The Shattered ‘Paradise’ of Agricultural Mogul Sun Dawu
August 31, 2021
Leo Timm
Though a CCP member and professed socialist, Sun believed in the capacity of the Chinese people to work for themselves. The backwardness and poverty of the countryside, he frequently argued, had little to do with the inability of China’s farmers to turn profits, but stemmed from the preponderance of crushing government regulations and taxes.
Speaking with the Chinese-language Epoch Times, Wang lamented that the Party saw people like Sun, “who have ideals and create prosperity for the people,” as enemies. “These people are society’s conscience, and they are hard to find. It is they who lead society forward.” But the CCP “is practicing totalitarianism, it is going backward, so any force that stops this backsliding will be increasingly suppressed and destroyed.”
For Cao, the Dawu Group’s accomplishments show “what a private citizen and a private company can do for the country, for a place, and for the people with a little freedom and policy support from the government. But I’m afraid, politically, that’s exactly where the CCP now sees danger,” Cao, the editor of China Change, wrote.
Sun had said in his numerous speeches that China’s countryside had no shortage of talent, labor, capital, or markets; only a lack of freedom.
https://truthusa.us/china-news/the-shattered-paradise-of-agricultural-mogul-sun-dawu/
One reason Dawu Group was successful was that it stressed self-suffiency. The concept of self-sufficiency matches Xi Jinping's goal for the country. One problem with the Dawu Group model may have been that it was too self-sufficient in that it did not rely enough on government. For example, it may have been "out of sync" with government regulations in some areas. Sun Dawu has conceded as much.
As a result, a dispute arose in the summer of 2020 between Dawu Group and a state-owned organ known as Xushui State Farm. At other times it is referred to as Baoding State Farm so the author is not exactly sure who the owners are. To use a bodily reference, Xushui State Farm might be considered to be the equivalent of a vestigial organ such as an earlobe.
The local regulatory, administrative issues assumed national, political importance on the 100th anniversary of the CCP. In fact, it was reported at one point that prosecutors wished to hold the criminal trial of Dawu Group's employees on July 1, 2021 in Baoding or when the Chinese Communist Party was celebrating at Tiananmen Square in Beijing. Were they just trying to curry favour with the leader at the expense of national issues such as alleviation and elimination of poverty, redistribution of weath and achievement of common prosperity?
August 31, 2021
Leo Timm
Though a CCP member and professed socialist, Sun believed in the capacity of the Chinese people to work for themselves. The backwardness and poverty of the countryside, he frequently argued, had little to do with the inability of China’s farmers to turn profits, but stemmed from the preponderance of crushing government regulations and taxes.
Speaking with the Chinese-language Epoch Times, Wang lamented that the Party saw people like Sun, “who have ideals and create prosperity for the people,” as enemies. “These people are society’s conscience, and they are hard to find. It is they who lead society forward.” But the CCP “is practicing totalitarianism, it is going backward, so any force that stops this backsliding will be increasingly suppressed and destroyed.”
For Cao, the Dawu Group’s accomplishments show “what a private citizen and a private company can do for the country, for a place, and for the people with a little freedom and policy support from the government. But I’m afraid, politically, that’s exactly where the CCP now sees danger,” Cao, the editor of China Change, wrote.
Sun had said in his numerous speeches that China’s countryside had no shortage of talent, labor, capital, or markets; only a lack of freedom.
https://truthusa.us/china-news/the-shattered-paradise-of-agricultural-mogul-sun-dawu/
One reason Dawu Group was successful was that it stressed self-suffiency. The concept of self-sufficiency matches Xi Jinping's goal for the country. One problem with the Dawu Group model may have been that it was too self-sufficient in that it did not rely enough on government. For example, it may have been "out of sync" with government regulations in some areas. Sun Dawu has conceded as much.
As a result, a dispute arose in the summer of 2020 between Dawu Group and a state-owned organ known as Xushui State Farm. At other times it is referred to as Baoding State Farm so the author is not exactly sure who the owners are. To use a bodily reference, Xushui State Farm might be considered to be the equivalent of a vestigial organ such as an earlobe.
The local regulatory, administrative issues assumed national, political importance on the 100th anniversary of the CCP. In fact, it was reported at one point that prosecutors wished to hold the criminal trial of Dawu Group's employees on July 1, 2021 in Baoding or when the Chinese Communist Party was celebrating at Tiananmen Square in Beijing. Were they just trying to curry favour with the leader at the expense of national issues such as alleviation and elimination of poverty, redistribution of weath and achievement of common prosperity?
Mao Tse-tung introduced the concept of "common prosperity" in 1953. In 1958, he visited Xushui District, Hebei Province to better understand the situation of the peasants and to promote the Great Leap Forward. Today, it seems that more understanding of the state-organ known as Xushui State Farm and Dawu Group is required by the national leadership if it wishes to promote "common prosperity" in the rural areas of China. Is "common prosperity" furthered with the imprisonment of Dawu Group executives and with the local government takeover of a thriving agricultural enterprise which serves the people? Dawu Group is not only "run" by the local government, but is being "run down" by it. Is this the model of "common prosperity" for the rural areas of China? The peasants, farmers and migrants might think differently. It may be time for another visit to Xushui District by the national leadership if it wishes to follow in the steps of Mao Tse-tung.
COMMON PROSPERITY (共同富裕)
"But common prosperity doesn’t just apply to financial markets – it also applies to society’s spiritual and cultural lives. It needs to be extended to rural and urban areas--and in particular, rural infrastructure and rural living conditions need to be improved" Xi said.
https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2021/08/is-getting-rich-still-glorious-xi-targets-wealth-inequality/
In the early 1990s, Sun Dawu proposed that the guiding principle of the Dawu Group was "not to aim for profit, but place development as the main goal, with common prosperity as the destination.” (共同繁荣为归宿)
After his release from prison in 2003, Sun Dawu began to implement the "constitutional system of private enterprise”in the Dawu Group. It could be summarized in six Chinese characters as “private-ownership, open governance, and co-prosperity” (私有、公治、共享) that cover the issues of ownership, governance, and supervision, a balance of three powers.
Sun Dawu is well aware of his company’s roots. In his words: “We are in a rather isolated place, and the surrounding rural areas are relatively poor where Dawu is the only large enterprise, so for everyone’s sake, I have had to walk the road of common prosperity (共同富裕). Dawu has relied on the support of villagers, on everybody’s support to get to where it is today, so I think the road we’ve taken is the right one.”
https://chinachange.org/2021/04/02/sun-dawu-a-chinese-agricultural-entrepreneurs-36-year-dream-in-the-era-of-reform-and-opening-up-part-two/
Sun Dawu of Dawu Group implements Xi Jinping's concept of "common prosperity" (共同富裕共) through both "common prosperity as a destination" and "co-prosperity" (共享) in rural infrastructure and living conditions.
