国运与大势（National Destination and General Trend）
Xiaoming Guo 郭晓明
2023年2月4日，美国F22战斗机在大西洋南卡附近海域击落中国一艘飞艇，流浪气球事件被推到了戏剧性的高潮，主流媒体把流浪气球炒作得满城风雨，搞得美国有如惊弓之鸟，又在其后几天击落了空中好几个气球。中美敌意陡增，中美大国博弈究竟谁胜谁负，已经是各国制定国策的一个不可或缺的基本判断。加拿大自孟晚舟事件开始就一边倒，在地缘政治中依附于美国。这个国策的基础很可能是认为美国能够成功压制中国的崛起，因此押宝到赢家。因为中国一直对美国和加拿大都没有敌意，有的只是中国对美国的敌意行为的适度反应。
如何判断中美博弈谁胜谁负？以时事而论，突发事件太多，如乌克兰战争，土耳其地震，新冠疫情等突发事件往往给地缘政治局势带来剧变，很难判断。就资本主义制度内生的经济周期而论，这是中短期的局势起伏令人难以琢磨。但是，如果我们把大国博弈放到历史大势中看，确定性就相当明显。
什么是历史大势？马克思认为，历史大势就是生产力的进步。马克思是经济学一代宗师，在经济学理论中与亚当斯密并驾齐驱。马克思和亚当斯密有很多观点是共同的，其中之一就是分工导致生产力进步。
生产力进步的驱动力在于人类希望以更少的劳动获得更多的效用。这个经济学指标叫作生产率，即生产投入越少，产出越多，人类生活水平就越高。无论是社会主义还是资本主义，无论是自然经济还是市场经济，生产率的提高一直是人类经济行为的冲动，提高生产率可以说是人类从诞生至今亘古不变的规律。
天才的亚当斯密发现，生产率的提高最重要的手段之一就是分工。工业革命之前的作坊工匠以师徒传承手艺，手艺关键在于熟能生巧。当作坊规模扩大的时候，一个产品就可以分为几个工序，每个工人只专攻一个工序，这大大缩短了学习曲线，工人每个反复操作的就是几个简单的动作，这样生产的产品又快质量又好。当然，作坊规模的扩大需要更大的市场。分工还把生产过程分为若干的工序，为工业革命机械化铺平了道路，机器就根据一个产品生产过程需要的几个分工的工序来设计的。分工带来了劳动的异化，工人的劳动变成了枯燥无味的简单重复动作，劳动力失去了劳动者的主观意识作用，劳动产品不是为了使用而是为了交换，劳动沦落为资本盈利的资源。
英国工业革命起于纺织业，应用曼切斯特河边水轮动力驱动的纺织机。机器的使用使得产出必须有一定的规模，必须有更大的市场，必要有更多的棉花和羊毛来源。可以说，西方工业革命是发现新大陆后跨大洋贸易的产物，非洲的奴隶运到新奥尔良，奴隶种植园的棉花从新奥尔良运到利物浦港，曼切斯特生产的纺织品销往全球。当时列强为了工业革命，必须殖民海外，以获取殖民地资源和市场，以维持机器生产必须要达到的的规模。西方资本主义产生于贸易资本，西方民主政治制度产生于贸易海港城市的资本家自治，产生于汉萨同盟。日本明治维新以后，立即殖民海外，殖民琉球群岛，殖民朝鲜半岛，殖民台湾，殖民东北三省。资本主义工业革命从一开始就建立在剥削压迫殖民地人民的基础之上。但是，日本占领的海外殖民地和大英帝国海外殖民地根本就不是一个数量级，因此，资本的侵略扩张本性从明治维新开始就是日本国家行为的基因。
日本，美国，俄罗斯，德国都是第二次工业革命后起的列强。美国有西部扩张，一下子就从东部13州扩张到了太平洋，有跨大陆铁路作为其工业革命基础设施，50州的地域，比很多老牌殖民者的殖民地地域还要大。俄罗斯则中亚和远东扩张，也占有了大片土地，占有了丰富的资源以支撑工业革命的规模。德日则不然，尤其的德国，海外扩张必然与老牌殖民者发生冲突，因为地球已经被老牌列强瓜分完了。两次世界大战都从德国发起不是没有原因的。
鸦片战争以后，中国发生了惊天动地的太平天国运动。1900年八国联军镇压义和团运动，占领了北京，但他们不敢也没有可能把中国分裂成8块，每个列强占领一块殖民地。他们不能重复划分非洲和美洲那种宗主国-殖民地的国际秩序。因为太平天国和义和团运动，显示了中国民间的组织能力，列强只能借清廷和后来的国民政府的手来左右中国的政治和经济，即用官僚买办阶级和军阀作为列强划分在华势力范围的帮凶。美国是最不主张分裂中国的，八国联军索取庚子赔款，老牌殖民地模式蜕变成金融殖民模式。1900年后中国海关由国际共管，海关税收，以及中国中央政府税收，被用来支付庚子赔款。那时候列强对华政策是“门户开放”和“利益均沾”。这种模式对于美国、德国和日本这样的后起帝国有很多的吸引力，是对宗主国-殖民地经济秩序的替代。
第二次世界大战，美国取代英国成为全球霸权，就是鼓励殖民地独立，殖民地独立把英法老牌殖民地都变成“门户开放”和“利益均沾”的模式，英法之失就是美国之得。模式变了，分工规模经济的经济学基本原理是一样的，就是西方发达国家一样需要亚非拉的资源和市场来支撑其资本运作规模。最惠国待遇和世贸的国民待遇就是“利益均沾”原则的延伸，一国国家给一个列强降低关税，就必须给所以列强都降低到同样的关税，这就叫最惠国待遇，这就是当年列强“利益均沾”的模式。要求贸易自由，就是“门户开放”政策的扩展和延续。二战后美国主导的全球市场经济秩序是一个统一的全球大市场，细化了全球分工，提高了生产率，是一种进步，这就是为什么“民族要解放，国家要独立”的反殖民运动在二战中风起云涌，成为“世界潮流浩浩荡荡，顺之者昌逆之者亡”的世界大势。
在世贸规则下，既然有了货物商品的自由流通，也可以有劳动力的自由流通。美国和加拿大每年都发签证给墨西哥季节农民工到签证，海湾石油出口国家大量使用外国劳工。外国劳工的使用往往是种族歧视的土壤，为人贩子制造了市场，制造出黑暗的社会问题，与道德规范相冲突。因此，有了资本自由流动的诉求。苏联解体以后第一实行的就是资本自由流动，资本自由流动也是一把双刃剑，它可以促进全球经济繁荣发展，也可以成为国际金融垄断资本洗劫它国财富的渠道。80年代拉美的债务危机，就是垄断资本洗劫拉美财富之作，把拉美压在“中等收入陷阱”之内。苏联解体后其财富被西方洗劫，就是资本自由流动之功。98亚洲金融风暴，金融垄断资本洗劫了亚洲大笔财富，这种西方资本涌入亚非拉某国，则该国经济欣欣向荣，待羊养肥了，资本忽然大撤退，那国经济倒退十年，一地鸡毛。这种金融大戏在二战后重复上演若干次。这本来就是金融垄断资本洗劫亚非拉发展中国家的拿手好戏。二十一世纪开初，美国网络经济泡沫破裂，经济危机在美国，洗劫的却是美国盟友欧洲的资产。1998-1999的科索沃战争把欧洲美元赶到了纳斯达股市上，网络经济泡沫破裂，导致欧洲美元血本无归。二十一世纪就是美国反噬盟友的世纪。
