Çin'in 50 yılı. Mao'nun ölümünden günümüze / 2

Indeed >> Erkin, Mao died in 76. He died in September of '76. What happened on September 10th? Can you bring us step by step from September 10th to the present day? >> Of course. I will try not to go into too much detail, both for you and for our dear viewers. Because we have very limited time. >> Now, when Mao died, [laughter] I mean, after Mao died, it was the end of the Cultural Revolution and shopping, in a sense. He lost hope in his life. Because Mao was the greatest leader and executor of the Cultural Revolution, and the source of legitimacy among other CCP cadres who defended the Cultural Revolution. The deaths of Mao and other important CCP leaders in the same year create a great void. We see Deng Xiaoping stepping in historically. But I want to open a very brief parenthesis here. Deng Xiaoping >> As soon as Mal died, I guess Deng Xiaoping didn't pass. >> No, he didn't pass immediately. There is a group called the Gang of Four, which the current official CCP narrative calls the Gang of Four, including Mao Zedong's wife, who were the executors of the Cultural Revolution. They were among the star cadres of the CCP at that time, and they were in a political campaign, using the legitimacy they created through Mao. Merit explained this very thoroughly and beautifully. Now, as I said, Merit explained the reasons for the Cultural Revolution very well, but there were economic and political reasons in China. Let's summarize briefly. A great economic collapse, the collapse of industry, the collapse of education. This country produced almost no university graduates for 10 years. Similarly, processes such as the majority of the Red Guard groups, formed by young people, starting to clash with each other occurred. These Red Guard groups also began to clash with the Chinese army. It was complete chaos, and after the end of the Cultural Revolution, the point I want to emphasize is this. It's not just about Deng Xiaoping. At the peak of the Cultural Revolution, more than 50% of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the next level of high-ranking officials were already labeled as traitors, renegades, capitalist roaders, bourgeoisie, and so on. So, more than half of the party's central committee was accused. So, it's not just about Deng Xiaoping's personal will or the policies he implemented; there is also a general discomfort. This economic crisis that befell them, people's weariness of this internal conflict, is a very important factor. At the same time, what makes Deng Xiaoping special is that even during his tenure, because you know Deng Xiaoping has been an active cadre since the Chinese Revolution and is known to have been closely involved in economic affairs. Therefore, the period initiated by Deng Xiaoping is a period that we can explain with the question: How will we recover the economic and political damage caused by the Cultural Revolution for the Chinese? Therefore, the current official CCP history defines the Cultural Revolution as a disaster, a period of chaos, and attributes Deng Xiaoping's success to his ability to recover from the destruction caused by the Cultural Revolution in a short period. An important parenthesis here. >> Can I ask something here? Let me ask my first question. Of course, of course. >> As far as we know, Mao is still seen as a great figure and hero in China. They have no problems with this. But as you said, the Cultural Revolution is very decisive in the entire attitude of the current CCP and all its policies after '76. How do they separate Mao from this? How do they explain it? Do they say the Cultural Revolution happened on its own? >> Did Mao have no fault in this, for example? How do they separate this? >> Let me answer you with direct quotes from CCP documents. First, they have a formula when criticizing Mao. They criticize Mao. First, they say that 70% of everything Chairman Mao did was correct, and 30% was mistaken. This is the famous saying at the beginning. >> Yes. They put the Cultural Revolution in the mistaken part. There is a bit of an attitude here. It will be a wrong analogy, but it's like asking, "Who misinformed our Sultan?" Is it Mao? They blame the Gang of Four primarily, and Chairman Mao, and indeed it was so. Chairman Mao was very ill. He was not in a state to read or write. Those around him, of course, this is a period of the Cultural Revolution. Of course, there is also a political aspect here, from the perspective of the Deng Xiaoping faction. And those who informed him continued to say that the Cultural Revolution was very successful. Their aim was to carry out a coup within the party. And Deng Xiaoping even presented not deviating from Mao Zedong's path as a condition for success for China's reform period. This was a political issue. There is also a theoretical dimension to it. Since Deng Xiaoping, CCP theorists have argued that the story of reform and opening up also belongs to Mao Zedong, that Mao Zedong also had this tendency, but it could not succeed due to the Gang of Four and the leftist mistakes of the time. They give the example of the 8th Congress, if I remember correctly. They say that at this congress, the Communist Party of China made a majority decision to develop productive forces for the establishment of socialism nationwide. But Chairman Mao, despite this majority decision, did not recognize it and continued to follow a path based on class struggle, which is why this happened. Even among CCP theorists or famous figures who tell anecdotes, many stories are told, and they all say that Mao was very old, he couldn't think properly, and there was a group that exploited Mao's condition. Deng Xiaoping and the majority of the party, which they say was the majority, recovered from this situation. This is roughly how they summarize it, and the reform and opening up also began a few years after Mao's death. Deng Xiaoping is doing something smart, in my opinion, at that time. Now, setting aside his own intentions, whether he was accused of being a capitalist roader with Mao's