Chapter 28 Chapter 27: The Trapped "Mainstream Economist"

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, although Chinese economists were immature in economic theory, lacked a sufficient grasp of the twists and turns and surprises of reform, and seemed to be at a loss when it came to specific reform methodology, from beginning to end they were Full of confidence to win.However, after entering the new century, the situation began to change subtly. The definition and object of "reform" became blurred. The division of interest groups made the contradiction and the choice of development path extremely complicated. It is gradually disintegrating, and even the market economic system itself has once again been questioned unprecedentedly.

This scene was most dramatically reflected in Wu Jinglian.After entering 2003, the situation that he expressed in many discussions that he did not want to happen happened in a way that he did not realize at the time.As corruption spreads, resentment among the disadvantaged has become increasingly intense.At this time, supporters of the old system and the old line before the reform took action one after another, mobilizing the masses to fight against the market-oriented reform.Wu Jinglian's old colleague Ma Bin, who fought against inflation and corruption in 1988, even rushed forward.In September 2003, he sent an article titled "Miscellaneous Notes on Beidaihe Rest" to his close friends, arguing that the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee "thoroughly" criticized the "Cultural Revolution" and completely negated the theory of continuing revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat. It is completely wrong", "the result is to continue to engage in revisionism", "thus completely betraying Marx's theory, Lenin's theory of continuing revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat and Mao Zedong's theory of the 'cultural revolution'", "engaging in privatization, corruption, Westernization, division, Shareholding of urban industrial capitalism, privatization of agricultural production contracted to households, and comprehensive capitalism".He also expressed the hope that his comrades would correct their belief that Mao Zedong had wrong ideas in his later years, "criticize the downfall of 'Deng Xiaoping' who tried and single-mindedly cut down the banner of Mao Zedong Thought", and that the set of "revisionist things" he created "repeat Launch the Cultural Revolution to get rid of it."

Ma Bin's announcement really had an effect.From the beginning of 2004, many websites began to serialize a series of articles criticizing Deng Xiaoping and the so-called "capitalist reform route", which was later compiled into an e-book of more than 200,000 words "Deng Xiaoping's Road in His Later Years", which was published on many websites. Public download. To criticize the reform line since the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee, economists who provide advice and suggestions for market-oriented reforms will naturally bear the brunt.A large number of articles have appeared on so-called "leftist websites" accusing "neoliberal mainstream economists of misleading China's economic reforms."Some people openly stated on the website that their struggle strategy is to "concentrate superior forces, adopt the method of fighting in large corps, and encircle and wipe out the 'capital reform' scholars." For these people, it is necessary to concentrate superior forces, carry out strong fire attacks, and deeply expose and criticize their absurdity and reactionary until they are stigmatized and defeated."

In February 2004, "Oriental Outlook Weekly" affiliated with Xinhua News Agency published a long report "Right and Wrong of Economists Advocating for Enterprises", raising the sharp question of "Who do economists speak for?"The article lists 14 economists including Wu Jinglian, Zhang Weiying, Gao Shangquan, Dong Fu, Zhong Pengrong, and Xiao Zhuoji as independent directors of listed companies, and lists 41 companies that employ them as independent directors and their annual salaries.Wu Jinglian was disclosed as an independent director of Digital China, China Unicom, PetroChina and Zhongshui Fishery.According to the report: “According to public information, as of the end of 2001, a total of 274 listed companies had established independent directors, hired or nominated more than 500 independent directors, including 131 economists. The 130 listed companies sampled in the 2001 annual report disclosed Among the companies, there are 18 independent directors with an annual allowance of 10,000 to 20,000 yuan, 26 with 20,000 to 30,000 yuan, 49 with 30,000 to 40,000 yuan, 21 with 40,000 to 50,000 yuan, and 50,000 to 50,000 yuan. There are 16 companies with more than 10,000 yuan."

The article further asked: "It is unknown that those economists who take on several positions, constantly appear in the mass media, express their opinions on various economic issues, and rush to attend various forums and seminars one after another How do you manage to fulfill the duties of so many part-time jobs while you are busy?" The report quoted Professor Yang Fan, who was a researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, as saying: "Independent directors have no practical role, they are just to strengthen the enterprise. Union of Economists and Economists."

