Phrases (Used to Describe China’s Market Model); Let’s Add Another……………………………………………………….. 22

2.2 “Confucian Capitalism”: Why The Label/Branding Doesn’t Work (or, “The Non-Confucian Nature of Capitalism”)……………………………. 22

2.3 Aspects of Confucius’ Teachings Are Wholly Compatible With Capitalism………………………………………………………………... 26

2.4 The Proverbial Light Bulb Goes Off and Sparks An Idea……………….. 29

2.5 Confucius’ ‘Four Occupations’ Classifies Merchants & Traders at The Bottom of Society………………………………………………………... 30

2.6 A Personal Anecdote (To Connect Some Dots)…………………………. 32

2.7 Grandfather, I’ve Come to Realize, is The Eponymous Junzi…………… 35

XIV

Table of Contents

2.8 Respectfully, I Submit: My Grandfather (His Interpretation of Confucian Values) is Outdated………………………………………………………. 36

2.9 Why Junzi and Junzi Socio-capitalism Are Important…………………… 37

2.9.1 A Chinese Rebalancing Is Called For; Capitalism (As We Know It In The West) Is Morally Bankrupt and Insolvent As A Standalone Ideology…………………………………………………………….. 38

2.9.2 Death And Taxes – The U.S. Market Model Is Based Upon Narratives That Do Not Harmonize With The Chinese…………….. 40

2.9.3 Animal Spirits Of Man Call For Chinese Wisdom…………………. 42

2.9.4 Confucius Was Absolutely Correct In Adjudging Mankind’s Need For Virtues………………………………………………………….. 43

Chapter 3 Chinese Values……………………………………………………. 46

3.1 The Chinese ‘Classics’………………………………………….………... 493.2

Kong Qiu (K ng Qiū ǒ 孔丘 ) – Also Known As Confucius……………...50

3.3Confucius’ “Junzi” (Jūnz ǐ 君子) – Confucius Idea Exemplary Person….

51

3.4 Confucius Lives On Through Today…………………………….……….. 52

3.5 Confucius’ Long-Arm Reach Has Touched My Life, Too (Before This Thesis Project)……………………………………………………………. 53

3.6 “Confucianism”: Many Things to Many People…………………………. 54

3.7 Confucius’ Five Virtues (To Be Considered A Junzi)…………………… 55

3.7.1Rén (仁)……………………………………………………………..

56

3.7.2L (ǐ 禮 or 礼)…..……………………………………………………

57

3.7.3Yì (義) ……………………………………………………………..

58

3.7.4Zhì (智)……………………………………………………………..

59

3.7.5Xìn (信)……………………………………………………………..

60

3.8 Additional Traits and Virtues…………………………………………….. 61

3.8.1Xiào (孝)…………………………………………………………….

61

3.8.2Zhōng (忠)…………………………………………………………...

62

XV

Table of Contents

3.8.3Jié (節)………………………………………………………………

63

3.9Chinese Value Harmony / Hé píng (和平)………………………………..

64

3.10Chinese Value Relationships / Guānxì (关系)……………………………

64

3.11Chinese Value Face / Miànzi (面子)……………………………………...

66

3.12Chinese Value Reverence, Respectfulness, Loyalty / Gōng (恭)………...

67

3.13 Chinese Value Courtesy+Sentiment+Favour+Relationship / Rén qíng

(人情)……………………………………………………………………..

67

3.14 Chinese Value Restraint (as Confucius Taught)…………………………. 68

3.15 Chinese Value Humility, Humbleness, Modesty and Other Self-

effacing Behavior / Ràng (讓)……………………………………………………...

69

3.16 Chinese Value Avoidance of Shamefulness (Or, rather, Being Ever-

Conscious of Not Bringing Shame) / Chǐ (恥)……………………...