accusation, ideologically and politically, unlike the post-Stalin steps taken in the Soviet Union, such as Khrushchev's secret meetings criticizing Stalin, Stalin's legacy, etc., Deng Xiaoping initiated a widespread discussion about Mao Zedong and the Cultural Revolution within the party. More than 4,000 cadres were officially assigned to study the Cultural Revolution. They created hundreds of thousands of documents, data, and the party brought them together in a collective effort and published a very famous document. It was something like "On the Wrong Tendencies in the History of Our Party." It was even titled "On Certain Problems of Our Party After the Founding of the People's Republic." Everything actually started from here in terms of Deng Xiaoping's reform and opening up period. >> Can I say something? >> Of course, of course. >> So, can we say that there isn't a complete Mao Zedong personality cult, as is often written and discussed? Because the party openly conducted a discussion process and did not present him as an untouchable, sacred being, but rather revealed some of his mistakes. Can we say that? >> Of course, we can definitely say that. In fact, in Deng Xiaoping's writings from that period, he constantly showed respect to Mao Zedong, saying Chairman Mao was right, he was good. But Deng Xiaoping constantly emphasized Mao's struggle against dogmatism in his contributions to Marxism or the socialist struggle in his works from that period. And he says that because they dogmatized Mao directly, he blames the Gang of Four again, but I think this is also an indirect criticism of Mao. I was going to say that now. Exactly. >> Because at that time, this also tipped the scales in favor of Deng Xiaoping's line. >> So, how do these find a reaction among the people? I mean, they make such an explanation, they say 70 to 30, they blame the Gang of Four, they sideline Mao. What could be the reason for this? It means that there is still a response to Mao among the people, so they cannot completely eliminate it. They do it by saying 70 to 30, by saying the Gang of Four. But as you said, when they open these discussions, they also open up discussions about Mao Zedong. But what do they do? They don't let the founder of the People's Republic of China be discredited. They don't let him be trampled underfoot, so to speak, in their own words. But at the same time, they also open up these discussions to lead the country in the direction they want. So, it seems politically clever. >> Yes. Yes. I want to go back a sentence. Meri mentioned in the broadcast that a group of Chinese patriots and students were sent to France for education. >> Yes. >> Deng Xiaoping was one of these students. Deng Xiaoping was 16 when he went to France. He was a Chinese person who embraced communism in Europe. Later, he was active in organizations like the Chinese Communist Youth League. He worked in a tractor factory. That's why they made him work in a tractor factory during the Cultural Revolution. He went to Moscow. He returned for the Chinese Revolution, and so on. But when we look at Mao's writings from that period, there was an unspoken gap between those who went abroad and those who stayed in China within the party, in my opinion. Other writers have also expressed this. >> Is it like elites versus common people? >> Like, or a distinction between those whose theoretical aspect is more prominent and those who are directly in the field. He even gives another example, but it's not used much. Mao called them "donkeys carrying books" for them. He didn't say it directly to Deng, but he had a stance for this line. There is a rivalry because those who went to France knew foreign languages, were theoretically (I'm saying this in quotes) more familiar with Marxism, received other training, and came back. Therefore, personally, although I might be mistaken, all of this story, because when we look at the names, the classifications are more or less the same. In a sense, this is also a dimension of the struggle within the party. >> After Mao's death, of course, a great leader like Mao, it's not just about personality cult, but as I said, there are many excesses. Now, such a line comes to power, but the Cultural Revolution really created great chaos. There is a very famous visual that our viewers will remember, and you too, brother. A black and white visual from China. A little girl holding the Little Red Book. That's very... >> Holding the red book. Yes. For example, that's a frame captured during the Cultural Revolution. During the Cultural Revolution, the book we call the Little Red Book was expressed as being printed in a simplified way for the people to better understand Mao's views. Now, but Lin Biao compiled this book. Then he died in a plane crash in Moscow. >> Yes. They took him because they thought he was a traitor. The book is actually a book of aphorisms, there is nothing theoretical in it. It's actually Mao Zedong's. Therefore, highlighting it only as a symbol during that period... >> There are articles, early ones, like "The Burning of the Grass," etc. >> Yes. Yes. Written in a more popular language. On the one hand, there is the civil war that broke out, and on the other hand, from the perspective of Deng Xiaoping's views, there is dogmatism. At that time, they didn't enact laws, but Mao once issued something saying, "Everything Chairman Mao says is correct." Now, Deng Xiaoping says, roughly speaking, he doesn't say it at the table. >> It might not be correct. >> Yes. It is directly contradictory to the struggle against dogmatism that Mao opposed. Apart from the economic destruction. I'm returning to your question. >> Now, after this, the end of the war, first of all, creates great relief for the people. These are according to CCP documents. Because >> You mean the end of the war, the end of the Cultural Revolution. You mean that, right? >> Of course, of course. But it is known that there were very serious clashes towards the end of the Cultural Revolution, especially among the Red Guard groups themselves. And like this >> It's an