The article "Advocacy" also quoted Yang Fan and expressed his point of view by directly calling names. He said: "The Chinese business community is divided into three groups. One is the speculative group. The representatives of the economics circle are Li Yining, Xiao Zhuoji, and Han Zhiguo. The second is the private enterprise group, which is doing practical work; the third is the comprador capital group, which is emerging, and the representatives of the theoretical circle are Wu Jinglian, Lin Yifu, Fan Gang, Zhang Weiying, Jiang Xiaojuan, Zhang Wuchang, etc. Any social theory represents certain interests and social interests. Groups. According to Marx, interest groups must strive to elevate their own interests into policies, and they must also find theories and theorists and master their own propaganda tools.”

The report by "Oriental Outlook Weekly" was widely reprinted and caused a great sensation in the circles of public opinion and economics.According to a report in the 100th issue of the magazine: "The article "Endorsement" also alarmed the senior leaders of the State Council. Later, some departments became more cautious when inviting economists for seminars and consultations." That is, since then, in In the eyes of many members of the public, economists becoming "spokesmen" of consortiums have become a public topic. If the "independent director controversy" questioned the professional ethics of economists, then another debate that broke out in the autumn and winter of 2004 almost pushed all "famous economists" such as Wu Jinglian to focus on state-owned assets. Churn is responsible for the dock.

The large-scale property rights reform of state-owned enterprises that started in 1998 took shape around 2004. During this period, hundreds of thousands of state-owned enterprises "changed their identities" and carried out shareholding reforms. The supervision of powerful government officials has caused some chaos. Some people with powerful backgrounds can use power for personal gain, and even blatantly steal public property for themselves.We have seen that Wu Jinglian has repeatedly called for an end to this abnormal phenomenon in the past few years.But in this debate, Wu Jinglian was said to be an "accomplice" who supported the theft of state-owned assets.This is what he did not expect back then.

In the summer of 2004, Lang Xianping, a Hong Kong finance professor who was born in Taoyuan, Taiwan and graduated from the Wharton School of Business in the United States, published papers and speeches in succession, raising strong doubts about the property rights reform of some well-known enterprises. On June 17, he publicly questioned TCL, arguing that its shareholding reform plan was actually a process of diluting state-owned equity, a process of "using equity incentives as a signboard and using the securities market as a channel to gradually flow state-owned assets to individuals." On August 2, he published "The Metamorphosis of Haier—A Tortuous and Ingenious MBO", pointing the finger at Haier, the most famous home appliance company in China. MBO succeeds". In late August, Lang Xianping threw the third "shock bomb". He delivered a speech entitled "Greencool: Carnival at the Feast of "Retirement of the Country and Advancement of the People"" at Fudan University in Shanghai, pointing directly at China's second largest electric appliance company Gu Chujun, chairman of Guangdong Kelon, used a variety of tricks, "taking advantage of the eagerness of some local governments to speed up the exit of state-owned enterprises, and packaged the acquisition and restructuring together, playing a win-win game of mutual benefit for both parties."

Lang Xianping's three crusades set off an uproar in the business circles, public opinion circles, and economic theory circles.Throughout the autumn, it even diverted people's attention from macro-control.The outspoken finance professor from Hong Kong has conducted a "grand reckoning" of the property rights clarification and corporatization movements of the past few years.His conclusion is that "the current scene of legally embezzling state property by taking advantage of the gap in the legal system is very similar to the original Russian privatization movement."The quick-witted Professor Lang also used a very vivid "nanny" metaphor - "My home is dirty, messy and poor. I found a nanny to help me clean up the house. She is credited, but this This is a very absurd thing.” Based on this, Lang Xianping put forward three points of view: property rights transactions must be suspended, MBO must be banned, and the issue of private enterprises competing for profits with state-owned enterprises is not part of the current economic reform. focus.

