When might the begin with a few preliminary observations about the question under discussion namewee China as the model for developing nations, why is it worth even considering China is a model for developing nations? That might be asked and what do we mean by that model? The reason that it pays to ask about China is the model for developing nations is that the China has at least at first glance and even on second and third glance has accomplished a great deal in the past 25 years a nation that had suffered a century of internal war a nation that had seen itself the victim of a foreign encroachment a nation that had suffered disease and disorder and poverty has a gathered Itzhak stop to put it mildly and in many Realms has made remarkable progress since 1949.The Chinese economy in the past decade has performed. Well, although there are soft spots in that performance. The nation is Unified. It is a nation Law & Order a nation that would even make a John Mitchell in his earlier Incarnation happy. It is a nation with an increasing rate of literacy a wide widely available services to the public in the realm of education and public health, particularly. And particularly as the United States itself. Suffering from self-doubt after the war in Indochina and after Watergate and after the economic disorders following the October war in the Middle East of last year as we begin to feel that our own model, which we sought to exsport to the developing countries may not be applicable to them much less to us. And as we searched around and see that other developing countries seem to be mired in the whole host of problems, which the Chinese seem to be coping with. It seems particularly relevant to ask him if they got anything there and that is the purpose and effect of the one of the questions that was submitted to stand Carno and an effect. We will be exploring that question of the weather. There's anything to learn from China not necessarily for ourselves, but at least for the developing countries Now when one speaks of China as the model, I might say when other preliminary thing that implicit in the phrasing of the issue is the notion that there is a Chinese model of development and I would immediately qualify that what is the Chinese model or is a major problem in definition that confronts us for the Chinese have not pursued similar economics a similar economic strategy for the 25 years of mouse rule. There was a period in the mid-50 mid-50s in which the Chinese Economic Development pattern was heavily influenced by the stalinist model of development in the 19 late 1950s, or is this Great Leap Forward and effort to mobilize the entire Manpower of China and Leap Forward Suddenly by changing the ideas of the people and directing their enormous energies, simply their Manpower energies and in the night. 60s there was another pattern of a combination of of shall we say an emphasis on an advanced industrial sector and advanced emphasis on the backward sector of the economy and we now see in the 1970s yet 1/4 series of policies adopted to develop the country. So there's a problem here as to which development model are we talkin about the 50s the Great Leap the sixties the 70s. Further the Chinese themselves seem to have been engaged in a great deal of discussion over the past 10 years as to what their own model is. I refer of course did the debates in disputes between Mauser dong and Lil xiaoqi his mouth designated successor at an earlier era and then his disputes with lindow and so forth. So they're even differences within China as to what the model ought to be what Chinese development policy. To be which should give us pause for our own thinking about whether the Chinese have a model. And finally in anything about China we must recognize that we know a terribly little stand car. No stress this point in his earlier remarks. I simply reiterate them. We know enough about China to make plausible any hypothesis you wish to offer into more facts to make it implausible we and in that kind of a context. You must remember the Chinese haven't released any aggregate statistics about their performance in the social economic educational realm since 1958-59 so we can make rough guesses about what they've been doing and what their model seems to be but let's also recognize that until the Chinese provide firm statistics until the Chinese allow foreigners to spend for long periods of time investigating of the Chinese experience. Everything that is said about China must be said with extraordinary tentativeness nonetheless. Sing to me that there are the following Six Dimensions to the Chinese model, which we must be aware of and I don't put these down in any particular order of importance. The first is China's adherence to a policy of economic self-sufficiency the Chinese use the word themselves of self-reliance, but I think self-reliance implies a greater degree of isolation in English band indeed Izzy, but the policy represents but the Chinese are attempting to develop an economic system in which the Chinese can remain independent can remain aloof from International fluctuations in the economy in the world economy a self-sufficiency that would enable them to resist those countries that seek to encroach upon China's autonomy. The policy of self-sufficiency is pursued. However, not only at the national level but The provincial and that is the kind of a state-level in China and the local levels as well. Each particular geographic area in China in short has been encouraged to become as self-sufficient as if possible given its natural resource endowment. This is deemed desirable. For more than one reason among the reasons though are obviously a National Defense consideration local self-sufficiency makes China less vulnerable to nuclear attack local self-sufficiency places less demand upon a nation with highly underdeveloped transportation systems, but also