incredible period, the Cultural Revolution is an incredible period. It's truly a perverted period. >> Yes. As we said earlier, university graduates were not produced because of "imperialist culture." Of course, they have meanings, and I find some of them justified. Things that have passed through a filter of reason, like building mountains and violins, can go to very strange places in practice. Like the example we gave last program of people jumping to avoid being put on display. When you look at the very end, when you look at the very end, truly absurd things are seen. But behind it, there is a foundation. There was something. Of course, of course. >> From such a moment, the Gang of Four is purged, and this is important. They are purged with the support of the majority of the Central Committee, so it's not a seizure of power. It's a phenomenon, and they open a new era for China. As I said earlier, a working group is formed. What has our party done in the last 30 years? >> Can I add something here, Erkin? There is something in the left that might be good to summarize briefly. The question is, how do we bring socialism to countries that have undergone socialist revolution? How do we make this country socialist? And there are various answers to this. For example, by exporting the revolution, by spreading the revolution. This is one strategy. This is a narrative that Trotsky, and even Mao, were largely involved in. We will spread it around, like a complete world revolution. Mao says so. At least Trotsky, continuous revolution. Or, within this turmoil, we will first develop and establish socialism in one country, and then it will spread around. This is more Stalin's narrative. And then, to achieve socialism in these countries, first, because these revolutionary countries are actually not countries with a working class, but socialist theory, in essence, Marxist theory, will do it with the working class. It happened in Russia. It happened in China. These were not as capitalist as Western countries. Marx's theory predicted the revolution would happen there, but it didn't. It happened in Russia, it happened in China. They are big examples. I'm only mentioning them for that reason. There is also a method here. It is to develop productive forces, not relations of production. That is, let's first develop our industry, our industry, our industry, let this country prosper, so that a working class can emerge, and then socialism can come. This is more Deng Xiaoping's narrative. The narrative we see in him. China will now enter this. We are starting that now. You will start telling us about it. It will proceed from this perspective. Not exporting the revolution, or continuing with the class struggle like socialism in one country. The Soviet Union has also collapsed. The Soviet Union is also declining. China is definitely afraid. They think, "We might go this way too." And they are looking for a way out. Deng Xiaoping found this way out. Not Deng Xiaoping, of course. We shouldn't talk about it too much with personality cult. Deng Xiaoping is the person at the head of this. Yes. Say it. They take various measures. One of them is, starting from the point you mentioned, they say that when the Chinese Revolution took place, feudalism, foreign occupation, and war with nationalists existed in this country. That is, the Chinese Revolution took place at a point where multiple historical stages that should have followed each other intersected. Therefore, first, as you said, they set the task of developing productive forces. Didn't the chairman before Mao say this? Is there something like that? The chairman before Mao says this. He belittles it. Mao belittles it. He doesn't do it. He continues with the class struggle. We haven't seen this only in China; we've seen similar things in other countries. I even brought a book here. You tell it, Erkin. I will read something from here. >> After making this assessment, they put economic development as the most fundamental. They say, in summary, this is the source of China's current breakthrough. They say, "We will achieve economic development by operating a capitalist market economy under the control of the socialist party, the Communist Party's socialist power." They set various goals for this. They also say, "Capitalists cannot know capitalism as well as we do." They also say that. Because our core ideology is against it, we know it very well. They cannot know it as well as we do. We will bring the best capitalism. They have a funny narrative. >> If capitalism is to come, we know it best. [laughter] >> A political system that is more economically coherent and focused on development, under socialist power. They especially emphasize this. At this point, at the exact same historical period, in a similar parallel, there is a process of collapse and disintegration of the Soviet Union, which began with the reckoning with Stalin. Deng Xiaoping looks at them at that time and says, "Much has changed in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, but nothing has changed. Because the economic model remained the same." They also analyze Deng Xiaoping's line for the Soviet Union during this period, saying that NEP should have lasted much longer for the Soviet Union. That is, CCP theorists have an NEP analysis of the Soviet Union that spans almost 40-50 years. >> I just took it out. >> During this process, Lenin wrote. I am reading from Lenin's writings. Now, the Soviet Union is founded. Of course, it has emerged from war. This period is called "barracks communism." >> Production, productive forces cannot develop. They have to deal with things like famine. And Lenin's writings are there for the famous NEP process. I am reading something here. These are entirely Lenin's words. We thought that due to the obligation of the peasants to deliver, they would provide the predicted amount of grain, and we would distribute this grain to factories and enterprises, thus having communist production. >> He thinks this is a problem. He thinks this creates a problem and deviates from it. In the NEP