May 14, 2010 Sun Dawu
国家经济重心应向乡镇转移
河北大午农牧集团有限责任公司 孙大午
中央很重视农村问题，连续发了8个一号文件，但从实际效果看，农村变化不大，经济没有明显起色。我觉得这些一号文件，表明了国家的一种态度，却并没有提供具体的发展思路，也没有一个可操作的突破点。如何解决三农问题，促进农村的工业化发展，加快农村城市化进程？我认为，我们国家的经济重心应当向乡镇转移。
一、为什么向乡镇转移？
现在县级以上的城市已经开始膨胀式发展，而地处农村的乡镇发展滞后、缓慢。中国的改革开放，虽然始于农村，但实质却是县城及以上城市经济的开放。我们国家以经济建设为中心，其实是以城市为中心进行建设。经济重心始终集中在县城及县城以上城市，这让农村的人才、资金及建设用地源源不断地流向城市，激发了城市的活力，使城市迅速繁荣起来。这种繁荣，是建立在农村的巨大输出之上的，不可能持续发展。时至今日，其弊病已日益凸显：一方面是城市（包括一些县城）规模越来越大，交通拥堵，房价虚高，能源供应紧张，人口和就业压力巨大，大城市病越来越明显；另一方面是农村的人才和资金继续流向城市，农村经济萧条，城乡差别不断扩大，贫富分化越来越严重。可以说，我们的城市已经奔跑在工业化和信息化的大道上，农村却还在小农经济的泥泞里蹒跚。在这种局面下，单纯的讲反哺农村或反哺农业，都很难从根本上解决问题。
如果农村的改革是从联产承包责任制开始，那么城市的发展就是从开发区起步。深圳原来只是一个小渔村，因为设立开发区而崛起，全国学习深圳经验，结果就是在县城都建立了开发区。可以说，我们城市的发展建设，就是以建立工业化的开发区为依托的。
中央提出科学发展观、城乡统筹，明确要启动内需、重视民营经济，这是很好的趋势。我们要看到，城乡差距既是问题，也是机遇，越是落后地区，提升空间越广阔。如果我们将经济重心转移到乡镇，弥补城乡的巨大差距，让边远地区、穷乡僻壤发展起来，那我们国家的经济就能继续高速发展，而且很多社会问题，比如农民工问题、留守儿童问题、空心村问题等也能迎刃而解。
将经济重心转移到乡镇，发展乡镇经济，有很多成功的范例。
世界上的发达国家和地区，城乡差别都很小，甚至没有差别。欧洲一些国家的乡镇，比城市更适于居住，经济发达，社会安宁；我们集团的干部到韩国旅游，韩国的农村工厂很多，别墅林立，基本分不出哪里是城市，哪里是农村；我们到台湾考察，台湾的民雄乡就有两个工业开发区，连有名的中正大学都坐落在乡镇里。
将乡镇作为经济重心，并非是发达国家的专利。早在1985年，上海市就曾经提出过“三个集中”的发展模式，即人口向乡镇集中，企业向乡镇工业园区集中和耕地向大农场集中，不过这个模式没有贯彻到底。我发现，现在发展较快的山东省在很多乡镇设立工业园区，把发展乡镇企业作为振兴山东经济的战略重点，乡镇发展热火朝天，很有起色。农民很明白，在田里种庄稼穷，在地上种企业富，农村单纯靠发展农业，是没有什么出路的。
我想，要缩小城乡之间的各种差距，减缓城市压力，解决大城市病，我们国家的经济重心就应当向乡镇转移，在乡镇的广阔天地大力发展工业，通过改变农村的生产方式而改变农民的生活方式，变村庄为市镇，让人们安居乐业。
二、工业化是城镇化的必由之路。
从1995年起，我们国家开始大力开展小城镇建设，新农村建设，可是至今成效不大，其关键就在于我们只关注农村生活方式的转变，忽视了农村生产方式的改变。
在这方面，我们走了不少弯路，发展特色农业，搞农业产业化、现代化，这些措施虽然在一定程度上促进了农村发展，但成效很小。特色农业、农业现代化的实质，其实都是将农民固定在土地上，节约的劳力仍然是外出打工，支援城市建设；农业产业化消化了部分劳动力，但由于生产条件的制约，得不到大范围的推广。
发展乡镇经济，工业化是必由之路。1978年到88年这十年里，是乡镇企业异军突起的十年，那时候乡镇企业星罗棋布，群星璀璨，经济发展迅速，大批劳动力就地创业，自主择业，农民收入增加很快。可后来我们实行了新的土地管理法，禁止在农村办企业，企业全部集中到县以上开发区，乡镇经济就此一蹶不振，直到现在。
关于城镇化的建设，也有很多好的案例，如河北省高碑店市的白沟镇和霸州市的胜芳镇等。白沟和胜芳在历史上都曾经是著名的水旱码头，有悠久的工商业发展历史。改革开放后，白沟镇以箱包生产起步，出现了大批家庭式专业作坊，到九十年代中期，白沟的箱包生产进入精细化分工阶段，印花、剪裁、设计等辅助专业户越来越多，箱包生产区覆盖了500多个自然村，从事箱包和生产的人员近7万人，到2009年，全镇的总产值达到130亿元。胜芳镇则以家具产业为主，带动金属、板材、玻璃等产业，仅家具生产企业就有1300多家，全镇工商企业共7000余家，从业人员7万多人，2009年全镇总产值达到208亿元。这两个乡镇，都是从工业甚至是手工业起步，带动乡镇经济发展，进而推动城镇化建设。现在白沟镇有近万亩的工业园区，胜芳则是全镇都成为霸州工业区，这两个乡镇的农民，已基本实现了居民化。
先改变生产方式，再改变生活方式，这才是符合“经济基础决定上层建筑”这一社会发展原理的做法。也就是说，只有实现了乡镇经济的工业化，才能实现农民生活的城镇化，这个次序不能颠倒。
三、发展乡镇经济，可以从转变乡镇政府职能开始。
乡镇政府的行政职能，决定了它对发展农村经济的关键作用。
我们现在的乡镇政府仍然是县政府的派出机构，而不是一级政府，它既不能独立自主地发展，又不能带动农村乡镇发展。乡镇政府只有成为一级政府，成为机关法人，享有法人财产权、独立民事行为能力，才能具备自主发展的能力，成为带动农村乡镇发展的核心。
我们现在的乡镇财政体制，很多地方都在沿袭政府统收统支的体制，也就是说，乡镇政府收了多少钱，都要上交给县政府，乡镇政府的开支，要经过县政府审批。乡镇政府没有自由度，对于本乡镇的经济发展规划、计划、财政收支、预算决算等都无法自主。在这样的体制下，乡镇政府既不承担发展本乡镇经济的责任，也不享有本乡镇经济发展的成果，怎么会成为发展乡镇经济的核心呢？
如果想让农村活起来，就应该先让乡镇政府活起来，把乡镇政府变成一个具有实际意义的一级政府，让乡镇政府承担责任，享受成果，然后以乡镇政府为中心，发展农村经济。
如果乡镇政府成为一级政府，享有目前县级政府的发展政策，可以设立工业开发区，那么乡镇政府就可以招商引资，实现农村的工业化。
如果能更进一步的话，我觉得在政府机构设置方面，一些发展较快的地区，可以借鉴台湾“县市并行”的经验，因为从实际效果看，城市对农村经济发展的带动作用甚小，而虹吸效应极大，从某种程度上，城市的发展已经成为农村发展的阻碍。所谓县市并行，就是市只负责管理建设城市，而县则负责管理建设乡镇，使用两套人马，两套班子，分置两个行政区域，让我们的支农资金对县（乡镇）而不对市（城）。这样做的好处是避免了县政府既管理县城经济又管理乡镇经济的弊端，防止县城经济过快而乡镇经济发展滞后。
四、房地产开发，是发展乡镇的重要支柱
农村未来的发展趋势，应该是自然村向大的中心村合并，小乡镇向大乡镇合并，以乡镇为中心，吸纳附近村民，在乡镇安居乐业。这样可以腾出很多土地，建工厂、盖楼房，进行小城镇建设。这就涉及到放活农村土地问题。
我认为，要搞活农村经济，就应该适当放活农村的土地，让农村的土地包括宅基地、房产能够流转起来。因为社会经济发展的三大要素就是土地、金融和劳动力，劳动力和金融都是跟着土地走的，土地是最基本的生产要素，是农村、农民的最大资产。如果人为禁止了买卖交易，使农民的房子、宅基地、土地不能流通，这些资源就没有价值，或者说不能体现其价值。乡镇经济的工业化需要放开农村的土地资源，让农村的土地、宅基地、房产能够顺畅流转，在流转中实现其应有的价值。以前我在一些场合呼吁，我们不要再修改《土地管理法》，而是重新制定《土地法》，给农民确权，让农民的土地能够流转，让农民的宅基地、房产能够买卖交易。
如果不放开农村土地，就很难实现乡镇建设的城镇化，更无法让农民带资进城，让城市资本下乡。这里的“农民带资进城”指的是到农民带资到乡镇定居，“资本下乡”指的是城市资本进驻乡镇，开发乡镇。
我们有些乡镇有自己的企业，经济相对发达一些，比如我们那里的曲阳县阳坊镇。阳坊镇有很多农民从事石雕加工，也赚了不少钱，但乡镇并没有发展起来，因为县政府把税收都拿走了。再有，阳坊镇这些农民赚了钱以后，纷纷到县城买房，哪怕他的工厂、作坊还在老家，也要在县城买房，把自己赚的钱又返还给城市了。别说外来投资，就是农民自己赚的钱，都不能留在农村，留在乡镇，乡镇还怎么发展？农民为什么非要到城市买房？无非是因为在农村、乡镇，无法实现他们乐业安居的梦想。所以，如果不把资本落到实地上，这些钱还是城市的，不是农村的，也不是农民的。只有资本落到实地上，让人们就地自主择业的同时，就地安居，扎下根来，在创造财富的同时，就地消费财富，才能把乡村变成富裕之地。
适当放开农村的建设用地，乡镇政府有了开发房产用地，就可以建设小城镇，改变农民的生活方式。农民也不再需要审批宅基地，将宅基地置换为商品房，把自己最大的资产盘活，变成居民、市民，实现农民“安居”。
http://web.archive.org/web/20130917230055/https://sundawu.ca/-___________.html
The Focus of State Economy should be Shifted towards Townships
(By Sun Dawu: Chief Supervisor of Dawu Group)
The central government attaches great importance to rural issues and launches eight consecutive first-grade documents. But from the practical effect, little change has taken place in rural areas, nor has the economy witnessed any significant improvement. I think the first-grade documents, to some extent, signify the attitude of the country, but provide no concrete development ideas and significant breakthroughs in operational aspect. How to solve the three rural issues concerning agriculture or 1) countryside and peasants 2) promote rural industrialization and 3) speed up the urbanization in rural areas? In my opinion, the focus of our national economy should be transferred to the townships.