Lang Xianping's extremely provocative words won the enthusiastic support of the lower-level people who have long been dissatisfied with the injustice in the enterprise reform but have nowhere to appeal.Gu Weijun, chairman of Kelon who was under attack, fought back and sued Lang Xianping for alleged defamation. Almost all financial and urban media sided with Lang Xianping. As the title, he severely criticized the "ambiguous" attitude of domestic scholars towards Lang's bold actions. People who are looking for an opportunity to "smelt down" the old line and the old system of the "capital reform" economists are even more overjoyed. At the time of questioning, some scholars who called themselves "New Leftists" held a "Seminar on Asset Loss and State-owned Enterprise Asset Development" in Beijing to applaud Lang Xianping loudly, and more than 10 people jointly issued a statement "Supporting Lang Xianping".Soon, similar rallies were held in Nanjing and Shanghai. In June 2005, a book titled "The Record of "Lang Xuanfeng": A Great Discussion on the Loss of State-owned Assets" was published. The book declared: "This is a book that distinguishes right from wrong; Ugly book; this is a book that opposes the implementation of MBO in our country, opens eyes for a large number of nouveau riche who have embezzled state-owned assets, and tears away their painted skins. This big discussion on state-owned assets is a big issue related to the future and destiny of the motherland. The problem is that it clearly points out what path our Republic should take in the future and which direction it should go. That is to say, should we continue to follow the road of building socialism with Chinese characteristics pointed out by Comrade Deng Xiaoping? 'Mainstream' economists promote and mislead the road to privatization of capitalism?" What is particularly striking is that the "general counsel" of this book is a former head of the Central Propaganda Department.An author named Zhong Jianguo wrote an article on the leftist website to explain why he personally acted as the 'general counsel': "The book "Records of 'Lang Xuanfeng' touches on the most sensitive and important issues in China today. Problem. Powerful people with a guilty conscience may force the departments in charge of propaganda and publishing to suppress it. The old head of the Central Propaganda Department personally served as the "general counsel" of this book, which may play the role of "Taishan Stone dare to act." Obviously, Lang Xianping has also become a "pawn" being used in a larger debate about the fate of China's reform.Even some Western media have seen the revival of "leftist thought" in China. The Los Angeles Times opined in a commentary: "Lang Xianping's criticism of China's economic reform is not a lonely voice. He represents a An increasingly influential group dubbed the 'New Left,' which attacks the privatization of state-owned enterprises and experiments in China's economy." The question raised by Lang Xianping concerned the path choice and moral legitimacy of China's enterprise reform, and quickly involved a large number of economists.Almost all heavyweight scholars actively or passively expressed their views. For a while, their views were sharply opposed, and their positions were sharply opposed. This constituted the largest and most explosive debate in the field of economic theory in the past 20 years. Many scholars believe that Lang's views are extreme and misinterpreted the reform of China's corporate system.Professor Zhang Jun of Fudan University believes that Lang Xianping's case study "attacks one point, not as good as the rest, and is biased."Professor Zhang Weiying of Peking University delivered a speech, calling on the public opinion environment to "treat entrepreneurs well and not demonize them".Zhou Qiren, a professor at Peking University, said in an article "Why I Respond to Lang Xianping": "I couldn't figure out what to think about Lang Xianping... The reform of property rights was not planned by some good people. Economists who advocate property rights reform are all shot, as long as they follow the road of market economy, public enterprises still need to carry out property rights reform.” Wu Jinglian, who has always been regarded as the leader of "mainstream economists", got involved in the controversy in a very "innocent" way.The cause was the "Seminar on Asset Loss and Asset Development of State-owned Enterprises" on August 28, 2004. A few days before the seminar, Lang Xianping announced that he would invite "famous Chinese economists" to come and debate with him face to face.On the day of the meeting, none of the "invited" scholars were present.At the beginning of his speech, Lang Xianping jokingly named which economists were not invited.He said: "At my request, the organizer invited major economists to the venue, but unfortunately, the topic I was talking about today, the people who should participate did not participate for some reason. In order to prove that the organizer is I sincerely invite everyone, and today I will give a report on the invited people, including Wu Jinglian, Zhang Weiying, Lin Yifu, Mao Yushi, etc. The academic topic I will talk about today is to criticize the neoliberal school of thought that has dominated China’s property rights reform for 20 years.” When Lang Xianping was "criticizing by name" in Beijing, Wu Jinglian participated in the "China Europe International Business School South China Forum" in Shenzhen. On August 29, when he finished his speech and answered questions from the audience, how to view