process, they switch to a method like this. They don't tell the peasants, "You will give us your grain." They say, "You will give us 10 units of grain, and you can sell the rest." They move to something like this in the NEP process. When this happens, the problem is somewhat resolved, frankly. At least the problems of famine and scarcity. I will now actually, when you look at it, this NEP is actually a small application of what China later did by spreading it everywhere and expanding it. The CCP says this. >> Yes. They also refer to this quote from Lenin. I saw these in a few places. This book also refers to it. >> Extended NEP? It's in the comments too. >> Yes. Extended and expanded. >> Meaning expanded everywhere. In fact, if you ask me, this is state capitalism now. I wish I hadn't expressed my opinion, but yes. These people at the head of this state say they are socialists, but they are moving towards a capitalist system. I'll be quiet for a bit now. It's exactly at this point. >> Wait, the last, the last. I found it. [laughter] I found it, I found it. Sorry. I won't talk anymore. Okay. >> There was supposed to be a poem here. There was supposed to be a poem. >> Wait, wait, I'll find a poem or something. I don't read poems. Look, Lenin's words again. The haste shown in establishing the targeted new social order prevented the development of productive forces and therefore the progress of the cause of communism. That is, the difficulty of the situation they were in. These are Lenin's words. I'm silent. >> Therefore, this reformist line, let's call it, which began with Deng Xiaoping, they call it reform and opening up, but what they actually say and advocate, to put it crudely, is not "socialism is built like this." There is also a geographical aspect, and in terms of the Chinese economy, China is a very large geography, but its arable land, not to mention its underground mines, is limited in proportion to its population. Therefore, feeding so many people is a problem. Especially at the end of the Cultural Revolution, Erkin, you've arrived. Sorry. >> The last, the last 5 seconds were not heard. >> Take that part again. >> At this economic imbalance, they present two options: feeding the people and increasing the standard of living. And what they saw, I'm talking about the 80s. We've progressed a bit further. They foresee that the only solution is the development of technology, meaning the development of means of production. But they also foresee technological development as another important issue. For example, Deng Xiaoping himself, in '87, spoke about the importance of developing technology or technology transfer. It even reaches a point that affects China's foreign policy. Did it freeze again? It didn't freeze. It didn't freeze. >> The Soviets are intervening, indeed. Yes. Please. >> The Soviets, sorry, it reaches a point that affects foreign policy, and they think: we need to make a breakthrough in international trade, and a phrase emerges. Not showing the red flag in international relations, or perhaps not waving the red flag. Peaceful coexistence. It resembles the Soviet narrative. >> Is it Perestroika like Gorbachev? >> It resembles it. In fact, the sentence is very similar. The phrase "peaceful coexistence" is also directly used during Deng Xiaoping's era. But there is a slight difference: the Communist Party's rule and the goal of socialism are emphasized many times. What they mean is very different from the communism and socialism we understand, but according to what they describe, not showing the red flag in international relations. And this leads to the story of Chinese goods and Chinese trade, which became a phenomenon in the 90s. Now, the Chinese state applies a maneuver here. It's still like this. For example, they divide the economy into various trusts, into main branches. In these branches, Chinese companies are completely free to operate as private companies, engage in international trade, and so on. But with one difference: if these companies start to interfere with each other's areas and monopolize each other's areas, the state intervenes. Thus, they produce a new commercial model by completely minimizing competition in the domestic market through the power of the Communist Party or the state, with an explosion in international trade. >> In fact, China prevents what capitalist utopians try to prevent. They prevent monopolization. Capitalist utopians also don't want monopolization. As much as capitalism is prone to monopoly... >> Let's give a current example. For instance, there is the story of Alibaba and Jack Ma. We read stories about his purge a few years ago. Jack Ma was directly removed from all his positions by a party decision, and his companies were divided. Because Alibaba was growing too much and was heading towards monopolization. That was the reason. Jack Ma was also participating in events on Nurses' Day recently. They really brought him down. >> The reason behind Jack Ma's disappearance is this. That is, his monopolization, saying this man has done too much, he has monopolized, and it is starting to harm the economy, so they intervened. Exactly. And the Chinese state, the Communist Party, has the right to directly dispose of the areas where the private sector can enter. They have the power, not the right. They can do whatever they want. >> How is it? Berat, are you going to ask something? >> I was going to ask something related to this. The state also creates some sectors, doesn't it? In strategic sectors, the situation is probably different. Not everything is possible in everything. >> For example, the Chinese Communist Party itself promoted Alibaba. Jack Ma was also a former soldier and party member. There are also companies that are not like that. Therefore, these companies are finished, finished. Sorry, sorry. I will ask a question. When you finish. >> It was already finishing. Uh-huh. It's finished. >> I'm curious about this. Can I go to China and open a company? >> It's very difficult. It's very difficult for foreigners to go to China and open a company. There