Firstly, Reasons for the Shift towards Townships
Nowadays, the cities above the county level have experienced expansive development, but the townships in rural areas have lagged behind. They are developing rather slowly. Although China’s reform and opening up policy starts in rural areas, in reality, it brings more benefits towards counties or the cities above the county-level. Our country centers on economic construction, but, in fact, it is city building-oriented. The focus of the national economy is always on the counties and cities above county-level which makes talent, capital and lands for construction in rural areas flow continuously to cities. This stimulates the vitality of the cities and raises the cities to a prosperous state. The prosperity built on the huge output and sacrifice of the rural areas can not be sustained.
Today, the shortcomings have become increasingly prominent. On one hand, the scale of cities (including some county towns) is becoming increasingly larger causing traffic congestion, artificially high housing prices, shortage of energy supply, huge population and employment pressure etc. The so-called “urban diseases” emerge and become increasingly obvious.
On the other hand, talent and capital in rural areas continue to flow to cities, leading to the recession of rural areas, the growing differences between urban and rural areas, and the worst situation of the disparity between rich and poor. We can say that our cities have been galloping on the road of industrialization and "informatization". On the contrary, the economy in rural areas is still staggering in the mud of a small-scale peasant economy. In this situation it is very difficult to fundamentally solve the problems simply in the way of compensating rural areas or supporting agriculture.
If we say that the reform in the countryside starts with a system of contracted household responsibility related to output then the development zone is the outset of the development in cities. Shenzhen was originally just a small fishing village. It rose abruptly because of the establishment of development zones. The whole country begins to learn some experience from it. As a result, development zones in the counties are set up. The conclusion can be drawn that the development and construction of our cities rely on the establishment of industrial development zones.
It is a good trend where the Central government has put forward the scientific outlook of development to coordinate urban and rural areas, stimulate domestic demand and pay more attention to the private economy. We must understand that while the gap between urban and rural areas can be a problem, it can also be an opportunity. The more backward the area is, the vaster room there will be for improvement. If we shift the focus of the economy to the townships to make up for the huge gap between urban and rural areas and develop the remote areas and backward counties then we will be able to continue the rapid development of our national economy. Of course, we can easily solve many social problems; such as, migrant workers, left-behind children and empty villages.
Successful stories abound in shifting focus of the economy to townships and by promoting the township economy. There is small or no difference between rural and urban areas in other developed countries and regions. The economically developed townships of social peace in some European countries are more livable than big cities. Associates of our Group who have travelled to South Korea have found everywhere factories located in rural areas and villages. Basically, it is impossible for them to tell the clear boundary between the cities and the rural areas. We also have made an on-the-spot investigation in Taiwan province. We are astonished by the fact that two industrial development zones—including the famous National Chung Cheng University—are located in MinXiong Township.
It is not the “patent” of developed countries to take townships as the economic center. As early as 1985 Shanghai had raised the development model of “three concentration”; that is to say, the people are encouraged to go to the townships, enterprises to township industrial parks and farmlands to large farms. But this mode has not been implemented thoroughly to the end.
Now I also find Shandong Province—a fast growing province—has set up industrial parks in many townships. The development of township enterprises is taken as the strategic focus of the revitalization of the economy. Now the economy of townships is in full swing there. Farmers are clearly aware of the reality that they will remain poor if they just cultivate crops in the fields, but become rich if they develop the enterprises on the land. And there is no way out for them to simply rely on the development of agriculture in rural areas.
Personally speaking, our country’s economic center should be transferred to the townships if we want to narrow the gaps between urban and rural areas, alleviate urban pressure, and solve the so-called city diseases in huge cities. The industries should spring up in the vast townships. They should change the farmers’ way of life through changing the mode of production. In this case, the villages will be turned into small towns and people there can live and work in peace and contentment.
Secondly, Industrialization is the Inevitable Way towards Urbanization
Since 1995, our country has vigorously begun the construction of small towns and new socialist country sides, but so far little has been achieved. The key reason is that we are only concerned about changing the lifestyle of rural areas but we ignore changing the way of production.
In this regard, we have taken a lot of detours. Although the development of specialized agriculture and agricultural industrialization and modernization, to a certain extent, promotes rural development, the effect still is small. The essence of specialized agriculture and agricultural modernization is to fix the farmers on the land. They use spare labour to work outside the home and support urban construction. Agricultural industrialization offers jobs for some of the labour force, but it is impossible to promote it in a large scale way because of the limited production conditions.
Development of the township economy is the inevitable way to industrialization. During the decade from 1978 to 1988, the township enterprises spread all over the townships and villages in a star-studded way and the national economy developed rapidly. So a large number of people started their own businesses or selected their own jobs. The incomes of farmers increased rapidly. But, then, we introduced a new Land Management Law which prohibited enterprises to be built in the rural areas. As a result, all the enterprises were all relocated to the development zones in county towns or the cities above the county-level, plunging the township businesses into recession up to today.
On the development of urbanization, there are many good cases; such as, Beigou Township and Shengfang Township, in Gaobeidian City and Bazhou City respectively of Hebei Province. In history, both Baigou and Shengfang were famous piers with a long history of industrial and commercial development.
After the reforms and opening up, Baigou Town started with bag production, and then a large number of family-style professional workshops began to emerge. In the mid-1990’s, the production of bags in Baigou Township came into the refined phase with division of labour, including printing, tailoring and design etc. The number of specialized households grew. The industry of bag production was scattered throughout more than 500 villages and almost 70,000 people were engaged in bag businesses. By 2009, the town’s total output value had reached 13 billion yuan.
Shengfang Township specialized in furniture industries. This drove the development of various industries; such as, metal sheet material and glass. There are more than 1,300 furniture manufacturers and more than 7,000 businesses in the whole township which employ 70,000 people. In 2009, the total output value of the town reached 20.8 billion yuan.
The towns started from industry or even the handicraft industry to drive economic development, thus promoting urbanization.There is nearly a 1,648 acre industrial park in Baigou Town and the whole Shengfang Township has become the industrial area of Bazhou City.
The mode of production should be changed first and then the lifestyle. It complies with social development practice of the principle “economic base determines the superstructure”. In other words, only by first achieving the industrialization of the rural economy can we realize the urbanization of the peasants’ lifestyle. This order cannot be reversed.
Thirdly, to Develop Rural Economy we should transform the Functions of Township Government
The executive functions of township government determine its key roles in developing the rural economy. The township government is still an agency of county government rather than a class-A government that can develop independently. So it will not stimulate the development of towns and villages. The township government must act as a class-A government or a legal entity entitled with the rights of corporate property and independent capacity for civil rights. Only under this condition will it have the ability for self-development and become the core of development in villages and towns.
The rural financial system in many townships is still following the system of unified collection and relocation of funds by the upper government. In other words, the total revenue of the township government should be handed over to the county government. And any expenditure of a township government should get the approval of the county government. The township government has no freedom. It is incapable of making decisions independently in economic development plans, planning, revenue and expenditure, budget and final accounts concerning its enterprises. In this system, the township government neither assumes any responsibility for the development of the rural economy nor enjoys the fruits of economic development of the township. How can it play the role as the core of development of township economies?
If we want to invigorate rural areas, the township government should be given the priority. We should convert the township government into a class-A government with practical meanings and powers. The township government should take responsibilities and enjoy the fruits. Its core role should be the development of the rural economy.
If the township government works as a class-A government enjoying the present development policies of county governments then industrial development zones can be set up there. At this point the township government can attract investments to realize industrialization.