the "Lang-Gu Controversy" naturally became a topic of questioning.He said three things about this: first, it is not an isolated phenomenon to use the opportunity of state-owned enterprise restructuring to encroach on and devour public property, and this phenomenon should be resolutely fought against; second, Professor Lang accused a series of entrepreneurs of stealing state-owned property , I have no investigation and research, so I can't make a judgment; third, I can't agree with Professor Lang's claims that "the efficiency of state-owned enterprises is better than that of private enterprises" and "state-owned enterprises cannot withdraw". The reporter asked again: "What do you think of the performance of economists in the 'Lang-Gu Controversy'?" Wu Jinglian replied: There was an article in the newspaper titled "Reflections on Gu Chujunlang's Xianping case: why the economics community is collectively speechless."Economists are not an organization or an institution, and everyone independently draws conclusions based on their own research, so there is no "collective opinion of economists".How many people are in favor and how many people are against, and then a resolution is made, what's the point?Of course, economists have an obligation to uphold academic freedom.If Professor Lang Xianping is suppressed, attacked, or persecuted, any citizen or economist should express his opinion and support him.As for some specific issues involved, how can you express your opinion without research?Some commented that the conscience of economists was tortured this time. Without research and not expressing opinions, it means lack of conscience?I think it would be even more problematic if I didn't research and express opinions indiscriminately. The reporter further asked: Professor Lang Xianping announced the list of economists who could not be invited at the seminar yesterday. The first one is you. What do you think?Wu Jinglian replied gently: "I haven't received any invitations, so there is no question of whether I was invited or not. I guess the newspapers misreported it. I don't think Professor Lang would say such a thing. After all, he is a friend of mine. " What Wu Jinglian didn't expect was that in a public event not long after, Lang Xianping, who had a good relationship with him in the past, avoided the question of whether he had sent an invitation, but flatly declared: "I have no friends, and I don't need friends." Such a public performance made Wu Jinglian very dissatisfied, so that one or two years after the turmoil, when Professor Lang repeatedly called Wu Jinglian to invite him to participate in his research project, Wu Jinglian no longer wanted to, and dared not have any contact with him. . The "crusade" launched by Lang Xianping made him a star-level economist and "independent scholars" as he wanted; Neoliberal mainstream economists of China's reform".In the eyes of some uninformed people, these people have really become part of vested interest groups.Their "conscience" was bought by money. In this way, Wu Jinglian fell into an unprecedented embarrassing situation. Not long ago, he was praised as a "social conscience", but now he is accused of being bribed by interest groups.What's more complicated is that the attacks on him came from two different directions: the "leftist" website, which has always regarded him as a "thorn in the side", published an article, arguing that this was a manifestation of "Wu Jinglian and his donkeys are at their wit's end"; while some media in Beijing accused him of He said that Wu Jinglian neither affirmed Lang Xianping's accusation nor "presented facts and data to refute Lang Xianping", he was playing "Tai Chi push hands".In the future, although Wu Jinglian is not used to such a situation, it did not cause him too much trouble. He still speaks frankly and speaks from the heart.The fundamental reason is that this person has no self-interest at all, he has not reached an interest connection with any company, he does not speculate in stocks or invest, his children or relatives are not engaged in commercial activities, and he is even more than seventy years old He has also lost his enthusiasm for chasing fame and fortune. In the face of fierce attacks, Wu Jinglian was not worried about his personal reputation, but the prospect of China's reform and development. In December 2004, Wu Jinglian delivered a keynote speech "The Labor Pains of Modern China" at the annual meeting of the "Economic Observer". Problems and contradictions not only have not weakened, but have a tendency to intensify. Does it indicate that the general direction of reform and opening up has gone wrong and needs to be changed? This is a central issue discussed on various occasions in recent months.” Then he gave My own thinking: "I think the problem is not in the general direction of the reform, but related to some practices that deviate from the general direction of the reform... Therefore, the correct way for us to alleviate the pain of labor is not 'abortion',' Instead of driving backwards’, we will firmly and steadily advance reform and opening up.” However, the curtain of the great debate has not yet fallen.Since the summer and autumn of 2004, some people have repeatedly attacked China's market-oriented reforms by taking advantage of the unfairness and corruption in the property rights reform.Lang Xianping, who has become a "star", is also going to extremes.He even launched an attack on political reform, saying that "democracy and supervision by public opinion cannot solve the corruption and inefficiency of