local self-sufficiency is seen as a way of maximizing the commitment of people in local communities to the entire National effort of developing a country. It makes people in the spirit of self-reliant according to Mao is philosophy more involved. the total concept of transforming China A second aspect of the Chinese development model. I must be a listed as its comprehensiveness that is to say we see here in China a comprehensive attack on the interrail interrelated problems of development involving changing the attitudes of the people particularly those attitudes that inhibit economic and social development the development of Institutions that are capable of transforming a society the development of an economy that is geared to growth China certainly is in here. I agree totally with stand carnos message. China is deeply committed to rapidly increasing its industrial product up productivity. And so what one sees in the Chinese development both in a revolutionary since the social sense, but also in a political economic sense is a total attack. No piecemeal reformist measures. What I am saying insured here obviously is that the Chinese model is revolutionary revolution in the sense that it contemplates a rapid and violent change of Elites and institutions in the society a change that requires concerted continuous attack or in the mouse terminology permanent revolution. A third dimension of the Chinese developmental model is the effort to closely linked various sectors of the society that is to say the Chinese model in Visions while there is still local self-sufficiency a relatively high level of unity in the country and let me be more specific particularly developing very close links between the urban and the rural areas of the country if we compare for a moment China's developmental approach to the problems of development to that show. We say of India or Indonesia. One of the most striking efforts in China has been the heavy pressure exerted by the central government and particularly. This comes it seems to me from the chairman Mao. To make sure that the intellectuals who reside in the urban areas the industrialist to reside in the in the industrial areas that their activities are oriented toward the rural areas of the country that they are in service to where 80% of the people live. This is to be contrasted. Let us say to India or to Indonesia where intellectual still retain a commitment to their worldwide intellectual community and where the standards to which they refer when evaluating their performance are the worldwide standards of competent professional competence. I'll come back to that in a minute somewhat similarly to this attempt to make the urban and rural areas closely linked and their many specific programs that flow from this broad design are also efforts to reduce the the distinctions and differences. Between the intellectuals those who work with their minds and lectures and bureaucrats if you will and those who work with their hands farmers and industrial workers and attempt to minimize stratification as China industrialize is let me put it one other way the same kind of theme I'm developing here namely at in industrial the industrialization of the western world and of Japan has come at the price of the peasantry that industrialization in the west has meant ultimately urbanization High degree of urbanization and The Disappearance of the peasantry that broad patterns of development in many ways is 4 close to the Chinese. They may reject it on value grounds as well. But they may be making a virtue of necessity with 80% of the population in the rural area. And with the relatively low level of development the China now has there's simply no other way for China to develop develop successfully without preserving an orientation toward the countryside among those in the city or at least so it seems to the leaders of China. The fourth dimension of the China's of China's developmental model. I would say is organization pervasive total involving all people in society with no chance for escape a pervasiveness of organization that is hierarchical to a large degree and in which is a result all people are involved in the administration of State policy and when necessary through organization, the populace can be mobilized to achieve particular tasks on a crash short-term basis. So that one sees as a characteristic of China's development, the organization of campaigns to achieve certain short-term objectives when they order comes from Peking to clean the streets of Peking the street. Peking get cleaned they may get dirty three months after when that is no longer the total focus of the nation's energy, but there is a tremendous organizational capacity here as a result of total organization to achieve of the objectives and other part of this obviously comes in the in the the distribution of food because of the total control not total that's too strong. But because of the extensive control the extensive organization, then it becomes possible to more equitably distributed resources such as food and clothing so that the entire nation has a bare minimum at least And other aspect of the Chinese a development approach to development is the heavy emphasis upon education or to put it in a more education. It depends your language. That one deals with in China is such so politically loaded on the positive side. You can say education creating a moral order in China or if one is of a different political persuasion than one labels the same program indoctrination and brainwashing and I will just use both turn so you don't know where I stand. But there is a mammoth effort than at public education that is obviously related to the traditional Chinese concept of the state and the purpose of the state for the purpose. At least in the Confucian order was to create a moral universe and to an able man to reach his fullest potential as a moral