70

3.17 Chinese Value (Quietly) Pride – Of Nation, of Reemergence, of Preeminence (Once Again)……………………………………………….

71

Chapter 4 Politics in China…………………………………………………… 73

4.1 Over A Quintillion Possibilities…………………………………………. 744.2 The Meaning of ‘Politics’ For Chinese………………………………….. 75

4.3 Chinese Political Leaders Are Groomed…………………………………. 76

4.4 Zero Tolerance For Chaos……………………………………………….. 79

4.5 Political Legitimacy: Once, Legendary Revolutionaries; Increasingly, Talented Technocrats…………………………………………………….. 81

4.6 “Responsive Authoritarianism” in the Age of the World Wide Web…….

82

4.7 Cardinal Rule for China’s Leaders: “Feed The People”…………………. 83

4.8 “Populism” On The Rise…………………………………………………. 85

4.9 “Two Parties within The Party”………………………………………….. 86

4.10 China’s ‘New Left’………………………………………………………. 87

4.11 The Corporatists And State Owned Enterprises………………………….. 88

XVI

Table of Contents

Chapter 5 The Current Thinking on China’s Market Model: The Debate among China’s Elites – Introducing China’s Neoliberalists………………………..……………………………..

90

5.1 The “Elites” of China………………………………………….…………. 905.2 Elites in Traditional China……………………………………………….. 91

5.3 China’s ‘Elite Generations’………………………………………………. 92

5.4 Expansive Class Structure for China’s Elites: A Result of China’s Rapid Change…………………………………………………………………….

93

5.5 China’s Neoliberalists.………..………………………………………….. 95

5.5.1 Wu Jinglian…………………………………………………………. 101

5.5.2 Zhou Qiren………………………………………………………….. 105

5.5.3 Xu Xiaonian………………………………………………………… 107

Chapter 6 China Vs. The U.S. In Terms of Values, Politics And Market Models (2008 | American Values | American Politics)…………

110

6.1 2008: An Inflection Point?……………………………………………….. 1106.2 Historic U.S. Government Intervention Equals ‘Convergence’ with

China’s Market Model…………………………………………………… 1126.3 American Values; And, In Contrast to Chinese Values………………….. 118

6.3.1 A Survey of American Values (In Their Own Words)……………... 120

6.3.2 Individualism; Independence……………………………………….. 128

6.3.3 Equality……………………………………………………………... 128

6.3.4 Toughness (Strength) and Self-Creation……………………………. 129

6.3.5 Confidence, American Exceptionalism And The Importance of ‘Winning’…………………………………………………………… 131

6.3.6 Religion……………………………………………...….…………... 132

6.3.7 Overconfidence; An Overestimated Ability to Control All Things (Nearly All)……………………………………………………...….. 133

6.3.8 Honesty, Virtuousness, Faithfulness, and an Overriding Desire to be Devout…………………………………………………………… 135

6.3.9 Directness (‘Straight Shooters’); Openness; A Focus on Efficiency; American Work Ethic……………………………………………….

136

6.3.10 Self-sufficiency – Paying (and Paving) One’s Own Way in Life…... 138

6.3.11 Suspiciousness of Authority; Non-Hierarchal; Law Abiding Citizen (or not)………………………………………………………………. 138

6.3.12 Sense of Fairness (“Fair is Fair”); A Principle of Charity (a/k/a

XVII

Table of Contents

“The Good Samaritan”)…………………………………………….. 1416.3.13 Impatience; Short Term View……………………………………… 142

6.3.14 Democracy! Simpleness (A General Lack of Knowledge of World Affairs & History)………………………………………………….. 144

6.3.15 Socio-Economic Mobility………………………………………….. 146

6.3.16 Fame & Fortune; Materialism and Consumption…………………... 149

6.3.17 Attitude Towards Risk-Taking, Markets and Regulation………….. 150

6.3.18 Future Orientation (‘Futurists’); Technology….…………………. 153

6.4 American Politics; And, In Contrast to Chinese Politics………………… 156

Chapter 7 Why Junzi Socio-Capitalism Works for China and Why the U.S. Market Model Does Not…………………………………….. 162

7.1 The U.S. Model Is Not Useful to China Because The Values It is Based Upon Are Not Widely Accepted by Chinese…………………………….. 163

7.2 China Derives its Perspective from Ancient Old Wisdom and Possesses a Two-Way Long Term View; America is a Forward-Looking Country with A Relatively Brief History…………………………………………..

