RE: rural reconstruction

From "Mobo Gao" <>
Date Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:30:45 +1100
In-reply-to <fb3ce2efba88.43c379dd@Princeton.EDU>
Organization University of Tasmania
Thread-index AcYV741h1FyNWgpsQZuFeIVoIfBx5QBFzmWg

Good points Chuck. But don't some academics working in the China field not
only accept but also propagate the 'Deng saved rural China' argument?


-----Original Message-----
From: []
On Behalf Of William C Wooldridge (woldrdge@Princeton.EDU)
Sent: Wednesday, 11 January 2006 1:10 AM
Subject: Re: rural reconstruction

Lynn White makes a similar point in his book Unstately Power, which has a
wealth of information from around Shanghai suggesting that even some of the
agriculture research undertaken during the CR contributed to a growth in
rural output.  Others are more expert than I, but I remember something about
more efficient methods for transfering rice seedlings...and also I think
better access to tractors and such.

Why the Party might want to tell a different story is clear to me.   Why
academics working outside China accept the "Deng saved rural China" argument
merits further discussion.

Chuck Wooldridge

Brian Turner wrote..

> Has anyone read the new book _Revolution, Resistance,
> and Reform in Village China_, the sequel to _Chinese
> Village, Socialist State_?  In comments about the book
> prior to publication, Selden said that they planned to
> discuss how the roots of the reforms can be traced to
> 1970, and the green revolution as well.  Apparently
> there were more periods of relative market relaxation
> and local experimentation than usually portrayed,
> which probably explains why agricultural output growth
> was pretty good in the 1970s.  My point is that the
> 1970s may be closer to the 1950s than people imagine. 
> Though there's so much regional variation.  
> __________________________________________ 
> Yahoo! DSL - Something to write home about. 
> Just $16.99/mo. or less.