are certain rules. But for you as a Turk, it's almost impossible. By the way, I'll mention that separately. Because >> From what I see, although relations with Turkey are good on paper, etc., I don't think they like or trust Turks very much. Political issues. Let me ask it this way. Let me ask it this way. Semih, one second. I went as an American. Okay. Not as a Turk. If an American went to China. >> Uh-huh. >> I don't know, I'll open a tire shop. >> Are there obstacles to this? I mean, is it the same as what an American would try to do if they went to France? >> There are conditions. Of course, you need to have a certain capital, your field of work is limited, and you accept these from the beginning. I mean, I opened a tire shop first, saved money there, and then I went here. >> I'm opening a hamburger joint, you can't. Ha. >> Of course. No. Second, even if you are a foreign company, China monitors and knows everything your company does in China. I mean, all your information is open within China, under state control. Another issue is that the Communist Party of China, although they say this is not applied effectively everywhere, it is a rule. They send an official from the party who has the authority to monitor you, but not the authority you have. >> And he has a position, a post, and so on. How much control do I have over my own capital? Does the CCP have any say in this? I mean, let's say I'm a large construction company. >> You are a foreigner. >> Uh-huh. I'm not a foreigner. No, not anymore. I can be Chinese too. It's not a problem. After all, we opened up. I am a construction company. I am Lima. I am a company. I will go, I will agree with this person, I will agree with that person. I will build houses here without even considering the state. I will give this much money in return, I will receive this much. And I will put this in my account. Is the CCP not involved in any of this? Doesn't it interfere? Does it? Or does it say, "No, you can't do this here"? What happens? Is it free? Is enterprise free? >> Enterprise is free, but limited. In this way. As a foreign or Chinese company, you cannot enter the military technology sector. In telecommunications in China, absolutely not, unless you are a CCP company. You cannot enter strategic sectors at all. Are companies that are CCP companies the companies in strategic sectors? >> Of course, they work directly for the state. Company. >> Do they compete? Now, in the capitalist narrative, if there is no competition, it's not capitalism. In fact, this is the capitalist narrative. Now, there is a CCP company, and it's also a state company. So, it's something the state does. Does it have a competitor? >> Yes. Many. I mean, there are multiple electricity companies, multiple telecommunication companies that are dependent on the state. Competition between them is also possible. But don't think of it as competition in Turkey or a Western country, brother. Because they have certain regulations. The maximum they can earn is limited. It's like that, I mean, if they earn more, they can't. Their scope of work is limited accordingly. So, if you are a Chinese company and you are close to the state, you can say, "I will work in this area," and you work in that area. Going beyond that is rare and very difficult. >> I have a question. Of course. >> I will ask the same question as Çatay, but differently. I am not an American, not a Turk. I am Chinese. >> And maybe I am a civil servant, or an academic. Or I work in a factory. Can I resign and start my own personal enterprise? >> Of course, if you resign, you can. But they don't allow civil servants to get into such businesses. This is somewhat related to CCP policy. Now, you know, we see news sometimes, right? Someone in charge in China was executed, tried, etc. Now, high-ranking officials in China have many rights, and they are in a somewhat elite position, but this right is not related to money. They are forbidden to accumulate money. I mean, they can be executed for hiding $300,000. Now >> I understand. Since I won't have any capital accumulation, I won't be able to realize a private enterprise either. Because where will I get the money? >> Yes. Moreover, being a civil servant or a high-ranking manager is still considered more prestigious. From my personal experiences. >> How is the inheritance issue, Erkin? >> There is inheritance. There is inheritance law. You can leave an inheritance. But in terms of inheritance, you can do all your transactions. Actually, the only thing you cannot do, as in a capitalist market economy, is to monopolize and be closed to supervision. That is, the state has the legal status to monitor your every move and, when necessary, to confiscate it. >> So, I have a question here. I will ask you this again in other contexts later, but I will ask it here too. You said that being closed to supervision is a condition. Are the mechanisms that carry out supervision reliable, in your opinion? I mean, from what I can see. >> It may or may not be. >> This is a very frequently raised issue, brother. That's why I'm curious. It's one of the most frequently raised criticisms. >> For example, what made Xi Jinping, let's say, is that he directly addressed this issue when he took office. The anti-corruption campaigns that Xi Jinping started are actually targeting state officials and exactly the kind of activities you are talking about. For example, there was the "flies and tigers" campaign by Xi Jinping. Tigers are high-ranking party officials, flies are low-ranking party officials. Asians are a bit like bears, I should say that too. >> The metaphors are truly incredible. Donkeys carrying books, etc., incredible. >> Yes. Is it something like this? We need to ask this question. Now, there is a somewhat romantic reading of this in the left. Regarding China's situation. And that is this. Now, there are high-ranking officials in the CCP. They are revisionist people. They have betrayed socialism. Okay. They have made the country capitalist. Okay. But now China and these officials also have a narrative. What is this