话说回来，继续接着分工促进全球经济进步的话头。上世纪末的信息革命忽然把各国距离拉近了，全球化变成了神圣的人类使命，全球经济进入欣欣向荣，世界分工前所未有。西方国家的很多制造业外包到了发展中国家。生产率的提高，在公司层面就是效率的提高。如果公司自己生产成本高于市场价格，那就是外包给其它工厂以降低成本。市场经济只要保持公司的核心竞争力就行。如耐克和阿迪达斯的核心竞争力是市场营销，把所有制造都外包了，美国鞋公司不需要在美国制造鞋，只保留设计和市场营销即可傲视群雄。服装也是这样，如鳄鱼牌，只收品牌专利就可以了，衣厂可以是在孟加拉或者越南。加拿大汽车制造业都是美日资本投资的工厂，加拿大汽车制造业很发达，就是没有加拿大自己的民族品牌。全球化创造了巨大的财富，是工业大生产全球分工的结果。资本输出比劳工输入更人权一点，要高举人权，不必在国内高举，高举就反对他国就行了。2023年1月23日，美国加州农场发生华人枪杀案，7人遇难，就是输出劳工的悲剧。美国是全球最大的人口走私市场，东欧剧变后有大量妇女儿童被人贩子拐到美国做性奴。美国劳动力黑市是人道主义灾难。美国资本需要廉价劳动力，但美国在美墨边境筑墙，阻止拉美人偷渡进美国，阻止劳动力的市场流通，美国选择北美自贸协议，让资本流入墨西哥攒取廉价劳动力利润。美国资本投资中国，美国一些白左就攻击中国没有人权，不保护劳工，让劳工廉价劳动，因此美国劳工支持特朗普，声讨中国人权状况，在这种左右都反华的气氛下，两党一致要制造业回归美国，搞去全球化，搞孤立主义，这是逆国际分工而动，是逆历史潮流而动。去全球化，就是肢解社会大生产的国际分工，由此产生了供应链危机，由此降低了全球经济的生产率，降低了全球经济的生产力水平，导致全球通胀。新冠疫情和乌克兰战争使得美国对华贸易战导致的通货膨胀更是雪上加霜。美国对华贸易战，要脱钩中国，要去全球化，是当代的卢德运动，是认为中国在全球化的国际分工中收益了，所以要废掉全球化，这和当年卢德运动中，作坊工匠认为机器抢了他们的饭碗而要砸机器如出一辙。
2008金融海啸是一个历史转折点。和拉美债务危机、98亚洲金融风暴、已经纳斯达股市泡沫破裂不同，华尔街出问题了，华尔街垄断资本没能利用这次危机快速的收割全球。但帝国掠夺亚非拉的原始基因没有变，美国2009年就启动亚太再平衡战略，瞄准了中国巨大财富，同时用量化宽松印钞的伎俩，如依附在全球经济身上的蚂蟥一样吮吸全球经济中的财富。这和2022年美国截断俄罗斯对欧洲能源供应高价卖液化天然气给欧洲那种瞬间暴利是不同的，以中国的制造能力，足以供给美国的吮吸而有余。因此在2008其后十多年间，美国进入了零利率政策（吮吸）时代一直持续到新冠疫情。而在这十多年时间，中国建成了高速铁路网。即美国以金融吸星大法是可以维持经济不跨的，但无以阻止中国的发展，全球化的国际分工是市场经济的必然结果。2008年金融海啸，让中美都认识到中国制造-美国消费的这种国际南北经济格局已经不可持续，美国从那时候起就致力于制造业回归美国，而中国则致力于提高内需，加大中国自身的消费。美国要由制造少而消费多转型为增加制造，中国要由制造多消费少而转型为增加消费，中美两国的战略，谁更容易实现？肯定是增加消费比增加制造容易。因此，2008年以后中国的中产阶级迅速崛起，中外都对此欢欣鼓舞，西方有理论认为，中产阶级是西方民主制度的基石，中国中产阶级崛起有利于中国采纳西方民主制度。
好，不跑题，继续谈分工与进步。中国纳入世界分工，要从鸦片战争开始。有一种观点，认为鸦片战争打开了中国的大门，即鸦片战争开始就有了列强在中国利益均沾，条约港门户开放把中国纳入西方列强主导的宗主国-殖民地全球经济秩序。从鸦片战争以后的百年屈辱历史，是中国处于半殖民地的历史。1949年，在“民族解放，国家要独立”的历史潮流下，新中国诞生了。西方不满失去的半殖民地，美国发表了《丢失了中国》的白皮书，因此有了西方对中国的封锁。冷战期间中国更是受到两霸的封锁，被排除在全球经济之外。中国工业化进程难以长足，原因在于没有大英帝国那样的海外殖民地市场，在于没有美国战后那种金融统治全球的市场。但是，冷战期间两大阵营的经济体是相当的，即市场经济可以分工，计划经济也可以分工。但资本主义市场经济不敌东方阵营的苏联计划经济，西方30年代陷入经济大萧条的时候，斯大林领导的苏联工业化突飞猛进，苏联率先送宇航员加加林上太空，而美国深陷越战泥潭。美国怎么办？国力本质是经济实力。经济实力本质是生产力水平。尼克松访问毛泽东，开启了中国重返国际分工的大门，门户再次开放，但这次门户开放与鸦片战争不同，鸦片战争是列强主导中国的门户开放，是不平等条约下的开放。中国改革开放是中国自主的开放，是保持主权独立的开放。美国赢得冷战胜利，是尼克松和毛泽东做的交易，尼克松接纳中国进入国际分工，中国帮助美国从越战泥潭中抽身。美苏主导的冷战两大阵营中，美国主导的阵营忽然加入了中国这个巨大的市场，西方阵营的经济实力大增。由于中国的改革开放，美国1984年GDP增长高达7.24%。中国那时候占世界人口四分之一，中国加入世界分工的最大优势就是廉价优质劳动力，改革开放开初的经济特区模式是“三来一补”，“来料加工”，“两头在外”，国外制造业到中国组装，用中国劳动力。日本经济也上一个台阶，以雁阵模式，把劳动密集型产业，如成衣业制鞋业等，转到了中国。这是一个双赢关系，中国开启工业化进程，工业化进程有赖于大市场，大于本国的市场，是国际分工，是生产率提高，是生产力水平提高。中国加入国际分工后先发展成衣业，和英国第一次工业革命起源于纺织工业几乎一样。事实证明双赢合作是可行的，西方资本在中国盈利，劳动是剩余价值的源泉，西方资本的利润源于中国劳动力加入世界分工。