governments at all levels in China." thinking".He also used the performance of monopoly companies such as China Telecom to prove that "China's state-owned enterprises have never been worse than private enterprises." In March 2006, at a panel discussion in the economic circles of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, Wu Jinglian, who almost never named and criticized his peers in public, rarely and directly spoke to Lang Xianping’s long article “People Man-eating China Urgently Needs to be Harmonized" made the criticism by name.He said: "Professor Lang Xianping's overall judgment on China's situation is that 'the reform of state-owned enterprises is outraged by the people', 'the cost of education reform is borne by the poor, the medical reform has basically failed, and the three rural issues are shocking', 'all of these stem from market-oriented reform' As a result, China 'becomes a society where people cannibalize people', so that 'the worst society can only be seen in 5,000 years'! Lang Xianping said that private enterprises steal state property, and almost none of China's famous enterprises slipped through the net. Lang Xianping also said that private enterprises are more efficient than The efficiency of state-owned enterprises is low, so state-owned enterprises should not be reformed. Some scholars refuted him with data, saying, "I discuss big issues of right and wrong, and I don't discuss small issues of right and wrong." Then, Wu Jinglian commented: "Since it is a big issue of right and wrong, we should It should be discussed clearly. I don’t agree with the use of administrative suppression to discuss, but we can’t use the method of spreading rumors and inciting vulnerable groups to discuss. The strategic measures that are related to the future of our country are now encountering great resistance and opposition to the reform. Some people want to deny the reform and the general direction of the reform. The anti-reform voice reached a climax in October last year. I think this is infuriating. " These voices of Wu Jinglian were quickly described as "Wu Jinglian vs. Shaking Lang Xianping" in an entertaining manner. The media and the public were impatient to listen to what "big right and wrong" was, and the academic circle seemed to be losing enthusiasm for rational debate.Amidst the noise, Wu Jinglian, who was in the center of the vortex, seemed more and more lonely.What worries him is that those incitements that will ultimately damage the fundamental interests of the Chinese nation, with the clamor of people who support the old line and system and the cooperation of some public opinion tools, are likely to deceive the public and lead them to oppose their fundamental interests. Interest diverges.After entering 2006, he introduced the book "Saving Capitalism from Capitalists" co-authored by R. Rajan and L. Zingales on many occasions, and repeatedly quoted the discussion in it to analyze the difficulty of China's market-oriented reform sex-- Market economic institutions face a double threat in terms of the political environment.The first threat comes from vested interests in the early development of the market.These people have acquired a strong position in the market and are trying to maintain it.Since the free competition system of the market requires that all people be treated equally, these privileged people are afraid that the establishment of the free market system and its supporting systems will endanger their vested power, so they strongly encourage the use of government power to limit foreign and domestic influence. Competition hinders the further improvement of the market competition system and its supporting systems.The second threat comes from the disadvantaged groups who were damaged in the early development of the market. When these vulnerable groups are deceived and their legitimate dissatisfaction with various injustices is exploited by others, they often point the finger at the market economic system.And this approach just caters to the needs of vested interests.Under such circumstances, vested interests can hide behind the masses, demanding greater government intervention, abandoning opening to the outside world, and suppressing market competition.If it is not done well, the following "bad scenes that have happened in history" will appear: "Under the guise of protecting the safety of the poor, vested interest groups suppress the market mechanism to ensure their own safety, while the victims It's the free market economy and all those who can take advantage of it." Wu Jinglian then pointed out that "not only will the disadvantaged groups not protest, but they will cheer instead, completely unaware that their future will be damaged." However, Wu Jinglian's words, which were supposed to be thought-provoking, were published in a prominent position on the website with the most eye-catching title "Wu Jinglian Says Poor People Oppose Reform", which aroused indiscriminate bombardment on the Internet. In this irrational attack, the old man had no choice but to do nothing!He is like an "old butler" standing on the edge of a game of cards. Although he is very dissatisfied with the game in progress and thinks that the current rules must be changed, whoever wants to reach out and overturn the table is definitely him. Can't agree.It is precisely because of this that he has become a person who is not "pleasing" to the left and right. Those who are playing cards think he is too "long-winded", while those who are not used to the status quo believe that he is an accomplice in an unfair game.