Ive been writing this on and off for about 3 hours now, so I'd appreciate if at least one of you would read it. It's easy to understand, just a lot of reading (I guess).

 

On The Three Levels Of Society: Level A, Level B, and Level C

 

Today's Chinese society and American society can be said to consist of 3 levels. Lower lever (Level C), which means people who work for a boss and who live by paychecks. Medium level (Level B), that level includes bosses, businessmen, and high paying white collars. Upper level (Level A), that level consists of people who is part of the state mechanism, for example, policemen, officials, judges, etc etc.

 

In this classification, the Upper Level does not actually have more wealth than the Medium Level. For example, a policemen have much less money than a company senior executive. But the upper level has more power. For example, in a soccer match, the referee is not as rich as the players, yet he is clearly in a higher position of authority.

 

Now, let's call the Upper Level level A. Medium Level level B. And Lower Level C. So I said that both American and Chinese society is made up of Level A,B, and C. Yet, there's some difference. What is the difference? Well, the difference lies in the relationship between Level A (upper) and Level B(middle).

 

To put it simply, in America, Level A is very close and intimate with Level B. In other words, Level B has a lot of room to influence the actions of Level A. But in China, Level B has very little influence over Level A. In other words, China's level A can very comfortably ride on top of Level B. China's Level B simply does not have enough force to challenge level A.

 

This is actually a very good thing. Because level A is not influenced by level B, it can better manage the society and establish long term strategic visions. Therefore, maintaining the dominance of Level A over Level B is a precondition for China's growth. In fact, it actually benefits Level B to have Level A riding it.

 

In America, Level B has to constantly influence Level A to maintain its own interests. THe result is constant bickering and arguing and things get mired in non-progress. For example, it is pathetic that the gun-control issue has been discussed for decades and has no real resolution. That kind of efficiency is even worse than the UN.

 

Now, democracy-lovers will now jump out and say "It is good to have arguments and debates!". But my question is, how come we don't see the same intensity of arguments in other areas? Do you see arguments and bickering when engineers are building spaceships? Did big American corporations became profitable by letting employees and executives argue all the time? How about a patient? if you are a patient, do you want doctors to spend 1 month arguing over your diagnosis, or do you want someone who simply is in control and knows that he/she is doing?

 

Of course, scholarly debates should be encouraged. But the difference between healthy debates and unhealthy debates is that a healthy debate focuses on the issue at hand and nothing else. An unhealthy debate is one in which the parties have personal interests entangled in the issue at hand, and they are really arguing to protect his/her personal interests. For example, when two chess players argue over whether to move the rook first or move the knight first, that is a healthy argument, because they are only concerned about the goodness of the move and has no personal interests involved. But, when a political party argues with another party over whether to reform education/environment/economy, they are arguing because their political fates are on the line, so the issue at hand is simply a tool or a cover, they are not really concerned about the issue, but what they can gain from the issue. And I'm a afraid to say, 70% of arguments in American society are of such unhealthy arguments.

 

Now, when Level A can comfortably ride Level B, then even Level B would feel very nice and should enjoy it. So my advice to China's businessmen and white collars is to just let Level A ride you. If you fight it, then you'll simply hurt yourself because the time you spent arguing with Level A could have been used for Level A to do better things.

 

But there's a condition for Level A to ride Level B. That condition is: Level A must have a very close and intimate relatioship with Level C (Lower Level). Level A must represent the interests of Level C. In other words, the more Level A represents the interests of Level C, the better it can maintain its riding position in society and be free of influence from Level B.

 

But if Level B's force grows larger, it'll inevitably try to influence Level A in every aspect. And Level A will try to resist such influence. And in such struggle, both Level A and B will try to win over Level C. If level A loses its intimacy with Level C, then Level C will be won over by Level B, and join forces with Level B to fight Level A. The result is that Level A loses its riding position and is forced to share power with Level B.

 

So, for Level A, the goal is make sure to always keep an intimate relationship with Level C and always represent the interests of Level C.

 

In Summary, China's social structure in which Level A comfortably rides Level B is a very advanced and mature one, and it should try very hard not to slip into the American structure where level B has shaken off Level A and can influence Level A.

 

If the day comes when the Chinese leadership cannot help but be influenced by Level B, then China is not too far away from collapse.

deep, you are very smart mister o'Reilly and i agree that China should strive to be independent of the american ways of social structure.

Very deep indeed.

i cant believe i understood that, but i did (dont go thinking i didnt) and now its making me think.

Thanks very much for reading :D

 

Yeah I do sociology which often leads the general audience who arent familiar with the terminology, a little confused. But when you get past the snobbery of language, it's as easy to understand as above (Which isn't easy to understand off the bat, but if you read it while thinking it shouldn't be too hard).

 

Thanks again.

no worries :D , and thankyou for opening my eyes, it needed to be done, oh god did it need to be done.