国际分工讲究资源禀赋，各国资源禀赋不同，各国文化不同。中国是农耕文化，重生产轻贸易，自古以来就有“重农轻商”的经济文化。西方资本主义从贸易资本起家，起于航海贸易，西方重贸易。亚当斯密的“看不见的手”就是对市场交易的崇拜的文化。在商业实践中，中国商家重薄利多销，海外华人喜欢到华人超市买东西，因为便宜实惠，华商多以薄利多销为生意策略。西人商家重垄断利润，要高回报，占据市场垄断地位要垄断超额利润，西人喜欢品牌策略，专利保护，法律程序等保持垄断利润的操作。因此，自从中国改革开放参加国际分工以来，几十年都有这种现象，中国买什么什么就贵，中国卖什么什么就便宜。原来西方生产的高价商品，一旦变成中国生产，价格就大幅下跌。中国工业化过程推进了全球的市场竞争，市场竞争压低了利润压低了价格。改革开放初期，中国是转型经济，从计划经济转型为市场经济，而市场自由竞争是华盛顿共识，是西方国家鼓励中国门户开放的学术共识。垄断本质是压制市场竞争的，本质是反市场经济的，因此各国都有不同程度的反垄断法。垄断其实就是一种欺行霸市，就是扭曲市场规则。可以说，中国加入世界分工的工业化进程，强化了全球的市场竞争，完善了资本主义制度下的全球市场经济。
上世纪末的信息革命，大大推进了全球化进程，全球化是华盛顿共识一部分。贸易促进分工，促进经济增长，贸易对贸易双方有益，这是两百多年前亚当斯密的《国富论》的重要结论，也是人类历史的经验。各国人均GDP的提高与出口贸易正相关。本世纪个高科技发展，是知识密集型经济，知识密集型经济有规模经济效应，即知识的使用不会减小知识的价值。一个设计，生产100个产品是这个设计，生产100万个产品也是这个设计。但一个高科技产品设计的研发成本的很高的。高科技产品不仅需要国际分工合作，更需要国际大市场。国际分工体现在国际贸易中中间产品电话零部件的贸易量增加了。一个产品往往使用了许多国家的零部件或材料。很难有一个高科技产品完全由一个国家生产。计算机设计在美国，芯片生产在台湾，组装在东莞。中国中产阶级的崛起大大提高了中国市场购买力，使得中国成为高科技产品不能忽视的市场。苹果平板多次在中国首发，离开中国市场的国际品牌基本不存在。哪个品牌蔑视中国市场，就有被挤出市场的风险。智能手机鼻祖黑莓不进入中国市场，导致黑莓完全退出智能手机市场。
如今，在中美博弈中，美战略是去全球化，去市场竞争，要把中国排除出全球产业链，要把芯片产业链全部搬进美国，这是逆全球大势而行的现代卢德运动。中国今天是坚持市场开放，坚持全球化，是顺应历史大势。特朗普加高中国商品的关税，没有减小美国对华贸易逆差，反而增加了贸易逆差。台积电搬到美国，放弃中国市场，放弃中国市场无异于自杀。台积电投资400亿美元在美国建3纳米晶圆厂，3纳米芯片是军事敏感产品，只能卖给美国军工集团，市场及其有限，这种投资没事市场支撑，只赔不赚。离开全球市场的产业在国际分工的今天几乎是不可能的事情。高科技更依赖全球市场。2021年中国的电动车市场是全球市场的53%，2022年中国电动车市场的全球市场的60%， 丢掉中国市场就等于丢掉全球市场。但是，加拿大电动车产业的国策是去中国化，这种以地缘政治选边站队的做法严重损害加拿大国家利益，重蹈黑莓手机衰落的覆辙。中国网民是美国的三倍多，离开了中国市场，人工智能聊天平台就不能持久。中国有9亿人口使用手机，中国移动支付普及率全球首屈一指。 工业4.0需要大数据，中国人口众多是大数据的优势，深度学习需要多人使用，中国人口众多是优势。
什么是制裁？市场不准入是制裁，因为丢掉市场就丢掉了规模，就没有了分工基础，就失去了工业进步的能力。中国14亿人口是实际上最大的统一市场，有统一的文字。印度人口超过中国了，但是，印度又几十种语言，是拼音文字，市场统一程度远远低于中国。欧盟人口是中国的一半，而且有英语、德语、法语等等，市场统一度低于中国，产品说明书都要好几种文字才能进入市场。
资本主义经济基础是市场经济，是资本的市场运动，由产业资本变为商品资本变为金融资本如此周而复始不断扩大。但美国以国家机器粗暴干涉全球产业链，规定芯片在哪里生产，只能卖给谁，这种做法就是摧毁资本主义。美国军工集团和金融垄断资本正在颠覆过去几百年来的西方资本主义。美国去全球化，是缩小了自己的市场。工业4.0是智能革命，智能革命的很多技术不是给终端消费市场的，而是给制造业市场的。制造业技术革命是智能革命的最大市场，而中国是全球最大的制造大国，是工业4.0最大的市场。即便是终端消费产品，如电动车，中国也是首屈一指。以经济学理论而看世界大势，大势在中国一边，不在美国那边。
马克思和亚当斯密都是西方经济学家，以上以分工论进步完全是西方理论。难道西方智库就看不到这个大势？不是的。他们还有一套地缘政治理论，有一套强权政治力量，认为美国是当今最大的军事强国，可以玩零和博弈，而且还能赢者通吃。中国军事力量虽然和美国无法比，但中美是有核互毁能力的。美国想要改变核互毁格局是非常困难的。美国搞全球导弹防御系统，就是要摧毁中国的核互毁能力，但是，中国很快就研发了超高音速导弹，可以直接突破美国全球导弹防御系统。为什么一个流浪气球搞得美国草木皆兵歇斯底里？应为他们的全球导弹防御系统原来是一个纸老虎，气球在美国上空飘了几天美国都没有办法。中国的歼20不少性能超越美国F35。美国不是科技全球领先吗？为什么中国超高音速导弹和5代战斗机能追上美国呢？原因是流体力学是非线性方程，美国科技再先进，没有大风洞做实验就难以研发出超高音速导弹和战斗机。中国是制造大国，中国是电力大国，中国有世界上功率最高最强的风洞，有了这个风洞优势，中国超高音速导弹和5代6代战斗机就会领先美国。这是工程技术能力问题。中国有这个工程技术能力，而美国没有。美国首都华盛顿为什么会有越战墓地和韩战墓地？韩战和越战是美国失败的战争，是美国绝无仅有的两场失败的战争，都败在红色中国手下。美国从来没有打赢过一场与中国为敌的军事战争，即便在红色中国还处于胚胎状态时，在解放战争时期，美国也失去了中国，美国支持的蒋介石也败给了毛泽东。