If further steps can be taken concerning government institutions then I think some fast-growing regions can learn from the system of “cities and counties running parallel” practiced in Taiwan Province. From the practical effect, the city plays very little role in promoting the development of the rural economy, but the Siphon Effect is extraordinary. To some extent the development of the city has become an obstacle for rural development. The so-called system of “city and county running parallel” means that the city governments are only responsible for managing the construction of urban cities, and the county governments are in charge of managing the construction of townships. We can have two leading groups with two administrative divisions so that funds for supporting agriculture are in charge of the county (township), not the City (City). It can help avoid the situation where the county government is in charge of managing the economic development in the county town, towns and villages. It can also prevent the economic development in county towns from flourishing too fast and the township economy lagging behind.
Fourthly, the Development of Real Estate is an Important Pillar for the Development of the Township
It is the trend of future development in rural areas that the small natural village should be merged to be part of key villages, and the small town part of key towns. The key towns will be the centers which can appeal to the villagers in surrounding villages. And they will live and work there in peace and contentment. In this case, a lot of lands will be available to set up factories, buildings, and small towns. At any rate, the future trend will involve the deregulation of rural land.
In my opinion, appropriate deregulation of lands in rural areas is quite essential so as to invigorate the rural economy. The lands which include homesteads and the house properties can circulate. Generally speaking, there are three fundamental elements of social and economic development: land, finance and labour. But labour and finance go along with the land because the land is the most basic factor of production and a peasant’s greatest asset in rural areas. If we artificially ban the necessary transaction, the farmers’ houses, homesteads and lands can not circulate. There is no value of these resources to mention, or we can say their values can not be reflected. Industrialization of the rural economy calls for deregulation of rural land resources. The rural lands, homesteads and house estates should flow smoothly to achieve their proper values in circulation. On some occasions, I call on no more amendments for the “Land Management Law”; instead, we should re-enact the “Land Law”. The law will confirm the farmers’ right of circulating their lands. Naturally, the lands, the homesteads of the farmers, and the house estates can be traded freely.
If we do not deregulate rural lands then it is difficult to achieve urbanization of the township. It is also not necessary to mention the possibilities of the farmers going into the townships with funds and the capital in cities going to the townships. Here, “the farmers going into the city with funds” refers to the farmers with funds settling in the township”: “capital to the countryside” means the capital in cities flowing to towns for their development.
Some towns with their own businesses in our hometown are relatively developed; such as, Yangfang Town in Qugou County. A lot of farmers there are engaged in stone carving and earn a good deal of money. But that township does not develop quite well because the county government takes away the tax. For another reason, after making money the farmers choose to buy a house in the county town even if their factories or workshops are still located at home. So the money still returns back to the city again. Even the money earned by farmers themselves can not be reserved in the countryside or towns not to mention the investment from other places. How can villages and towns be well developed? Why do farmers have to buy a house in the county town? The reason is that in the rural areas or towns, their dreams of living and working in peace and contentment can not be realized. So if we do not put the capital into the development of the townships then money still belongs to the city, not to rural areas and not to farmers. Only by putting the capital into the development of the townships can the farmers settle down and take root while they are selecting professions according to their wills. And they will consume wealth while they are creating it, converting the countryside into a prosperous place.
Appropriate release of the control of the lands for construction in rural areas will offer the township government lands for real estate development. There will be possibilities to build small towns and to change the lifestyle of farmers. Farmers no longer need the approvals for their homesteads. And they can change homesteads for commodity houses, invigorating their best asset to become townspeople, then residents of a city. At last, they can realize their dreams of living and working in peace and contentment.
Translated by a friend of the poet
http://web.archive.org/web/20160510091825/https://sundawu.ca/Focus_of_Economy.html
河北大午农牧集团有限责任公司 孙大午
中央很重视农村问题，连续发了8个一号文件，但从实际效果看，农村变化不大，经济没有明显起色。我觉得这些一号文件，表明了国家的一种态度，却并没有提供具体的发展思路，也没有一个可操作的突破点。如何解决三农问题，促进农村的工业化发展，加快农村城市化进程？我认为，我们国家的经济重心应当向乡镇转移。
一、为什么向乡镇转移？
现在县级以上的城市已经开始膨胀式发展，而地处农村的乡镇发展滞后、缓慢。中国的改革开放，虽然始于农村，但实质却是县城及以上城市经济的开放。我们国家以经济建设为中心，其实是以城市为中心进行建设。经济重心始终集中在县城及县城以上城市，这让农村的人才、资金及建设用地源源不断地流向城市，激发了城市的活力，使城市迅速繁荣起来。这种繁荣，是建立在农村的巨大输出之上的，不可能持续发展。时至今日，其弊病已日益凸显：一方面是城市（包括一些县城）规模越来越大，交通拥堵，房价虚高，能源供应紧张，人口和就业压力巨大，大城市病越来越明显；另一方面是农村的人才和资金继续流向城市，农村经济萧条，城乡差别不断扩大，贫富分化越来越严重。可以说，我们的城市已经奔跑在工业化和信息化的大道上，农村却还在小农经济的泥泞里蹒跚。在这种局面下，单纯的讲反哺农村或反哺农业，都很难从根本上解决问题。
如果农村的改革是从联产承包责任制开始，那么城市的发展就是从开发区起步。深圳原来只是一个小渔村，因为设立开发区而崛起，全国学习深圳经验，结果就是在县城都建立了开发区。可以说，我们城市的发展建设，就是以建立工业化的开发区为依托的。
中央提出科学发展观、城乡统筹，明确要启动内需、重视民营经济，这是很好的趋势。我们要看到，城乡差距既是问题，也是机遇，越是落后地区，提升空间越广阔。如果我们将经济重心转移到乡镇，弥补城乡的巨大差距，让边远地区、穷乡僻壤发展起来，那我们国家的经济就能继续高速发展，而且很多社会问题，比如农民工问题、留守儿童问题、空心村问题等也能迎刃而解。
将经济重心转移到乡镇，发展乡镇经济，有很多成功的范例。
世界上的发达国家和地区，城乡差别都很小，甚至没有差别。欧洲一些国家的乡镇，比城市更适于居住，经济发达，社会安宁；我们集团的干部到韩国旅游，韩国的农村工厂很多，别墅林立，基本分不出哪里是城市，哪里是农村；我们到台湾考察，台湾的民雄乡就有两个工业开发区，连有名的中正大学都坐落在乡镇里。
将乡镇作为经济重心，并非是发达国家的专利。早在1985年，上海市就曾经提出过“三个集中”的发展模式，即人口向乡镇集中，企业向乡镇工业园区集中和耕地向大农场集中，不过这个模式没有贯彻到底。我发现，现在发展较快的山东省在很多乡镇设立工业园区，把发展乡镇企业作为振兴山东经济的战略重点，乡镇发展热火朝天，很有起色。农民很明白，在田里种庄稼穷，在地上种企业富，农村单纯靠发展农业，是没有什么出路的。
我想，要缩小城乡之间的各种差距，减缓城市压力，解决大城市病，我们国家的经济重心就应当向乡镇转移，在乡镇的广阔天地大力发展工业，通过改变农村的生产方式而改变农民的生活方式，变村庄为市镇，让人们安居乐业。