being and in order to do this one had to have a state that in Coke hated values in the people and that is certainly what goes on in China as all people are continually subject to an unending reminder that their life is at the disposal of the state that they are to be self-sacrificing in attitude and willingly slow so that the future generations and China may live in a wealthy and powerful and socialist society. And that leads to it seems to me the 6th dimension of the Chinese model for developing nations the emphasis upon a spirit of self-sacrifice the creation of a tremendous Spirit of what the Chinese call serving the people and related to that. Of course as part of the developmental strategy is part of this creation of a spirit of self-sacrifice is on the part of the leaders a high degree of confidence in what people properly motivated can achieve so the emphasis at least until the most recent phase in China's development has been a heavy Reliance on China's greatest resource. It's human beings not as much on technique not as much on material things on Machinery on technology, although that hasn't been over. But the emphasis is upon using the talents of the vast number of Chinese people to develop their country. Now it now we can briefly ask. Is it a model for others to follow for developing nations the question before us? That question can be answered on three levels that is to say are there things specifically in China that can be learned by others specifically in the Realms in which the Chinese have made greatest progress Public Health Agricultural Development A, perhaps a checking the morning farias dimensions of bureaucracy eliminating crime ridding the country of dope addiction major problem in China than earlier. Of extending education to the to the entire country. Are there specific lessons will most people who have looked at the Chinese experience in these specific rounds and here I only have time to give the conclusion include two things. The Chinese have accomplished a great deal in each of these Realms, but precisely because the accomplishments are but part of a comprehensive attack upon a whole set of interrelated problems. It is very difficult to think of extracting one part of China's program programs such as their Public Health policy and plug it down in another country couldn't do it because the infrastructure the organizational infrastructure the propaganda Network and everything else that is part of the public health program is absent in any other developing country. So on the most specific level it becomes hard to Envision how one could export for example the techniques through which China has spread agricultural technology and therefore increased agricultural production. Unless one at the same time conceived of an effective Land Reform perhaps socialization of Agriculture changes in the whole nature of the way the bureaucracies in developing countries relate to their people and so on. So this leads us to the second level not in terms of specific programs, but at the intermediate level the level, I described self-sufficiency. That is the Chinese model in terms of The Six Dimensions self-sufficiency comprehensiveness, urban-rural links organization emphasis on education emphasis on a Serve the People orientation. Maybe that's what other country should import the six broad dimensions of the Chinese development and here again one says good idea, but and the but is that these are as Mister Car, no did note so inextricably intertwined with China's cultural a heritage. Is it possible in other countries to develop the same kind of extensive organization to import those patterns of organization when one doesn't have in other countries, not all other countries. Anyway the same sense of Of collectivism which existed in China even before 1949 and in which there was a long tradition after all of effective bureaucracy after we speak of bureaucracy both and it's positive and negative sense in here. We speak of organization is bureaucracy is positive since the Chinese invented it. And so it the most intermediate level than at the intermediate level we come into problems of the cultural bedding in which the Chinese experience takes place. In addition. Of course one is talking about a mammoth continent China more a continent than a country. Which has the economic resources to be self-sufficient when China urges the state of Burundi or the Pago Pago or some other small country to be self-reliant. There is a note of hollowness in the recommendation. It is hard to believe that Guatemala will ever be self-sufficient. So the Chinese advice to Guatemala is maybe to join with other countries in the larger Union, but then we're talking about already a different process of development and a different challenge for Guatemala then confronted the Chinese. This leads us then to the most General level. Did the Chinese have anything to offer at the most General level and hear one has to say yes, but yes only in the sense that what one sees in China. This is a an opinion of mine obviously, but once he's in the most General sense is that a nation has galvanized itself at a price. I wouldn't want to ignore the price either and it a high-cost but none the less a nation has galvanized itself and it has done better than it was doing before and in that sense in that the perhaps one can mutt. The one most that one can say is it the Chinese model is an inspiring one. And in that sense. It seems to me the Chinese model is applicable to the developed world as to the developing world for if a nation that was as poor as China can end up feeding all of its people. Providing minimum security and achieving a minimum amount of equity recognizing that also in China. There is a gross instances of the miscarriage of justice, but even so a minimum Equity than we know in our country that we can do better than we've been doing recently. Thank you.