新中国的历史证明，美国无法以军事战争让红色中国屈服。那么，西方智库建议的国策为什么还是一边倒支持美国呢？难道西方智库学者连这点当代史的知识都没有？或许他们还心存侥幸，认为美国虽然无法战胜红色中国，但可以把中国变色，把红色中国变成蓝色中国，那不就可以战胜中国了吗？这就是颜色革命，就是和平演变，就是意识形态领域的战线。2019年香港暴乱，就显示了美国颜色革命的威力。意识形态领域中美以前不是没有交过手，新中国建国后，毛泽东就在全球反对霸权，支持了美国黑人的民权运动，联合国恢复红色中国合法席位就是中国在意识形态领域战胜美国的果实。美国颜色革命在阿拉伯之春，在乌克兰橙色革命等屡屡得手，可谓所向披靡。但是，为什么在中国就失败了呢？89年尝试了一次，为什么没把中国变色，倒是变了苏东的颜色呢？实际上，美国颜色革命和平演变的雕虫小技在中国已经无能为力了，因为中国已经经历过十年的“反对一切权威”，“砸烂公检法”的无政府主义状态，其规模深度广度都远超所有美国颜色革命之总和。有了这十年的经历，中国人懂得法制的重要，中国人更珍惜和谐而反对动乱。中国有伟人，早就布下了江流石不转的八卦阵，让美国的颜色革命对中国无可奈何。中国自“韬光养晦”以来在意识形态领域就一直避战，但美国坚持冷战思维，非要把中国拉入意识形态领域战场，估计中国也躲不过这场战争，估计中国更不会败在这场意识形态领域的战争。讲人类良心还是虚言假意？讲人类命运共同体还是美国优先？讲公理还是强权？是顺应历史大势还是当代卢德运动？这些都可以用来判定意识形态领域战争的胜负。
美国如今使用的是假道伐虢的策略，台面上纠集盟友围堵中俄，实际上的经济上收割盟友。美国2022年收割欧盟吃相难看，如今以国家安全为由收割日、韩、台的芯片产业。西方有没有明白人？肯定有，但无法发声。
美国在衰落，中国在崛起，这是历史大势，是以西方古典经济学社会分工理论为基础观察到的历史大势。美国在去全球化，在缩小市场，在弱化国际分工；而中国以区域全面经济伙伴，以金砖组织，以一带一路在加速全球化，在扩大市场，在强化国际分工。是追随美国一起衰落，还是与中国合作共赢发展经济，这是世界各国领袖制定国策的必选题。
On February 4, 2023, an American F22 fighter jet shot down a Chinese airship near South Carolina in the Atlantic Ocean. The stray balloon incident was pushed to a dramatic climax. Several balloons were shot down in the air in the next few days. The hostility between China and the United States has increased sharply. Who will win and who will lose in the game between China and the United States has become an indispensable essential judgment for countries to formulate national policies. Canada has been on one side since the Meng Wanzhou incident and is attached to the United States in geopolitics. The presumption of this federal policy is probably to be that the United States can successfully suppress the rising of China, so betting on the winner’s side. Because China has never been hostile to the United States and Canada, and there is only a moderate reaction of China to the hostile behavior of the United States.
How to judge who wins and who loses in the Sino-US confrontation? In terms of current events, there are too many emergencies, such as the war in Ukraine, the earthquake in Turkey, and the COVID pandemic, which often bring drastic changes to the geopolitical situation, and it is difficult to tell. As far as the economic cycle endogenous to the capitalist system is concerned, the ups and downs in the short and medium term are difficult to fathom. However, if we put the game of great powers into the historical trend, the certainty is quite obvious.