二、工业化是城镇化的必由之路。
从1995年起，我们国家开始大力开展小城镇建设，新农村建设，可是至今成效不大，其关键就在于我们只关注农村生活方式的转变，忽视了农村生产方式的改变。
在这方面，我们走了不少弯路，发展特色农业，搞农业产业化、现代化，这些措施虽然在一定程度上促进了农村发展，但成效很小。特色农业、农业现代化的实质，其实都是将农民固定在土地上，节约的劳力仍然是外出打工，支援城市建设；农业产业化消化了部分劳动力，但由于生产条件的制约，得不到大范围的推广。
发展乡镇经济，工业化是必由之路。1978年到88年这十年里，是乡镇企业异军突起的十年，那时候乡镇企业星罗棋布，群星璀璨，经济发展迅速，大批劳动力就地创业，自主择业，农民收入增加很快。可后来我们实行了新的土地管理法，禁止在农村办企业，企业全部集中到县以上开发区，乡镇经济就此一蹶不振，直到现在。
关于城镇化的建设，也有很多好的案例，如河北省高碑店市的白沟镇和霸州市的胜芳镇等。白沟和胜芳在历史上都曾经是著名的水旱码头，有悠久的工商业发展历史。改革开放后，白沟镇以箱包生产起步，出现了大批家庭式专业作坊，到九十年代中期，白沟的箱包生产进入精细化分工阶段，印花、剪裁、设计等辅助专业户越来越多，箱包生产区覆盖了500多个自然村，从事箱包和生产的人员近7万人，到2009年，全镇的总产值达到130亿元。胜芳镇则以家具产业为主，带动金属、板材、玻璃等产业，仅家具生产企业就有1300多家，全镇工商企业共7000余家，从业人员7万多人，2009年全镇总产值达到208亿元。这两个乡镇，都是从工业甚至是手工业起步，带动乡镇经济发展，进而推动城镇化建设。现在白沟镇有近万亩的工业园区，胜芳则是全镇都成为霸州工业区，这两个乡镇的农民，已基本实现了居民化。
先改变生产方式，再改变生活方式，这才是符合“经济基础决定上层建筑”这一社会发展原理的做法。也就是说，只有实现了乡镇经济的工业化，才能实现农民生活的城镇化，这个次序不能颠倒。
三、发展乡镇经济，可以从转变乡镇政府职能开始。
乡镇政府的行政职能，决定了它对发展农村经济的关键作用。
我们现在的乡镇政府仍然是县政府的派出机构，而不是一级政府，它既不能独立自主地发展，又不能带动农村乡镇发展。乡镇政府只有成为一级政府，成为机关法人，享有法人财产权、独立民事行为能力，才能具备自主发展的能力，成为带动农村乡镇发展的核心。
我们现在的乡镇财政体制，很多地方都在沿袭政府统收统支的体制，也就是说，乡镇政府收了多少钱，都要上交给县政府，乡镇政府的开支，要经过县政府审批。乡镇政府没有自由度，对于本乡镇的经济发展规划、计划、财政收支、预算决算等都无法自主。在这样的体制下，乡镇政府既不承担发展本乡镇经济的责任，也不享有本乡镇经济发展的成果，怎么会成为发展乡镇经济的核心呢？
如果想让农村活起来，就应该先让乡镇政府活起来，把乡镇政府变成一个具有实际意义的一级政府，让乡镇政府承担责任，享受成果，然后以乡镇政府为中心，发展农村经济。
如果乡镇政府成为一级政府，享有目前县级政府的发展政策，可以设立工业开发区，那么乡镇政府就可以招商引资，实现农村的工业化。
如果能更进一步的话，我觉得在政府机构设置方面，一些发展较快的地区，可以借鉴台湾“县市并行”的经验，因为从实际效果看，城市对农村经济发展的带动作用甚小，而虹吸效应极大，从某种程度上，城市的发展已经成为农村发展的阻碍。所谓县市并行，就是市只负责管理建设城市，而县则负责管理建设乡镇，使用两套人马，两套班子，分置两个行政区域，让我们的支农资金对县（乡镇）而不对市（城）。这样做的好处是避免了县政府既管理县城经济又管理乡镇经济的弊端，防止县城经济过快而乡镇经济发展滞后。
四、房地产开发，是发展乡镇的重要支柱
农村未来的发展趋势，应该是自然村向大的中心村合并，小乡镇向大乡镇合并，以乡镇为中心，吸纳附近村民，在乡镇安居乐业。这样可以腾出很多土地，建工厂、盖楼房，进行小城镇建设。这就涉及到放活农村土地问题。
我认为，要搞活农村经济，就应该适当放活农村的土地，让农村的土地包括宅基地、房产能够流转起来。因为社会经济发展的三大要素就是土地、金融和劳动力，劳动力和金融都是跟着土地走的，土地是最基本的生产要素，是农村、农民的最大资产。如果人为禁止了买卖交易，使农民的房子、宅基地、土地不能流通，这些资源就没有价值，或者说不能体现其价值。乡镇经济的工业化需要放开农村的土地资源，让农村的土地、宅基地、房产能够顺畅流转，在流转中实现其应有的价值。以前我在一些场合呼吁，我们不要再修改《土地管理法》，而是重新制定《土地法》，给农民确权，让农民的土地能够流转，让农民的宅基地、房产能够买卖交易。
如果不放开农村土地，就很难实现乡镇建设的城镇化，更无法让农民带资进城，让城市资本下乡。这里的“农民带资进城”指的是到农民带资到乡镇定居，“资本下乡”指的是城市资本进驻乡镇，开发乡镇。
我们有些乡镇有自己的企业，经济相对发达一些，比如我们那里的曲阳县阳坊镇。阳坊镇有很多农民从事石雕加工，也赚了不少钱，但乡镇并没有发展起来，因为县政府把税收都拿走了。再有，阳坊镇这些农民赚了钱以后，纷纷到县城买房，哪怕他的工厂、作坊还在老家，也要在县城买房，把自己赚的钱又返还给城市了。别说外来投资，就是农民自己赚的钱，都不能留在农村，留在乡镇，乡镇还怎么发展？农民为什么非要到城市买房？无非是因为在农村、乡镇，无法实现他们乐业安居的梦想。所以，如果不把资本落到实地上，这些钱还是城市的，不是农村的，也不是农民的。只有资本落到实地上，让人们就地自主择业的同时，就地安居，扎下根来，在创造财富的同时，就地消费财富，才能把乡村变成富裕之地。
适当放开农村的建设用地，乡镇政府有了开发房产用地，就可以建设小城镇，改变农民的生活方式。农民也不再需要审批宅基地，将宅基地置换为商品房，把自己最大的资产盘活，变成居民、市民，实现农民“安居”。
http://web.archive.org/web/20130917230055/https://sundawu.ca/-___________.html
The Focus of State Economy should be Shifted towards Townships
(By Sun Dawu: Chief Supervisor of Dawu Group)
The central government attaches great importance to rural issues and launches eight consecutive first-grade documents. But from the practical effect, little change has taken place in rural areas, nor has the economy witnessed any significant improvement. I think the first-grade documents, to some extent, signify the attitude of the country, but provide no concrete development ideas and significant breakthroughs in operational aspect. How to solve the three rural issues concerning agriculture or 1) countryside and peasants 2) promote rural industrialization and 3) speed up the urbanization in rural areas? In my opinion, the focus of our national economy should be transferred to the townships.
Firstly, Reasons for the Shift towards Townships
Nowadays, the cities above the county level have experienced expansive development, but the townships in rural areas have lagged behind. They are developing rather slowly. Although China’s reform and opening up policy starts in rural areas, in reality, it brings more benefits towards counties or the cities above the county-level. Our country centers on economic construction, but, in fact, it is city building-oriented. The focus of the national economy is always on the counties and cities above county-level which makes talent, capital and lands for construction in rural areas flow continuously to cities. This stimulates the vitality of the cities and raises the cities to a prosperous state. The prosperity built on the huge output and sacrifice of the rural areas can not be sustained.
Today, the shortcomings have become increasingly prominent. On one hand, the scale of cities (including some county towns) is becoming increasingly larger causing traffic congestion, artificially high housing prices, shortage of energy supply, huge population and employment pressure etc. The so-called “urban diseases” emerge and become increasingly obvious.
On the other hand, talent and capital in rural areas continue to flow to cities, leading to the recession of rural areas, the growing differences between urban and rural areas, and the worst situation of the disparity between rich and poor. We can say that our cities have been galloping on the road of industrialization and "informatization". On the contrary, the economy in rural areas is still staggering in the mud of a small-scale peasant economy. In this situation it is very difficult to fundamentally solve the problems simply in the way of compensating rural areas or supporting agriculture.
If we say that the reform in the countryside starts with a system of contracted household responsibility related to output then the development zone is the outset of the development in cities. Shenzhen was originally just a small fishing village. It rose abruptly because of the establishment of development zones. The whole country begins to learn some experience from it. As a result, development zones in the counties are set up. The conclusion can be drawn that the development and construction of our cities rely on the establishment of industrial development zones.
It is a good trend where the Central government has put forward the scientific outlook of development to coordinate urban and rural areas, stimulate domestic demand and pay more attention to the private economy. We must understand that while the gap between urban and rural areas can be a problem, it can also be an opportunity. The more backward the area is, the vaster room there will be for improvement. If we shift the focus of the economy to the townships to make up for the huge gap between urban and rural areas and develop the remote areas and backward counties then we will be able to continue the rapid development of our national economy. Of course, we can easily solve many social problems; such as, migrant workers, left-behind children and empty villages.