narrative? They say, "We will bring socialism in this way." We will get to the details of the "later" later. But now, looking at it, a commentary is made. They say, "They will open the country to capitalism, but they explain it this way." Why might they explain it this way? Because the people won't want it. The people are so Maoist, so socialist, that they won't want it, so these officials are deceiving the people. That's why they explain it this way. So, are they explaining it this way because they are truly deceiving the people, or do these people sincerely want to bring socialism? If they want to bring it, what are their plans for it? How will it happen? >> Personally, I am closer to the latter, personally. Because the people, of course, there is a widespread love for Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, or identifying themselves as socialist communists. But now I will state my negative observation about the CCP. Being a party member is very important. Yes. But if the CCP today says, "I am dissolving myself, I am now a capitalist," I absolutely do not think there is a Marxist or communist vein on a global level that would oppose this. Because >> You think they would do it, if they wanted to. >> There is no one to hold them accountable in China, in a positive sense or in a sense of collapse. Chinese youth work very hard to become CCP members. They take exams, they study like textbooks. Marxism is also taught in educational institutions in China. But it's a bit like memorizing Atatürk's principles and reforms without understanding them. Do you understand? Most Chinese youth try to become CCP members to find jobs. >> There is also the issue of integration there. >> Of course. I think this will seriously confront the CCP in about 15 years. There must be a calculated ideological core or something, I don't know. It's also a closed country, but I see a very intense apoliticism, both from my observations and from the Chinese people I've met in China, especially the youth. Therefore, the CCP doesn't need to convince anyone that it is communist, nor does it need to deceive anyone. I think they have a socialist goal, according to their own definition. They have some predictions for this. Now, Chinese people, Asians in general, love numbers, stages, phases, etc. Officially, China, the CCP, does not directly say that China is a socialist country. It says that China is in the initial stage of establishing socialism. This means that the development of productive forces, reaching a certain level of public welfare, reducing the poverty rate, etc., are the parameters. And they say the target is 2040. This is an official target, legally bound. They say that in 2049, China will complete the stage of becoming a modern socialist state and a prosperous society. It's the 100th anniversary of the Chinese Revolution. Then the second phase will begin. Then the third phase, and so on. It is said among Chinese theorists that the establishment of a communist order in China could take 200-300 years. This can be read as, "We will establish it in the future, brother," or it can be read as a serious plan. I think we cannot know that part, but I believe the CCP has an ideological purpose. >> It is condemned to unite with world revolutions. China is like that. This must happen in other countries. Anyway, that's a different topic. Erkin, we've gone too much into question and answer. It feels like we've drifted from the chronology. Shall we continue from there a bit? Shall we continue from there a bit? >> Now, we said this. An economic breakthrough began with reform and opening up. The private sector was opened up. Private companies were established. Foreign capital was invited and attracted to China. For a period, there were Chinese workers. Chinese workers were sent abroad. They are not there anymore. There is the story of Chinese workers going and coming. And China reached a level of economic development. Now, there are two issues facing China. We are approaching the 90s again. The rural areas. >> I'll get to that. The rural areas are a big problem in China. The peasant population, and even under the current administration of Xi Jinping, they pay special attention to increasing the welfare of the peasant population. Because there is not much that the peasant population can do. A great wave of urbanization began. It is said that more than 500 million people have stopped being peasants and become urban dwellers in the last 20-30 years, according to statistics. This is sometimes done by turning villages into cities, and sometimes by emptying rural areas and settling people in cities. In places where production has also stopped, hundreds of thousands of peasants have become international merchants in China. You know, we see funny videos sometimes. A peasant in China makes a TikTok video, holding pears, holding melons. All of them are state-supported, subsidized, grant-receiving people. That is, the state gives them, very crudely speaking.

It will be an analogy, but you know how much it gives away. You take your goods, I'll give you the equipment, I'll give you the drone, I'll give you the land, I'll give you the camera. You sell these abroad, international trade. So, apart from the e-government support for rural areas, the most important solution has actually been international trade. I mean, there are places in China where the whole village is actually shooting TikTok. I just visited the Xinjiang Uyghur region, for example. Everywhere there are TikTok rooms. There are TikTok rooms in rural areas. It's very interesting. I see them on TikTok too, these TikTok rooms. They really have places. It's a bit different. I thought. Yes, it's very interesting. This economy, indeed. By the way, I need to say this. I'll have some tea. You speak. I'm listening. Now, the official ideology is Mao Zedong Thought plus Deng Xiaoping Theory. Recently, Xi Jinping has also been added to this, but it was not officially put into the constitution until Deng Xiaoping's death. That is, what we call Deng Xiaoping Theory is something that was