What is the general trend of history? Marx believed that the general trend of history is the progress of productive forces. Both Marx and Adam Smith are great economists. Marx and Adam Smith have many points in common, one of which is that the division of labor leads to the improvement of productivity.
The driving force behind the progress of productivity lies in the desire of human beings to obtain more utility with less labor. This economic indicator is called productivity, that is, the less production input, the more output, and the higher the living standard of human beings. Whether it is socialism or capitalism, whether it is a natural economy or a market economy, the improvement of productivity has always been the impulse of human economic behavior. It can be said that increasing productivity has been an eternal law since the birth of human beings.
The genius Adam Smith discovered that one of the most important means of increasing productivity is the division of labor. Before the industrial revolution, workshop craftsmen passed on their skills from master to apprentice, and the key to craft is practice makes perfect. When the scale of the workshop expands, a product can be divided into several procedures, and each worker only specializes in one process, which greatly shortens the learning curve. Each worker repeatedly operates a few simple actions. The products produced in this way are of good quality and can produce faster. Of course, the expansion of the workshop scale requires a larger market. The division of labor also divides the production process into several processes, paving the way for the mechanization of the industrial revolution. Machines are designed according to the several divisions of labor required in the production process of a product. The division of labor has brought about the alienation of labor. The labor of workers has become a boring and simple repetitive action. The labor force has lost the subjective consciousness of the laborer. The products of labor are not for use but for exchange.
The British Industrial Revolution began in the textile industry, using textile machines powered by water wheels on the rivers around Manchester. The use of machinery necessitated a certain scale of output, a greater market, and greater sources of cotton and wool. It can be said that the Western Industrial Revolution was the product of transoceanic trade after the discovery of the New World. African slaves were transported to New Orleans, cotton from slave plantations was transported from New Orleans to Liverpool Port, and textiles produced in Manchester were sold all over the world. At that time, for the sake of the industrial revolution, the great powers had to colonize overseas to obtain colonial resources and markets in order to maintain the scale that machine production must achieve. Western capitalism arose from the commercial capital, and Western democratic political systems arose from the self-government of capitalists in trading seaport cities of the Hanseatic League. After the Meiji Restoration, Japan immediately colonized overseas, colonized the Ryukyu Islands, colonized the Korean Peninsula, colonized Taiwan, and colonized the three northeastern provinces of China. The capitalist industrial revolution was built from the beginning on the exploitation and oppression of the indigenous people in colonies. However, the overseas colonies occupied by Japan and the overseas colonies of the British Empire are not of the same order of magnitude at all. Therefore, the aggressive and expanding nature of capital has been the gene of Japan’s national behavior since the Meiji Restoration.
Japan, the United States, Russia, and Germany are all emerging powers in the second industrial revolution. The United States has expanded to the west, expanding from 13 states in the east to the Pacific Ocean. It has the transcontinental railway as its industrial revolution infrastructure, and the area of 50 states is larger than the colonies of many old powers. Russia expanded in Central Asia and the Far East, and also occupied a large area of land and abundant resources to support the scale of the industrial revolution. This is not the case for Germany and Japan, especially Germany, whose overseas expansion will inevitably conflict with the old powers, because the world has been divided up by the old powers. That’s why both world wars started in Germany.
After the Opium War, the earth-shattering Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Movement took place in China. In 1900, the Eight-Power Allied Forces suppressed the Boxer Rebellion and occupied Beijing, but they dared not and could not split China into eight parts for each power to occupy a colony. They cannot repeat the suzerain-colonial international order that divides Africa and the Americas. Because the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom and the Boxer Movement demonstrated the organizational capabilities of the Chinese people, the big powers could only use the hands of the Qing court and the later National Government to control China’s politics and economy, that is, using the bureaucratic comprador class and warlords to divide the sphere of influence in China for imperialist powers. The United States is the least advocate of splitting China. The Eight-Power Allied Forces demanded Boxer indemnity, and the old colonial model degenerated into a financial colonial model. After 1900, China’s customs were jointly managed by the international community, and the customs revenue, as well as the tax revenue of the Chinese central government, were used to pay Boxer indemnity. At that time, the policies of the great powers towards China were “open door” and “equal shared interests”. This model has a lot of appeal for rising empires like the US, Germany, and Japan, as an alternative to the suzerain-colonial economic order.
In World War II, the United States replaced the United Kingdom as the global hegemony to encourage national independence from colonialist powers. National independence turned the old British and French colonies into an “open door” and “equally shared interests” model. The loss of Britain and France is the gain of the United States. The model has changed, but the basic economic principles of division of labor and economy of scale remain the same, that is, Western developed countries also need resources and markets in Asia, Africa, and Latin America to support their capital operation scale. The most-favored-nation treatment and the national treatment of the WTO are extensions of the principle of “equally shared interests”. When a country lowers tariffs for one big power, it must lower the tariffs for all other powers as well. This is called the “most-favored-nation treatment. ” mode. Demanding free trade is the extension and continuation of the “open door” policy. The global market economic order dominated by the United States after World War II is a unified global market, which refines the global division of labor and improves productivity. Movement of independence was surging, becoming the general trend of the world that “the world trend is mighty, and those who follow it prosper and those who go against it perish”.