Haha, its good that I got you thinking. Any thoughts you'd like to share?

not really, i dont know what to say, but to agree and add that it would be brilliant if america realised there mistakes and tried again from the start, because who knows what'll happen if it keeps goin the way it is. But then as if thats gonna happen.

"Now, when Level A can comfortably ride Level B, then even Level B would feel very nice and should enjoy it. So my advice to China's businessmen and white collars is to just let Level A ride you. If you fight it, then you'll simply hurt yourself because the time you spent arguing with Level A could have been used for Level A to do better things.

 

But there's a condition for Level A to ride Level B. That condition is: Level A must have a very close and intimate relatioship with Level C (Lower Level). Level A must represent the interests of Level C. In other words, the more Level A represents the interests of Level C, the better it can maintain its riding position in society and be free of influence from Level B.

 

But if Level B's force grows larger, it'll inevitably try to influence Level A in every aspect. And Level A will try to resist such influence. And in such struggle, both Level A and B will try to win over Level C. If level A loses its intimacy with Level C, then Level C will be won over by Level B, and join forces with Level B to fight Level A. The result is that Level A loses its riding position and is forced to share power with Level B. "

 

 

that is the best i have ever heard the social stucture of the world being summed up, but the problem is how do you stop the growing of 'Level B'?

Well, a lot more is possible then it appears. It's just hard to imagine, because things like that can take a few hundred years.

 

Although the economy is doing quite well right now, America is a country that could crash at any year. Just like the Wall Street. It's a very dangerous country for world economy, especially considering the amount of power that American companies have right now (Basically, companies see it as: China: Producer, America: Distributor, they dont care how many American jobs are lost).

 

There is definately a system between Capitalism and Communism that isn't as extreme. Maybe I'll put together a new world order some boring Sunday afternoon :wacky:

thats an idea. you do that :lol:

Sorry! I didnt see this post.

 

"Now, when Level A can comfortably ride Level B, then even Level B would feel very nice and should enjoy it. So my advice to China's businessmen and white collars is to just let Level A ride you. If you fight it, then you'll simply hurt yourself because the time you spent arguing with Level A could have been used for Level A to do better things.

 

But there's a condition for Level A to ride Level B. That condition is: Level A must have a very close and intimate relatioship with Level C (Lower Level). Level A must represent the interests of Level C. In other words, the more Level A represents the interests of Level C, the better it can maintain its riding position in society and be free of influence from Level B.

 

But if Level B's force grows larger, it'll inevitably try to influence Level A in every aspect. And Level A will try to resist such influence. And in such struggle, both Level A and B will try to win over Level C. If level A loses its intimacy with Level C, then Level C will be won over by Level B, and join forces with Level B to fight Level A. The result is that Level A loses its riding position and is forced to share power with Level B. "

 

 

that is the best i have ever heard the social stucture of the world being summed up, but the problem is how do you stop the growing of 'Level B'?

 

It's all about blatant Elitism, and I've tried to resist stating that in the past, but it is, it's as simple as keeping the Top people on Top, and the Bottom people on Bottom.

 

And I dont think anyone should really argue this because in truth, although America has a society in which the average working joe can make their way to the top of their business or company, it complicates things when every working joe is trying to do this.

 

Right now a big crisis within America is that the rich are VERY rich, and the poor are VERY poor. They are by no means an impoverished nation in contrast with the rest of the world, but considering where they should be, they are.

 

In China this is not a crisis because the Rich stay quite Rich, and the Poor stay quite Poor. Everything is much more moderated and stabilised.

China could very well top us...it's economy has risen (not socially, by your means) steadily and on it's own now. They have been silently and slowly, but surely growing and are making it good enough on their own, so i don't know about the collapse part

 

:confused: :confused:

Well I said if that day comes (Actually I'm not sure what I said, but what I mean is that IF it happens) that Level A gets influenced by B, then China could face collapse because it's so strongly reliant on it's current system.

 

And I believe thats the only major flaw in their system.

 

I dont think it's China that America should worry about being top, it's going to be Europe.

yeah...prolly, but China scares me..mostly because people are so unaware of it's capacities..i mean it is first with many things and they are willing to do anything if it means raising their standards and being bigger

If you mean 'people' as in the simpler population, I dont see how they should really worry, but a lot of Americans are quickly discovering China's capacities as it basically eats at their jobs (Or at least moves their jobs).

Well I said if that day comes (Actually I'm not sure what I said, but what I mean is that IF it happens) that Level A gets influenced by B, then China could face collapse because it's so strongly reliant on it's current system.

 

And I believe thats the only major flaw in their system.

 

I dont think it's China that America should worry about being top, it's going to be Europe.

 

have to disagree. China will become alot more powerful in the years to come. their catching up with teh world, plus i think the EU lifted the arms selling band.

 

but back to capitolism, pure capitolism is evil just like pure communism.

just wrote an exam about this...

 

though we haven't touched the theme deeply but i decided to read "The Capital" lol

 

and I agree about China with mrcool, i think they'll become more powerful with the years, even if there's a possibility: a total collapse.