put into the Chinese constitution after Deng Xiaoping. The Chinese explain it this way: it was an exploration. You know, they are against dogmatism and so on. It's not right to directly adopt this ideology as a dogma. I'm elaborating here, of course. Therefore, the Deng Xiaoping Theory, which will take its place in the constitution after Deng Xiaoping's death, is based on the story of how we develop capitalist market relations under the leadership of socialism, which we have been counting all along. Now, at this point, if you wish, Çatay, let's come to the Tiananmen events. Because let's come. Interestingly, the Tiananmen events are still one of China's biggest taboos. I worked in the Chinese media, for example. They don't even want to talk about it, you know, talking about Tiananmen in China. As if it doesn't exist. The Chinese also have a bit of this attitude. You know, if America commits a crime or does something, Hollywood makes 10,000 movies about it. Okay? They justify this issue. The Chinese and Asians are not like that. They work through these issues by acting as if they don't exist, like the Japanese too. Therefore, I don't think you can easily talk about the Tiananmen issue with a Chinese person today. Those who know will know superficially. The young people probably say something happened there. Now, there are a few important points I want to emphasize about the Tiananmen issue. Firstly, the Chinese, the CCP members, see Tiananmen as China's first and only attempt at a color revolution, not counting Hong Kong. They see it as an attempt at a color revolution. They see it as an attempted coup. Now, what Meri said in the previous episode is absolutely correct. From the very beginning, there is a revolutionary opposition, especially among the youth and in the rural areas, against the party. But the events very quickly turn into something similar to a color revolution. Now, if you look at any photo of those protests in Tiananmen Square in Beijing, it says "Democracy" in English, it says "Down with the CCP, we want freedom, end the dictatorship," and so on. And at that time, Nancy Pelosi, our sister, you know, wherever there's a problem, she intervenes and supports it by saying "Democracy for China," "May the souls of the deceased rest in peace," and so on, which complicated things. Now, the official narrative of the Chinese is this: During the Tiananmen events, there was a meeting between Gorbachev and Deng Xiaoping, a summit, a China-Soviet summit, and all the international press was there. And therefore, the Chinese say that these events were deliberately initiated while the entire world press was here. There are various death tolls for the events. Now, the essence of that event is this. The Chinese official narrative calls the Tiananmen events a bourgeois liberal, young bourgeois liberal, and right-wing movement in official sources. They say they were right-wing and had bourgeois radicalism. For the protesters, there is a person named Qiao Shi. I looked up his name. He was the head of the party's Politburo at the time, an important high-ranking leader. Qiao Shi is criticized by the Central Committee of the Party, accused of failing to do ideological work among the people, and he resigns after giving self-criticism. Now, this person, Zhao Ziyang, is brought in to replace him. They say that under Zhao Ziyang, bourgeois liberalism also strengthened. Zhao Ziyang even gave a speech saying, "There is no need to fight against bourgeois liberalism anymore." And Deng Xiaoping reacted very strongly to this, saying, "We need to fight liberalism for hundreds of years more in China." This reminds me of the scale issue that Meri mentioned last episode, which is very accurate. Their scales are like this. And Deng Xiaoping said in a speech he gave at the time, "Fighting against erroneous left-wing ideas, referring to the Mao era and Maoism, while neglecting the fight against right-wing liberal views is a great mistake." At that time, because these names were seen as reformers, this is not an official narrative, but the conclusion I draw from my readings is that they were more reformist, more inclined towards opening up, and Deng also favored opening up. And Hu Yaobang died. All the events erupted at his funeral. His funeral became an occasion for people to express their views against the CCP at that time. And the army responded very harshly. Because, as we mentioned earlier, in the rural areas, as far as I know, Maoists also emerged in the rural areas. Yes, Maoists in the rural areas. Something started with them, but it started to lead to completely different problems. I don't know exactly what happened to those rural Maoists. I don't know, at least. Because there is no data. And at that time, they were already focusing the spotlight on the more liberal, left-wing, or freedom-loving currents in the cities and in the center. And by labeling this as a threat to socialism, they created legitimacy for themselves and intervened directly and harshly. There was fighting and brawling. In that protest, both soldiers killed protesters, and protesters burned captured soldiers. There are visuals of that. They burned them and hung them from bridges. Later, the situation was resolved, in quotes, according to the CCP's narrative. Resolved, meaning they arrested and tried the leaders they saw as bourgeois liberals at the time. There is also a consistency in this regard from Deng Xiaoping's perspective. There are some prominent figures at that time. There is Li Peng, for example, who has books and writings about China. He was someone who opposed from a left-wing perspective, a student leader at Tiananmen, but since Li Peng has evolved to a point where he says social democracy is necessary in China today, it creates a picture that overlaps with the CCP's theses in a sense. And Deng Xiaoping will gradually withdraw from the political scene, not directly related to the Tiananmen events, but after the Tiananmen events. I also want to add this. Everything started with settling accounts with Mao and the Cultural Revolution, right? Now, they