Difference between Chinas economic management style and the Western Essay

Difference between Chinas economic management style and the Western style - Essay Example 1). The transition from a planned economy to a market economy has been particularly smooth with significant opportunities for entrepreneurship and expansion both at home and abroad (Long & Han, 2008, p. 52). The market-oriented economy is vastly similar to Western economies, yet China’s economic management style differs because of the remnants of the post-Maoist market socialism (Krau, 1996, p. 96). In the meantime, the Chinese government maintains strong control (Krua, 1996, p. 96). The purpose of this research study is to determine the extent to which this mixture of capitalism and socialism in China’s economy differs from the economic management style of the West. It will be demonstrated that what makes China’s economic management style unique and different from the West is the remnants of past socialist influences, persistent government control and the adoption of a market-oriented economy. From the outset, it is worth noting that the most obvious difference between China’s economic management style and that of Western countries is China’s persistent adherence to five year economic plans regardless of leadership changes. The first five year plan from 1953-1957 was influenced by the Soviet Marist style Communism and emphasized industrial growth. At the time, the ideal economic plan for Communism was to develop industry and the economy via â€Å"heavy industry, fuels, electric power, iron, and steel, machinery manufacturing, and chemicals†.... In China, during the first Five Year Economic Plan, the government owned 75% of all of China’s production and private enterprises owned the remaining 25%. During the first Five Year Plan, China was determined to further erode the percentage of private ownership. Rather than immediately turn these private ventures into state properties, the government decided to first form partnerships between private firms and state-owned firms (Galloway, 2011). As China moved forward in the 20th century, it looked for a â€Å"cultural formula† that would help it embrace modernity (Lu, 2004, p. 201). China was struggling with what is often referred to as a â€Å"cultural revolution† in which much of the blame for China’s â€Å"backwardness† was placed on â€Å"Confucianism, the foundation of traditional Chinese culture† (Lu, 2004, p. 201). There were scholars advocating for more â€Å"Western democratic† ideology (Lu, 2004, p. 201). These scholars†™ arguments would find currency in Mao’s belief that in order to embrace a proletarian culture that focused on the masses and not the elite, the old culture had to be left behind (Lu, 2004, p. 201). In the meantime, adherents to China’s traditional culture were entirely resistant to abandoning old values and norms. As Lu (2004) notes: China has been wrestling with the dilemma of modernity versus traditionality and Westernization versus national identity. Given that China now embodies a seemingly contradictory combination of authoritarian government and market economy, the path to culture reconstruction seems even more uncertain and unsettling (p. 201). Mao’s concept of a looking after the masses included state-owned enterprises and a centrally planned market. According to Kshetri (2009), under Mao’s centralized market plan,