The WTO rules are aimed at the free movement of production factors and goods in the world market. There is free movement of goods and commodities by lowering tariffs. There can also be free movement of the labor force. The United States and Canada issue visas to Mexican seasonal migrant workers every year, and the Gulf oil-exporting countries use a large number of foreign laborers. The use of foreign labor is often the soil of racial discrimination, creates a market for human traffickers, creates social problems in the underground economy, and conflicts with moral norms. Therefore, it is preferable for the free flow of capital. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the first thing to implement is the free flow of capital. The free flow of capital is also a double-edged sword. It can promote the prosperity and development of the global economy, and it can also become a channel for international financial monopoly capital to loot the wealth of other countries. The debt crisis in Latin America in the 1980s was the work of monopoly capital looting the wealth of Latin America and putting Latin America in the “middle-income trap”. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, its wealth was looted by the West, which is the result of the free flow of capital. In the 1998 Asian financial turmoil, financial monopoly capital looted a large amount of wealth in Asia. When western capital poured into certain countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, the country’s economies flourished. When the western capital withdraws from a country, the economy of that country collapses. It is called economical assassination. This financial drama was repeated several times after World War II. This is a good game for financial monopoly capital to loot developing countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. At the beginning of the 21st century, the Internet economic bubble in the United States burst, and the economic crisis in the United States looted the assets of American allies in Europe. The Kosovo war in 1998-1999 drove Eurodollars to the Nasdaq stock market. After the dot-com bubble burst, all the Eurodollars vanished on Wall Street. The 21st century is the century when the United States cannibalizes its allies.
Let’s continue with the talk about the division of labor promoting global economic progress. The information revolution at the end of the last century suddenly brought countries closer together, globalization has become a sacred human mission, the global economy is booming, and the world division of labor is unprecedented. Many manufacturing industries in Western countries are outsourced to developing countries. An increase in productivity is an increase in efficiency at the company level. If the company’s own production cost is higher than the market price, it is outsourced to other factories to reduce costs. A market economy only needs to maintain the core competitiveness of the company. For example, the core competitiveness of Nike and Adidas is marketing, and all manufacturing is outsourced. American shoe companies do not need to manufacture shoes in the United States, and they can stand out from the crowd by only retaining design and marketing. The same is true for clothing, such as the Crocodile brand, which can profit from brand royalty only, and the clothing factories can be located in Bangladesh or Vietnam. The Canadian automobile manufacturing industry is all factories invested by American and Japanese capital. The Canadian automobile manufacturing industry is very developed, but there is no Canadian national brand. Globalization has created huge wealth, which is the result of the global division of labor in industrial mass production. Capital export is more human rights acceptable than labor import. If you want to uphold human rights, you don’t have to uphold them domestically, and just oppose other countries if you uphold them. On January 23, 2023, a Chinese shooting occurred on a California farm in the United States, and 7 people were killed. This is the tragedy of importing labor. The United States is the world’s largest human trafficking market. After the upheaval in Eastern Europe, a large number of women and children were abducted into the United States as sex slaves. The black market for American labor is a humanitarian disaster. U.S. capital needs cheap labor, but the U.S. built a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border to prevent Latin Americans from trafficking into the U.S. Instead of the free movement of labor in the market, the U.S. chose the North American Free Trade Agreement to allow capital to flow into Mexico to harvest profits from cheap labor. American capital invests in China, and some white leftists in the United States attack China for having no human rights, not protecting workers, and making labor cheap. Therefore, American workers support Trump and denounce China’s human rights situation. In this anti-China atmosphere, the two parties are unanimous to have the manufacturing industry back in the United States. This is a move of deglobalization and isolationism and is a move against the international division of labor and a move against the trend of history. Deglobalization is the dismemberment of the international division of labor in mass production in society, resulting in a supply chain crisis, which reduces the productivity of the global economy, lowers the productivity level of the global economy, and leads to global inflation. The COVID pandemic and the Ukraine War have made the inflation caused by the US trade war with China even worse. The U.S. trade war with China is the deglobalization by decoupling China. It is the contemporary Luddite movement. It believes that China has benefited from the international division of labor in globalization, so it wants to abolish globalization. This is the same as in the Luddite movement back then. The craftsmen in the workshop think that the machine has robbed them of their jobs and want to smash the machine.
The 2008 financial tsunami was a turning point in history. Unlike the Latin American debt crisis, the 1998 Asian financial turmoil, and the bursting of the Nasdaq stock market bubble, something went wrong on Wall Street. Wall Street monopoly capital failed to take advantage of this crisis to quickly harvest the wealth in the world economy. However, the original genes of the empire’s plunder of Asia, Africa, and Latin America have not changed. The United States launched the Asia-Pacific rebalancing strategy in 2009, targeting China’s huge wealth. Instead of instant profiteering, such as cutting off Russia’s energy supply to Europe and selling liquefied natural gas to Europe at a high price in 2022, the United States entered the era of zero interest rate policy and quantitative easing, sucking wealth from the world economy until the COVID pandemic. China’s manufacturing capacity is more than enough to supply the sucking of the United States. Therefore, for more than ten years after 2008, China has built a high-speed railway network. The United States can sustain its economy through quantitative easing and zero-interest rate policy, but it cannot stop China’s development. The international division of labor in globalization is the inevitable result of the market economy. The 2008 financial tsunami made both China and the United States realize that the international north-south economic pattern typified as Chinese manufacturing and American consumption is no longer sustainable. The U.S. wants to transform from producing less and consuming more to increasing manufacturing, and China wants to transform from producing more and consuming less to increasing consumption. Which strategy is easier to realize for China and the United States? It is certainly easier to increase consumption than to increase production. Therefore, the rapid rise of China’s middle class after 2008 has been charged by both China and western countries. There are theories in the West that the middle class is the cornerstone of Western democratic systems, and the rise of the Chinese middle class is benefiting China’s adoption of Western democratic systems.