163

7.3 The Views of the Chinese Neoliberalists Do Not Represent Current Mainstream Chinese Thinking……………………………………………

165

7.4 The Chinese Neoliberalists Yearn For a U.S. Model that Does Not Exist Nor Yield the Societal Benefits They Wish For………………………….

166

7.5 The U.S. Model Has Its Own Critics; ‘Free’ Is But Myth……………….. 167

7.6 There Is No Such Thing As ‘Free Market Equilibrium’………………… 169

7.7 There is No Market Without Government Intervention; There Are Inherent Systematic Problems Whether Government Intervenes or Not…

170

7.8 There Should Be No Comfort Taken From a ‘Rule Of Law’ – Laws Alone Are But Rules Set By Those With The Greatest Influence And The Most To Gain – In Other Words, It’s Mostly A Sham In The Form Of A Sophisticated Shell Game………………………………………….. 171

7.9 A Laissez-Faire Free Market And Government Of The People, By The People, For The People Benefits the Ruling Elites, Not Society – Of the 1%, By the 1%, For the 1%………………………………………………. 172

7.10 Markets and Governments Are Not The Source of Society’s Problem But Are Manifestations of Man’s Nature; The U.S. Market Model Makes Things Worse, Not Better………………………………………………... 173

XVIII

Table of Contents

7.11 Man’s Nature: The U.S. Market Model Makes Things Worse, Not Better

175

7.12 Even Former True Believers In the Free Market Have Reformed Their Views…………………………………………………………………….. 176

7.13 Following the U.S. Model In China Would Lead To Chaos…………….. 177

7.14 Confucius Was Correct: What Needs To Be Addressed Is Man’s Nature

178

Chapter 8 Conclusions…………………………………………………….….. 1848.1 On The Subject of Values………………………………………………... 1848.2 On The Subject of Politics……………………………………………….. 185

8.3 On The Question of “Junzi Socio-Capitalism”………………………….. 186

8.4 In Summation…………………………………………………………….. 186

Chapter 9 Postscript…………………………………………………………... 189 Appendix……………………………………………………………………….. 190

A.1 Influences………………………………………………………………… 190A.2 A Case is Made for Progress – With Evolution of Thought & Process

At the Outset………………………………………………………………… 191A.3 Evolving the Process; Elevating My Game – What My Thesis Advisor

Saved Us From…………………………………………………………… 192A.4 Some Disclosures and Qualifications……………………………………. 194

Bibliography……………………………………………………………………. 195 Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………… 221 Acknowledgements (continued)……………………………………………... 222 Personal Statement…………………………………………………………… 223 Resume………………………………………………………………………… 224

XIX

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements

My deep appreciation to my much admired, highly respected thesis advisor,

Professor David Daokui Li 李稻葵, for helping me arrive at my thesis subject, and for

the support he has provided me in making this paper possible. It is indeed an honor

Professor Li has granted me to work under him, as well as an entire other education

unto itself that he has required me to undertake in order to attempt to tackle this

assignment.

I was more than a bit concerned when Professor Li redirected my energies and

focus, and reshaped my thesis topic when we first sat together on 05-15-15; I felt I was

in way over my head. This remains true (and interviews with some esteemed Chinese

economists and businessmen only seemed to validate my sense of feeling

overwhelmed), but I now recognize that the very daunting while analeptic challenge my

advisor laid before me required me to acquire some of the knowledge my family (and,

in particular, my recently departed grandfather) have wished me to have, about Chinese

culture, values, history and way of thinking. I can’t thank Professor Li enough for

guiding me towards helping me fulfill my responsibilities to my family and ancestors,

and for gaining a richer appreciation of my grandfather.

As many of the most deft, influential and forward thinking/looking minds

advise, to try to understand China is one of the greatest challenges of the twenty-first

century. Of course, I can claim no understanding, but I’m gaining a much better, deeper

approximate idea thanks to my thesis advisor’s instruction.