Successful stories abound in shifting focus of the economy to townships and by promoting the township economy. There is small or no difference between rural and urban areas in other developed countries and regions. The economically developed townships of social peace in some European countries are more livable than big cities. Associates of our Group who have travelled to South Korea have found everywhere factories located in rural areas and villages. Basically, it is impossible for them to tell the clear boundary between the cities and the rural areas. We also have made an on-the-spot investigation in Taiwan province. We are astonished by the fact that two industrial development zones—including the famous National Chung Cheng University—are located in MinXiong Township.
It is not the “patent” of developed countries to take townships as the economic center. As early as 1985 Shanghai had raised the development model of “three concentration”; that is to say, the people are encouraged to go to the townships, enterprises to township industrial parks and farmlands to large farms. But this mode has not been implemented thoroughly to the end.
Now I also find Shandong Province—a fast growing province—has set up industrial parks in many townships. The development of township enterprises is taken as the strategic focus of the revitalization of the economy. Now the economy of townships is in full swing there. Farmers are clearly aware of the reality that they will remain poor if they just cultivate crops in the fields, but become rich if they develop the enterprises on the land. And there is no way out for them to simply rely on the development of agriculture in rural areas.
Personally speaking, our country’s economic center should be transferred to the townships if we want to narrow the gaps between urban and rural areas, alleviate urban pressure, and solve the so-called city diseases in huge cities. The industries should spring up in the vast townships. They should change the farmers’ way of life through changing the mode of production. In this case, the villages will be turned into small towns and people there can live and work in peace and contentment.
Secondly, Industrialization is the Inevitable Way towards Urbanization
Since 1995, our country has vigorously begun the construction of small towns and new socialist country sides, but so far little has been achieved. The key reason is that we are only concerned about changing the lifestyle of rural areas but we ignore changing the way of production.
In this regard, we have taken a lot of detours. Although the development of specialized agriculture and agricultural industrialization and modernization, to a certain extent, promotes rural development, the effect still is small. The essence of specialized agriculture and agricultural modernization is to fix the farmers on the land. They use spare labour to work outside the home and support urban construction. Agricultural industrialization offers jobs for some of the labour force, but it is impossible to promote it in a large scale way because of the limited production conditions.
Development of the township economy is the inevitable way to industrialization. During the decade from 1978 to 1988, the township enterprises spread all over the townships and villages in a star-studded way and the national economy developed rapidly. So a large number of people started their own businesses or selected their own jobs. The incomes of farmers increased rapidly. But, then, we introduced a new Land Management Law which prohibited enterprises to be built in the rural areas. As a result, all the enterprises were all relocated to the development zones in county towns or the cities above the county-level, plunging the township businesses into recession up to today.
On the development of urbanization, there are many good cases; such as, Beigou Township and Shengfang Township, in Gaobeidian City and Bazhou City respectively of Hebei Province. In history, both Baigou and Shengfang were famous piers with a long history of industrial and commercial development.
After the reforms and opening up, Baigou Town started with bag production, and then a large number of family-style professional workshops began to emerge. In the mid-1990’s, the production of bags in Baigou Township came into the refined phase with division of labour, including printing, tailoring and design etc. The number of specialized households grew. The industry of bag production was scattered throughout more than 500 villages and almost 70,000 people were engaged in bag businesses. By 2009, the town’s total output value had reached 13 billion yuan.
Shengfang Township specialized in furniture industries. This drove the development of various industries; such as, metal sheet material and glass. There are more than 1,300 furniture manufacturers and more than 7,000 businesses in the whole township which employ 70,000 people. In 2009, the total output value of the town reached 20.8 billion yuan.
The towns started from industry or even the handicraft industry to drive economic development, thus promoting urbanization.There is nearly a 1,648 acre industrial park in Baigou Town and the whole Shengfang Township has become the industrial area of Bazhou City.
The mode of production should be changed first and then the lifestyle. It complies with social development practice of the principle “economic base determines the superstructure”. In other words, only by first achieving the industrialization of the rural economy can we realize the urbanization of the peasants’ lifestyle. This order cannot be reversed.
Thirdly, to Develop Rural Economy we should transform the Functions of Township Government
The executive functions of township government determine its key roles in developing the rural economy. The township government is still an agency of county government rather than a class-A government that can develop independently. So it will not stimulate the development of towns and villages. The township government must act as a class-A government or a legal entity entitled with the rights of corporate property and independent capacity for civil rights. Only under this condition will it have the ability for self-development and become the core of development in villages and towns.
The rural financial system in many townships is still following the system of unified collection and relocation of funds by the upper government. In other words, the total revenue of the township government should be handed over to the county government. And any expenditure of a township government should get the approval of the county government. The township government has no freedom. It is incapable of making decisions independently in economic development plans, planning, revenue and expenditure, budget and final accounts concerning its enterprises. In this system, the township government neither assumes any responsibility for the development of the rural economy nor enjoys the fruits of economic development of the township. How can it play the role as the core of development of township economies?
If we want to invigorate rural areas, the township government should be given the priority. We should convert the township government into a class-A government with practical meanings and powers. The township government should take responsibilities and enjoy the fruits. Its core role should be the development of the rural economy.
If the township government works as a class-A government enjoying the present development policies of county governments then industrial development zones can be set up there. At this point the township government can attract investments to realize industrialization.
If further steps can be taken concerning government institutions then I think some fast-growing regions can learn from the system of “cities and counties running parallel” practiced in Taiwan Province. From the practical effect, the city plays very little role in promoting the development of the rural economy, but the Siphon Effect is extraordinary. To some extent the development of the city has become an obstacle for rural development. The so-called system of “city and county running parallel” means that the city governments are only responsible for managing the construction of urban cities, and the county governments are in charge of managing the construction of townships. We can have two leading groups with two administrative divisions so that funds for supporting agriculture are in charge of the county (township), not the City (City). It can help avoid the situation where the county government is in charge of managing the economic development in the county town, towns and villages. It can also prevent the economic development in county towns from flourishing too fast and the township economy lagging behind.
Fourthly, the Development of Real Estate is an Important Pillar for the Development of the Township
It is the trend of future development in rural areas that the small natural village should be merged to be part of key villages, and the small town part of key towns. The key towns will be the centers which can appeal to the villagers in surrounding villages. And they will live and work there in peace and contentment. In this case, a lot of lands will be available to set up factories, buildings, and small towns. At any rate, the future trend will involve the deregulation of rural land.
In my opinion, appropriate deregulation of lands in rural areas is quite essential so as to invigorate the rural economy. The lands which include homesteads and the house properties can circulate. Generally speaking, there are three fundamental elements of social and economic development: land, finance and labour. But labour and finance go along with the land because the land is the most basic factor of production and a peasant’s greatest asset in rural areas. If we artificially ban the necessary transaction, the farmers’ houses, homesteads and lands can not circulate. There is no value of these resources to mention, or we can say their values can not be reflected. Industrialization of the rural economy calls for deregulation of rural land resources. The rural lands, homesteads and house estates should flow smoothly to achieve their proper values in circulation. On some occasions, I call on no more amendments for the “Land Management Law”; instead, we should re-enact the “Land Law”. The law will confirm the farmers’ right of circulating their lands. Naturally, the lands, the homesteads of the farmers, and the house estates can be traded freely.
If we do not deregulate rural lands then it is difficult to achieve urbanization of the township. It is also not necessary to mention the possibilities of the farmers going into the townships with funds and the capital in cities going to the townships. Here, “the farmers going into the city with funds” refers to the farmers with funds settling in the township”: “capital to the countryside” means the capital in cities flowing to towns for their development.
Some towns with their own businesses in our hometown are relatively developed; such as, Yangfang Town in Qugou County. A lot of farmers there are engaged in stone carving and earn a good deal of money. But that township does not develop quite well because the county government takes away the tax. For another reason, after making money the farmers choose to buy a house in the county town even if their factories or workshops are still located at home. So the money still returns back to the city again. Even the money earned by farmers themselves can not be reserved in the countryside or towns not to mention the investment from other places. How can villages and towns be well developed? Why do farmers have to buy a house in the county town? The reason is that in the rural areas or towns, their dreams of living and working in peace and contentment can not be realized. So if we do not put the capital into the development of the townships then money still belongs to the city, not to rural areas and not to farmers. Only by putting the capital into the development of the townships can the farmers settle down and take root while they are selecting professions according to their wills. And they will consume wealth while they are creating it, converting the countryside into a prosperous place.
Appropriate release of the control of the lands for construction in rural areas will offer the township government lands for real estate development. There will be possibilities to build small towns and to change the lifestyle of farmers. Farmers no longer need the approvals for their homesteads. And they can change homesteads for commodity houses, invigorating their best asset to become townspeople, then residents of a city. At last, they can realize their dreams of living and working in peace and contentment.