Let’s continue the talk about the division of labor and progress. China’s inclusion in the world division of labor began with the Opium War. There is a view that the Opium War opened the door to China, that is, since the Opium War, the great powers had equally shared interests in China, and the opening of the treaty port brought China into the suzerain-colonial global economic order dominated by Western powers. The century of humiliation since the Opium War is the history of China being a semi-colony. In 1949, under the historical trend of “national liberation and country independence”, Red China was born. The West was dissatisfied with the loss of the quasi-colony. The United States published the white paper “The Loss of China” followed by a blockade against China. During the Cold War, China was blocked by both hegemonies and excluded from the global economy. The reason why China’s industrialization process is difficult to make progress is that there is no overseas market like the British Empire, and there is no market in the world like the United States financial domination after WWII. However, during the Cold War, the economies of the two camps were comparable, that is, the market economy could divide labor, and the planned economy could also divide labor. But the capitalist market economy was lost to the Soviet-planned economy in the Eastern camp. When the West fell into the Great Depression in the 1930s, the industrialization of the Soviet Union led by Stalin advanced by leaps and bounds. The Soviet Union took the lead in sending astronaut Gagarin into space, while the United States was deeply mired in the Vietnam War. The essence of national strength is economic strength. The essence of economic strength is the level of productivity. Nixon’s visit to Mao Zedong opened the door for China to return to the international division of labor, and the door was opened again, but this time the opening of the door was different from the Opium War. China’s reform and opening up is China’s independent opening up, and it is an opening up that maintains sovereignty and independence. The United States won the Cold War because of a deal between Nixon and Mao Zedong. Nixon accepted China into the international division of labor, and China helped the United States get out of the quagmire of the Vietnam War. Among the two camps of the Cold War dominated by the United States and the Soviet Union, the American-led camp suddenly combined the huge market of China, and the economic strength of the Western camp greatly increased. Due to China’s reform and opening up, the GDP growth rate of the United States in 1984 was as high as 7.24%. China accounted for a quarter of the world’s population at that time. The biggest advantage of China’s participation in the world division of labor was cheap and high-quality labor. The special economic zone model at the beginning of the reform and opening up was, “processing with supplied materials”, and “with two ends outside”. Foreign manufacturing is assembled in China, using Chinese labor. Japan’s economy has also reached a higher level. It has transferred labor-intensive industries, such as garments and footwear. This is a win-win relationship. China has embarked on the process of industrialization. The process of industrialization depends on a large market, which is larger than the domestic market. It is an international division of labor, an increase in productivity, and an increase in productivity. After China joined the international division of labor, it first developed the garment industry, which is almost the same as the origin of the first industrial revolution in Britain in the textile industry. Facts have proved that win-win cooperation is feasible. Western capital makes profits in China, labor is the source of surplus value, and Western capital profits come from Chinese labor joining the world division of labor.
The international division of labor pays attention to resource endowments. Countries have different resource endowments and different cultures. China as an agricultural civilization emphasizes production over trade. Since ancient times, there has been an economic culture that “emphasizes agriculture over commerce.” Western capitalism started from the commercial capital, from maritime trade, and the West emphasizes trade. Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” is the culture of worship of market transactions. In business practice, Chinese merchants place a high value on smaller profits with more sales. Overseas Chinese like to buy things in Chinese supermarkets because of the high value/price ratio. Most Chinese businessmen use smaller profits with more sales as their business strategy. Western merchants focus on monopoly profits and want high returns, occupying a market monopoly position and harvesting monopolizing excess profits. Westerners like brand strategy, patent protection, legal procedures, and other maneuvers to maintain monopoly profits. Therefore, since China’s reform and opening up and joining the international division of labor, there has been such a phenomenon for decades. Whatever China buys is expensive, and whatever China sells is cheap. The high-priced goods that were produced in the West drop sharply once they are made in China. China’s industrialization process has promoted global market competition, and market competition has lowered profits and lowered prices. In the early days of reform and opening up, China was a transitional economy, transitioning from a planned economy to a market economy, and free market competition was the Washington consensus, an academic consensus in Western countries to encourage China to open its door. The essence of a monopoly is to suppress market competition and an anti-market economy in essence, so countries have different degrees of anti-monopoly laws. Monopoly is actually a kind of bullying and domination of the market, which is a distortion of market rules. It can be said that China’s participation in the industrialization process of the world division of labor has strengthened global market competition and improved the global market economy under the capitalist system.
The information revolution at the end of the last century has greatly advanced the process of globalization, which is part of the Washington Consensus. Trade promotes the division of labor, promotes economic growth, and trade is beneficial to both sides of the trade partners. This is an important conclusion of Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations” more than two hundred years ago, and it is also the experience of human history. The increase in GDP per capita in each country is positively correlated with export trade. The development of high technology in this century is a knowledge-intensive economy, and a knowledge-intensive economy has an economy of scale, that is, the use of knowledge will not reduce the value of knowledge. The production of 100 products is one design, and the production of 1 million products is the same design. But the R&D cost of a high-tech product is very high. High-tech products not only require international division of labor and cooperation, but also a large international market. The international division of labor is reflected in the increase in the trade volume of intermediate products, parts, and components in international trade. A product often uses components or materials from many countries. It is very difficult for a high-tech product to be completely produced within one country. The computer is designed in the United States, the chips are produced in Taiwan, and assembled in Dongguan, Guangdong. The rise of China’s middle class has greatly increased the purchasing power of the Chinese market, making China a market that cannot be ignored for high-tech products. The Apple tablet has been launched in China many times, and there are basically no international brands that are without the Chinese market. Any brand that despises the Chinese market risks being squeezed out of the market. BlackBerry, the originator of smartphones, did not enter the Chinese market, which led to BlackBerry’s complete withdrawal from the smartphone market.
Today, in the trade war between China and the United States, the US strategy is to de-globalize the competition in the world economy, excluding China from the global industrial chain, and moving all the chip industry chains into the United States. This is a modern Luddite movement that goes against the general trend of the world. China today insists on market opening and globalization, which is in line with the general trend of history. Trump’s increase of tariffs on Chinese goods did not reduce the US trade deficit with China but instead increased it. TSMC moved to the United States and gave up the Chinese market. Giving up the Chinese market is tantamount to suicide. TSMC invested 40 billion US dollars to build a 3nm factory in the United States. 3nm chips are military-sensitive products and can only be sold to the US military-industrial complex. The market is extremely limited. A high-tech industry without a global market to join today’s international division of labor is impossible. High technology is more dependent on the global market. In 2021, China’s electric vehicle market will account for 53% of the global market, and China’s electric vehicle market will account for 60% of the global market in 2022. Losing the Chinese market is equivalent to losing the global market. However, the national policy of Canada’s electric vehicle industry is to de-Sinicize. This practice of choosing sides by geopolitics seriously damages Canada’s national interests and repeats the mistakes of the decline of BlackBerry. Chinese netizens are more than three times that of the United States. Without the Chinese market, artificial intelligence chat platforms cannot last. There are 900 million people in China using mobile phones, and China’s mobile payment penetration rate is second to none in the world. Industry 4.0 requires big data. China’s large population is the advantage of big data. Deep learning needs to be used by many people. China’s large population is an advantage.
