China’s liberalization and structural reform drives growth

That said, here's another perspective on China's recent rise, translated from Chinese:

> The argument is simple: when China joined the world economy in the reform and opening era, capital flocked to China to take advantage of low-wage labor and what Qin calls China’s “low human rights advantage,” i.e., the state’s commitment to development at any cost (land-confiscation, suppression of workers’ rights, exploitation of migrant workers, etc.). Over time, China became the “world’s factory,” producing quality goods at low prices, at the expense of jobs and tax revenues in the developed world previously inhabited by the capital that had now fled to China. Despite a surplus of capital and increasingly frequent labor shortages, the naked power of the Chinese state keeps the machine running, lending the profits back to the developed economies so that the “exchange” can continue. Such debts only intensify the crisis of the developed world, as governments are already attempting to supply more “welfare” to increasing numbers of unemployed despite a fall in tax revenues.

https://www.readingthechinadream.com/qin-hui-dilemmas.html

No, the use of the term “dialect” is propaganda from the diversity-denying central government; describing Chinese languages as “dialects” is a gross abuse of the English word “dialect”, comparable to saying that French, Portuguese, and Romanian are all just dialects of Latin. “Chinese” consists of many mutually unintelligible languages (hundreds?), each of which has multiple dialects.

Mandarin works well enough as a lingua franca because (a) there has been a tremendous effort to force it on the population and suppress local culture (e.g. forcing children to speak it in school, force mass media to use it, etc.), and (b) there has been a massive internal migration in China so that a large proportion of the population is no longer living in their native land.

In some ways it is similar to the way young people from different European countries now speak English as a common language.

Deng Xiaoping (1904–1997) should still get credit for most of what is happening now. China had multiple paths it could have followed when Deng took over, but he was a clever fellow. He made several gradual alternations to rigid socialist and Marxist doctrine and authoritarianism that separated Chinese communism from all others others. He was able to keep hardliners at bay.

1. He declared that: "Socialism means eliminating poverty. Pauperism is not socialism, still less communism." Before Deng all communist countries justified poverty and suffering of the masses as necessary part of struggle towards communist utopia. Deng threw this rationalization away. He essentially adopted the same measure stick to success as capitalism.

2. Deng recognized stuff that worked outside government. 18 households in Xiaogang Village started land reform after a serious drought in secret in 1978 and it started to spread. It was against government rules and even against party doctrine. Instead of prosecuting people Deng endorsed it. Successful land reform has been the starting point for other successful Asian countries as well (see Studwell's "How Asia Works").

3. More meritocracy and checks and balances within the communist party. Before Deng, China was always gravitating towards typical strong man communist dictatorship. There was one dictator on the top and power and orders flowed downwards. Deng adjusted the rules. Government officials were moved to work in different regions from where their personal contacts were (and opportunities to corruption were reduced). Princelings still got into powerful positions but talented newcomers also had a change. There was clear movement towards meritocracy and accountability within the communist party.

After Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 Deng's power started to wane and hardliners gained more power. The momentum of his institutional reforms has carried on but there is constant erosion. The current leader Xi seems to be a typical strongman who tries to get more and more power to himself and his inner circle and this may end all momentum for China that Deng Xiaoping created.

Is there any evidence that religion actually increases the 'moral standards'?

This paper[1] suggests not:

> Religious and nonreligious participants did not differ in the likelihood or quality of committed moral and immoral acts.

[1] Hofmann W. et al. (2014), Morality in everyday life, Science. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25214626