Translated by a friend of the poet
http://web.archive.org/web/20160510091825/https://sundawu.ca/Focus_of_Economy.html
The idea of common prosperity is not a new one in China. It was first advocated for by Mao Zedong in his 1953 “Resolution of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on the Development of Agricultural Production Cooperatives.” The idea is to eliminate human exploitation and absolute poverty. Deng Xiaoping also followed the concept of common prosperity, but allowed for the fact that some would get rich first, while others would follow.
Chinese regulation aims to inject a sense of fairness into economic practices. This “fairness” is viewed through the lens of the Communist Party, and particularly through the eyes of Xi Jinping.
Credit: Emily Feng NPR
Portrait of Sun Dawu in many forms carved on rock face
https://www.npr.org/2021/05/15/996241784/the-latest-target-in-chinas-crackdown-on-entrepreneurs-is-an-outspoken-billionai
孙大午与杜润生先生谈话纪要
时 间：2002年12月13日上午
地 点：北京（农垦局）
Summary of the conversation between Sun Dawu and Mr. Du Runsheng
Hour and time: the morning of December 13, 2002
Location: Beijing (Agricultural Reclamation Bureau)
孙：我现在资产两个亿，名利两个字我都淡化了，没有野心也没有私心，我在思索怎样多承担一些社会责任，忧国忧民才是企业家，为国为民才是企业家精神。如果有机会我希望能向中央领导反映，我要告诉他中国的问题尤其三农问题很好解决，我把我的感受告诉他。中国农民问题以前没解决，我希望他能解决。
https://web.archive.org/web/20040823185555/http://www.sundawu.cn/showmt.asp?id=114&f=1
Sun: I have 200 million in assets. I have played down the words fame and fortune. I have no ambition or selfishness. I am thinking about how to bear more social responsibilities. It is an entrepreneur who is concerned about the country and the people, and an enterprise is for the country and the people. Family spirit. If I have the opportunity, I hope to reflect to the central leadership. I want to tell him that China’s problems, especially the three rural issues, are easily resolved, and I will tell him my feelings. The problem of Chinese farmers has not been solved before, and I hope he can solve it.
Du Runsheng (Chinese: 杜润生; pinyin: Dù Rùnshēng; July 18, 1913 – October 9, 2015) was a Chinese military officer, revolutionary leader, politician, and economist. He has been hailed as "China's father of rural reform".
Du Runsheng was among those who criticized the government’s ambiguous regulations, as well as its harsh stance on private enterprise, as though entrepreneurialism carried some inherent “original sin.”
https://chinachange.org/2021/04/02/sun-dawu-a-chinese-agricultural-entrepreneurs-36-year-dream-in-the-era-of-reform-and-opening-up-part-two/
高校演讲--理工大学：企业管理与经济体制改革
企业管理与经济体制改革
——在北京理工大学的演讲
（2003年4月4日）
University lectures--University of Science and Technology: Business Management and Economic System Reform
Corporate management and economic system reform
——Speech at Beijing Institute of Technology
(April 4, 2003)
资本主义法制思想体现在制度面前人人平等，道德面前人人平等；社会主义共同富裕思想体现在私营企业不姓私，私营是一种生产经营形式，创造的是社会财富。
大午集团的治厂思想是“传统的儒家思想、资本主义法制思想和社会主义共同富裕思想三者的结合”。思想是超前的，文化是滞后的。传统儒家思想不是传统的儒家文化，资本主义法制思想不是资本主义制度，社会主义共同富裕思想也不是社会主义制度。大午集团倡导传统的儒家思想，“仁义礼智信；温良恭俭让”，我们墙上的宣传语是“讲仁讲义讲良心”“己所不欲，勿施于人”“己欲立先立人，己欲达先达人”；资本主义法制思想体现在制度面前人人平等，道德面前人人平等；社会主义共同富裕思想体现在私营企业不姓私，私营是一种生产经营形式，创造的是社会财富。
The capitalist legal system is embodied in the equality of all people before the system and the equality of all people before the morals; the socialist common wealth is embodied in the private enterprises are not private, private is a form of production and operation, and creates social wealth.
Dawu Group’s thoughts on managing factories are "the combination of traditional Confucianism, capitalist legal system thought and socialist common prosperity thought." Thinking is ahead, culture is lagging. Traditional Confucianism is not traditional Confucian culture, the capitalist legal system is not a capitalist system, and the socialist common prosperity ideology is not a socialist system. Dawu Group advocates traditional Confucianism, "benevolence, justice, courtesy, wisdom and trust; gentleness, courtesy, frugality and concession". The slogans on our wall are "Speaking of benevolence and conscience", "Don't do to others what you don't want," and "If you want to establish yourself before you build others," The idea of capitalism is that everyone is equal before the system and everyone is equal before the morals. The idea of socialist common prosperity is embodied in the idea of private enterprise not being private. Private ownership is a form of production and operation, and what it creates is Social wealth.
http://www.sundawu.cn/showmt.asp?id=109&f=1
孙大午和妻子刘会茹当年创业时的合影
Enterprise Aims at the Mean
Sun Dawu January 17, 2005
English translation
The surname of private enterprise is not selfish
Now, I more and more think that private enterprise should not be labelled as selfish. It is just one kind of production and management form. In 1986, my wife gained 10000 yuan. At that time wealthy families were very few. In the next year, she gained 100,000 yuan and put it into a safe cabinet. When she obtained more than one million yuan, she was not so excited as when she earned 10,000 yuan and began to consider doing something. At that time, she studied the feasibility of opening a home for old people or orphan babies. When money becomes enough, I think private enterprise is not labeled as private or selfish, but becomes the welfare of the society. Supported by this belief, I became very frank and composed. I think, my corporation is the assets of the society and supports several thousand livelihoods. I do not think it belongs to me solely, so I became upright in my mind.
Lawyers of Dawu Group employees
Credit: China Change
Sun Dawu’s Closing Court Statement
Sun Dawu, July 28, 2021, in Gaobeidian Court, Baoding City, Hebei Province
"I said I have run the business with aspiration and an ideal, and my ideal is the prosperity of the community. I can say that I am very rich, a very rich tycoon, or I can say that I am a rich man who in fact has nothing."
孙大午法庭最后陈述
孙大午，2021年7月28日，于河北省保定市高碑店法庭
我说我是有情怀和理想办企业的，就是共同富裕的理想。我可以说我是很富有的，是一个很富有的大富翁，也可以说我是一个一无所有的大富翁。
Translated by China Change from 孙大午法庭最后陈述
https://chinachangechinese.org/2021/08/02/%e5%ad%99%e5%a4%a7%e5%8d%88%e6%b3%95%e5%ba%ad%e6%9c%80%e5%90%8e%e9%99%88%e8%bf%b0/ Chinese
https://chinachange.org/2021/08/03/sun-dawus-closing-court-statement/ English translation
Is China headed for civil war? How wealth redistribution will reshape markets - Chen Lin
David Lin Kitco News
September 08, 2021 19:56
China is currently making reforms to redistribute wealth. This will have an adverse effect on the economy as investors move capital and business away from the country, and worse, cause an outright civil war, said Chen Lin, president of Lin Asset Management.
"There is a historical precedent. I'm not saying that what happened 2,000 years ago in the Han Dynasty will happen today, but there is a decent chance that China can slowdown," Lin told David Lin, anchor for Kitco News.
https://www.kitco.com/news/2021-09-08/Is-China-headed-for-civil-war-How-wealth-redistribution-will-reshape-markets-Chen-Lin.html
Economy of the Han dynasty
There was mass unemployment among landless peasants during the Eastern Han period. However, archaeological and literary evidence shows that those managing wealthy agricultural estates enjoyed great prosperity and lived comfortably.
In the early Han period, rural peasant farmers were largely self-sufficient, but they began to rely heavily upon commercial exchanges with the wealthy landowners of large agricultural estates. Many peasants subsequently fell into debt and were forced to become either hired laborers or rent-paying tenants of the land-owning classes. The Han government continually strove to provide economic aid to poor farmers, who had to compete with powerful and influential nobles, landowners, and merchants. The government tried to limit the power of these wealthy groups through heavy taxation and bureaucratic regulation. Emperor Wu's (r. 141–87 BC) government even nationalized the iron and salt industries; however, these government monopolies were abolished during Eastern Han. Increasing government intervention in the private economy during the late 2nd century BC severely weakened the commercial merchant class. This allowed wealthy landowners to increase their power and to ensure the continuation of an agrarian-dominated economy. The wealthy landlords eventually dominated commercial activities as well, maintaining control over the rural peasants—upon whom the government relied for tax revenues, military manpower, and public works labor. By the 180s AD, economic and political crises had caused the Han government to become heavily decentralized, while the great landowners became increasingly independent and powerful in their communities.