What are sanctions? Denying market access is a sanction because if you lose the market, you will lose your scale, you will lose the basis for the division of labor, and you will lose the ability to advance your industry. China’s population of 1.4 billion is actually the largest unified market with a unified language. The population of India exceeds that of China. However, India has dozens of languages, all of which are spelling written languages, and the degree of market unification is far lower than that of China. The population of the European Union is half of that of China, and there are English, German, French, etc., the degree of market unification is lower than that of China, and product manuals need several languages to enter the market.
The basis of the capitalist economy is the market economy, which is the market movement of capital, from production capital to commodity capital to financial capital, so that the cycle continues to expand. However, the United States brutally interferes with the global supply chain with state power, stipulating where chips are produced and to whom they can sell. This approach is destroying capitalism. The U.S. military-industrial complex and financial monopoly capital are subverting the Western capitalism of the past few hundred years. The deglobalization of the United States has reduced its own market. Industry 4.0 is an intelligent revolution. Many technologies of the intelligence revolution are not for the end consumer market, but for the manufacturing market. The technological revolution in manufacturing is the largest market for the intelligence revolution, and China is the largest manufacturing country in the world and the largest market for Industry 4.0. Even for end-user consumer products, such as electric vehicles, China is second to none. Looking at the general trend of the world from the perspective of economic theory, the general trend is on the side of China, not on the side of the United States.
Both Marx and Adam Smith are Western economists, and the theory of economic progress based on the division of labor is entirely a Western theory. Why do western think tanks fail to see this general trend? Probably not. They also have theories of geopolitics, specifically the theory of realpolitik. They believe that the United States is the largest military power today, can play zero-sum games, and can be the winner taking all. Although China’s military power is incomparable with that of the United States, however, China and the United States have the capability of nuclear mutual destruction. It is very difficult for the United States to change the pattern of nuclear mutual destruction. The purpose of the United States’ global missile defense system is to destroy China’s nuclear mutual destruction capability. However, China soon developed a hypersonic missile that can directly break through the US global missile defense system. Why did a stray balloon make America hysterical? It shows that the global missile defense system turned out to be a paper tiger, and the United States can do nothing about the balloon floating over the United States for several days. China’s J-20 surpasses the American F35 in many performances. Isn’t the United States leading the world in technology? Why can China’s hypersonic missiles and 5th-generation fighter jets catch up with the United States? The reason is that fluid mechanics is a nonlinear equation. No matter how advanced American technology is, it is difficult to develop hypersonic missiles and fighter jets without large wind tunnel experiments. China is a big manufacturing country, and China is a big energy country. China has the highest and strongest wind tunnel in the world. With this wind tunnel advantage, China’s hypersonic missiles and 5th and 6th-generation fighter jets will be ahead of the United States. This is a matter of engineering and manufacturing capabilities. China has this capability, but the United States does not. Why is there a Vietnam War cemetery and a Korean War cemetery in Washington DC? The Korean War and the Vietnam War were the lost wars of the United States, the only two lost wars of the United States, both of which were defeated by Red China. The United States has never won a military war against China. Even when Red China was still in its embryonic state, the United States lost China during the Chinese Civil War, when Chiang Kai-shek, which the United States supported, lost to Mao Zedong.
The history of New China proves that the United States cannot subdue Red China through military warfare. So, why is the national policy suggested by Western think tanks still overwhelmingly supporting the United States? Do Western think tank scholars even have this knowledge of contemporary history? Yet they still cross their fingers, thinking that although the United States cannot defeat red China militarily, it can change China’s color and turn red China into blue China. The US could defeat China through the color revolution, and peaceful evolution, on the ideological front. The riots in Hong Kong in 2019 showed the power of the American color revolution capability. In the field of ideology, China and the United States have fought each other before. After the founding of the People’s Republic of China, Mao Zedong opposed hegemony around the world and supported the civil rights movement of black Americans. The restoration of the legal seat of Red China in the United Nations is the result of China’s victory over the United States in the front of ideology. The United States is successful in color revolutions repeatedly such as in the Arab Spring and the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. But why did it fail in China? The US tried it once in 1989, why didn’t it change the color of China, but changed the color of the Soviet Union instead? In fact, the petty tricks of the peaceful evolution of the American color revolution are powerless in China, because China has had The Great Cultural Revolution, a color revolution by Mao that far exceeds the sum of all the color revolutions by the United States in scale, depth, and breadth. With the experience of ten years of The Great Revolution, the Chinese understand the importance of the rule of law, and the Chinese cherish harmony and oppose turmoil. Mao the greatest statesman in human history has already prepared China to resist the color revolution, making the color revolution incited by the United States powerless against China. China has been avoiding wars on the ideological front since “keeping a low profile” by Deng, but the United States adheres to the Cold War mentality and insists on pulling China into the ideological battlefield. It seems, from the present US policy towards China, that China will not be able to avoid the new ideological war. By examining contemporary history, it is also unimaginable that China will not be defeated in this ideological war. Between human conscience and hypocrisy, between a community with a shared future for mankind and America first, between justice and realpolitik, between the general trend of the division of labor and the contemporary Luddite movement, what do we want for the human future?
The United States is now using a deceptive strategy of attacking others. On the surface, it solidifies allies to contain China and Russia, but in essence, it cannibalizes its allies. The United States harvested the wealth of the European Union in 2022, which is ugly. Now it is looting the chip industries of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan on the grounds of national security. We hear no sound on this obvious observation. All media are pretending the emperor wearing a cloth.
The United States is declining and China is rising. This is the general trend of history, which is observed on the basis of the theory of division of labor of classical economics. The United States is deglobalizing, shrinking its market, and weakening the international division of labor; while China is accelerating globalization, expanding its market, and strengthening the international division of labor through regional comprehensive economic partners, the BRICS organization, and the Belt and Road Initiative. To fall with the US? or to grow with China? this is the question for leaders of every country in formulating its national policies.