222

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements (continued)

I would also like to express my thanks to:

my professors at Tsinghua and at INSEAD for the education they provided me and,

in particular, my thesis advisor Professor David Daokui Li 李稻葵, Dean Yingyi Qian

and Professors Chen Ming-Jer 陳明 哲博 , S.H. Lee, George Lam Lee, and Charles

Cao, for their unique Chinese instruction which also assisted me in writing this paper;

my program coordinator, Shirley Lin 林雪 ; the TIEMBA alum who recruited and

guided me through my application process, Jay Teborek (class of 2010); my ‘TIEMBA

16 guardian angel,’ Wim Hazeleger; my teaching assistant, Ian Loh, for his assistance

with the Chinese translation and formatting of my thesis; my INSEAD Global Leadership

Development Practice coach and advisor, Kai Foong Tan 陳凱鳳 ; and the librarians at

INSEAD (in particular, Agnès Vitel Tyson, Clara Nicollete-Ras, Cécile Maciulis, and

Céline Moisson) for their terrific support in helping me gather research materials for this

paper, including the acquisition at my request of 18 new resources for the INSEAD

Library;

and

those certain of my cohorts in the class of 2016’s Tsinghua-INSEAD Executive

MBA Program, for sharing a large part of their past 18 months with me. Its been an

unforgettable once-in-a-lifetime, transformative adventure and I am grateful to those of

my mates who’ve invited me in to share some of their life and career journeys and, in

particular, for my Mainland China Brothers who’ve given me a taste of authenticity,

fellowship, kinship and a sense of what it is, for this ABC to have a solid sampling of

what it is to be, feel and think Chinese FAF (‘first and foremost’ or ‘family and friend’).

********

224

Acknowledgements

Lastly, I wish to acknowledge and extend my gratitude and appreciation (and my

爱) to the following colleagues, mentors, interviewees, friends and family members for

their support and guidance throughout my process: James J. Stricker (Partner at

Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman); David ZY Mao 茅志勇 (Managing Partner at

Shanghai Pioneer Law Office); Patrick Huayen Wang 王華燕 (Founder & Chairman

Emeritus, MTI Microelectronics Technology Inc.); John D. Morton (Senior Urban

Environmental Specialist at The World Bank); Christopher Ahn Chen 陳克達 (Senior

Counsel at Franklin Templeton Investments); Richard K. Kim (Partner at Wachtell

Lipton Rosen & Katz); George W. Madison (Partner at Sidley & Austin and former

General Counsel, U.S. Department of the Treasury); Haiyan Heidi Tang 唐 海 燕 (Founder and Managing Partner at Jiangsu Yiyou Tianyuan Law Firm); Christophe J.

Weber (Secretary General, Bank of Geneve and TIEMBA alumnus‘13); Dr. Erh-Cheng

Hwa (Chief Economist at Baoshang Bank); Dr. Chintay Shih (Professor of Institute

Technology at National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan); Frazer Xia 夏海宁 (Managing

Director at China Legal); Jonathan You 游炯 (Deputy Director at Beijing Kanda Law

Firm); Marc E. Kasowitz (Founder & Managing Partner at Kasowitz, Benson, Torres &

Friedman); Meir Gal; Michael Gruber; Wayne R. Loos; Junzi Richard Gao 高 军 ;

Jonathan D. Lau 劉立康 ; the members of my Lau / Liu / Tien / Tian / Kentis /

Sprinkel clan; Yvette Wang Chiang 王倚惠; Laura G. Lau 劉立璟; and, of course, for

Everything, Judith Tien Lau 劉田之雲.

Personal Statement

I hereby sincerely state that the thesis submitted is completed by me with the

instruction of my thesis supervisor. To my knowledge, except for content cited in the

thesis, my research results do not contain any achievements of other people who have

claimed the copyright. I have given clear indication of all the contributions made by

relevant people and groups to the completion of the thesis.

Signature: Date:

224