The Han Chancellor and King of Wei Cao Cao (155–220 AD) made the final significant attempt to limit the power of wealthy landowners. Cao Cao established government-managed agricultural colonies for landless commoners; in exchange for land and cheap equipment, the farmers paid a portion of their crop yield.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Han_dynasty
Yellow Turban Rebellion
The Yellow Turban Rebellion, also translated as the Yellow Scarves Rebellion, was a peasant revolt in China against the Eastern Han dynasty. The uprising broke out in 184 AD during the reign of Emperor Ling. Although the main rebellion was suppressed by 185 AD, pockets of resistance continued and smaller rebellions emerged in later years. It took 21 years until the uprising was fully suppressed in 205 AD.[1] The rebellion, which got its name from the colour of the cloths that the rebels wore on their heads, marked an important point in the history of Taoism due to the rebels' association with secret Taoist societies.[4] The revolt was also used as the opening event in the 14th-century historical novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
The rebels were mostly concentrated in Ji, Jing, You and Yu provinces. The group led by Zhang Jue and his brothers gained their support in Ji Province, located just north of the Yellow River, near Zhang Jue's home territory of Julu Commandery (around present-day Pingxiang County, Hebei) and Wei Commandery (around present-day Handan, Hebei). A second major uprising took place in Guangyang Commandery (around present-day Beijing) and Zhuo Commandery (around present-day Zhuozhou, Hebei) in You Province. The third centre of the rebellion was in Yingchuan Commandery (around present-day Xuchang, Henan) and Runan Commandery (around present-day Xinyang, Henan) in Yu Province, and Nanyang Commandery (around present-day Nanyang, Henan) in northern Jing Province.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Turban_Rebellion
孙大午,Sun Dawu, 孙大午,被捕11112020,刘会茹,Dawu Group,大午集团 ,私营企业主立宪制度,徐水国营农场,大午农牧集团有限公司,河北省,徐水县郎,五庄,2020年11月11日,November 11,2020,1911,辛亥革命,孫德明, 三民主义,Unirule,天则经济研究所,茅于轼,土地扣押,农民,农业集体 伦理资,本主义,D.Carlton Rossi,拆迁,寻衅滋事,709案,709大抓捕,警察,皇帝,保护伞,儒,武汉华南海鲜批发市场,中国科学院武汉病毒研究所
Sun Dawu,孙大午,Liu Huiru, Dawu Group,DAWU GROUP, Private Entrepreneur Constitutional System, Dawu Agriculture and Animal Husbandry Group Co., Ltd.,Langwuzhuang, Xushui County, Hebei Province, November 11, 2020, November 11,2020,1911,Xinhai Revolution,Sun Deming,Three Principles of the People,Unirule, Tianze Economic Research Institute,Mao Yushi,land seizure,farmers,agricultural collective,ethical capitalism,D. Carlton Rossi,demolition and relocation,picking quarrels and provoking troubles,709 case,709 crackdown,police,protective umbrella,Confucianism,Yellow Emperor Huangdi,The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market,National Institute of Virology,Winnipeg,National Institute of Virology,Wuhan,Dr.Qiu
David Lin Kitco News
September 08, 2021 19:56
China is currently making reforms to redistribute wealth. This will have an adverse effect on the economy as investors move capital and business away from the country, and worse, cause an outright civil war, said Chen Lin, president of Lin Asset Management.
"There is a historical precedent. I'm not saying that what happened 2,000 years ago in the Han Dynasty will happen today, but there is a decent chance that China can slowdown," Lin told David Lin, anchor for Kitco News.
https://www.kitco.com/news/2021-09-08/Is-China-headed-for-civil-war-How-wealth-redistribution-will-reshape-markets-Chen-Lin.html
Economy of the Han dynasty
There was mass unemployment among landless peasants during the Eastern Han period. However, archaeological and literary evidence shows that those managing wealthy agricultural estates enjoyed great prosperity and lived comfortably.
In the early Han period, rural peasant farmers were largely self-sufficient, but they began to rely heavily upon commercial exchanges with the wealthy landowners of large agricultural estates. Many peasants subsequently fell into debt and were forced to become either hired laborers or rent-paying tenants of the land-owning classes. The Han government continually strove to provide economic aid to poor farmers, who had to compete with powerful and influential nobles, landowners, and merchants. The government tried to limit the power of these wealthy groups through heavy taxation and bureaucratic regulation. Emperor Wu's (r. 141–87 BC) government even nationalized the iron and salt industries; however, these government monopolies were abolished during Eastern Han. Increasing government intervention in the private economy during the late 2nd century BC severely weakened the commercial merchant class. This allowed wealthy landowners to increase their power and to ensure the continuation of an agrarian-dominated economy. The wealthy landlords eventually dominated commercial activities as well, maintaining control over the rural peasants—upon whom the government relied for tax revenues, military manpower, and public works labor. By the 180s AD, economic and political crises had caused the Han government to become heavily decentralized, while the great landowners became increasingly independent and powerful in their communities.
The Han Chancellor and King of Wei Cao Cao (155–220 AD) made the final significant attempt to limit the power of wealthy landowners. Cao Cao established government-managed agricultural colonies for landless commoners; in exchange for land and cheap equipment, the farmers paid a portion of their crop yield.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Han_dynasty
Yellow Turban Rebellion
The Yellow Turban Rebellion, also translated as the Yellow Scarves Rebellion, was a peasant revolt in China against the Eastern Han dynasty. The uprising broke out in 184 AD during the reign of Emperor Ling. Although the main rebellion was suppressed by 185 AD, pockets of resistance continued and smaller rebellions emerged in later years. It took 21 years until the uprising was fully suppressed in 205 AD.[1] The rebellion, which got its name from the colour of the cloths that the rebels wore on their heads, marked an important point in the history of Taoism due to the rebels' association with secret Taoist societies.[4] The revolt was also used as the opening event in the 14th-century historical novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
The rebels were mostly concentrated in Ji, Jing, You and Yu provinces. The group led by Zhang Jue and his brothers gained their support in Ji Province, located just north of the Yellow River, near Zhang Jue's home territory of Julu Commandery (around present-day Pingxiang County, Hebei) and Wei Commandery (around present-day Handan, Hebei). A second major uprising took place in Guangyang Commandery (around present-day Beijing) and Zhuo Commandery (around present-day Zhuozhou, Hebei) in You Province. The third centre of the rebellion was in Yingchuan Commandery (around present-day Xuchang, Henan) and Runan Commandery (around present-day Xinyang, Henan) in Yu Province, and Nanyang Commandery (around present-day Nanyang, Henan) in northern Jing Province.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Turban_Rebellion
孙大午,Sun Dawu, 孙大午,被捕11112020,刘会茹,Dawu Group,大午集团 ,私营企业主立宪制度,徐水国营农场,大午农牧集团有限公司,河北省,徐水县郎,五庄,2020年11月11日,November 11,2020,1911,辛亥革命,孫德明, 三民主义,Unirule,天则经济研究所,茅于轼,土地扣押,农民,农业集体 伦理资,本主义,D.Carlton Rossi,拆迁,寻衅滋事,709案,709大抓捕,警察,皇帝,保护伞,儒,武汉华南海鲜批发市场,中国科学院武汉病毒研究所
Sun Dawu,孙大午,Liu Huiru, Dawu Group,DAWU GROUP, Private Entrepreneur Constitutional System, Dawu Agriculture and Animal Husbandry Group Co., Ltd.,Langwuzhuang, Xushui County, Hebei Province, November 11, 2020, November 11,2020,1911,Xinhai Revolution,Sun Deming,Three Principles of the People,Unirule, Tianze Economic Research Institute,Mao Yushi,land seizure,farmers,agricultural collective,ethical capitalism,D. Carlton Rossi,demolition and relocation,picking quarrels and provoking troubles,709 case,709 crackdown,police,protective umbrella,Confucianism,Yellow Emperor Huangdi,The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market,National Institute of Virology,Winnipeg,National Institute of Virology,Wuhan,Dr.Qiu