are finding some solutions within the party. I haven't talked about this, but it's very important. Deng Xiaoping introduced a generational system to the Communist Party of China. He said that each Politburo member would be a generation, and that generation would retire from the party when their work was done. He himself retired while he was alive, leaving his post and spending the rest of his life playing bridge and having conversations. He said that these generational changes would prevent dogmatism within the party or the concentration of power in one place, and that it would be one of the cornerstones of socialist democracy. Now, as these generations come one after another. He's acting like İsmet Pasha. Yes. But where does this break? It breaks during Xi Jinping's era. It's said to be in the late Soviet period, but some leaders also have this idea of renewal, not just a surrender to capitalism or the West. How can we fix this system? This also exists in the Soviet Union, but of course, it failed there. Here, as far as I understand, they have managed to stabilize the system to a certain extent. It's thought that by misdiagnosing the system's problems, they can fix it, but in reality, many things have become problematic, many things have rotted. Things are a bit late. Anyway, let's not get into that. Yes. Yes, in some aspects, I think so too. And therefore, this whole process was a necessity. Focusing so much on the economy after the Cultural Revolution. But there are also those who criticize the CCP from the left. Çin is still a CCP official. Left-wing currents are very strong in China, by the way. Our viewers. I asked, I was going to ask separately. There is a new left, there are Maoists, and when I say strong, I mean they don't have mass power, they have organizations. They are allowed to do this, for example. Of course, of course. Most of them are academics. Academia is never touched in China, as far as I've seen, unless you say "Come and destroy this place, America." There is a lot of criticism. This is something I am sure of. The culture of ideological debate is very developed. This has two meanings. One is related to that culture. The second is that they give freedom of speech, but of course, they don't give freedom of organization. There's that too. What about the unions, for example? Unions are completely state-controlled. All unions are state-controlled. Unions established outside of this are not accepted as unions. They are accepted as associations. But as far as I know, they are legally recognized. For example, there is a friend of mine, Onurcan Ülker, who knows China very well, who lived in China for many years and looks at China very critically. He wrote a story about the Motokiyeler protests. In such situations, workers or a professional group can form an association and find someone to talk to. Can they negotiate collective agreements, for example? Of course, of course. They can sign agreements with their counterparts. But I think that's something that changes depending on the situation. I don't want to sidetrack you too much, but I'll ask a short question related to this. For example, during the Tiananmen period, the left-wing critical currents, let's say, the currents that criticize the system from the left, it seems to me that they weren't labeled as "Taiwanese," "liberals," or "right-wing." So, other forms of opposition weren't labeled that way, as far as I understand. No, no, and this is also a fact. I think this part of the CCP's theses is correct. I studied that period well because the leftists, or those who criticized from the left, and we don't know about the rural areas, but the leftists are a bit like this: "I supported Tiananmen for the first three days, but then the issue became absurd." There are Chinese academics and writers who participated in those days and say this later. I'd like to interject here. Was there an economic reason for Tiananmen? Or was it always a cultural or sociological conflict? Was there an underlying criticism like income inequality, your moves not reaching the masses, a group benefiting from it? There was. The CCP itself says that the Tiananmen events, this attempt at a color revolution or this war against socialism, were fueled by the party's insufficient economic success at the time. They also find scapegoats for this. That's the political intrigue part, but they officially say that the economic difficulties experienced at the time were also among the triggering factors. They see this as public discontent, but for the group that took to the squares in Beijing, they see it as part of a planned conspiracy. The tank man, for example, is like that. I'll tell you that right away. The man in front of the tank. There's a continuation of those images. The tank man doesn't actually run him over. The soldier gets out of the tank, and no, someone else comes, grabs the man by the arm and takes him away. "Come, brother, what's going on?" But the man probably dies somewhere later. Then that. Whether he died or not is unknown. I also know that, but there are many symbols like that, and in a way, this is the fate of color revolutions. I'll say something completely off-topic, but in a color revolution, there is imperialist intervention, but there are also problems where imperialist intervention finds fertile ground, right? There are conditions where it can emerge, right? This is very much the case for Eastern Europe, for example. Imperialism is attacking, but Eastern Europe is... well, it's a mafia, and so on. It emerges on the basis of a material reality. Why would so many people take to the streets? Then, let's say the axis is controlled. In China, I think similar situations definitely exist, economic discontent. Because at that time, the CCP was still raising the country's economy in terms of graphs, but the situation in the rural areas was a big problem. However, because of this economic revitalization, Deng Xiaoping is very popular in China. There are excesses. Mao is not included in this, but there is a culture of extremism in China's past. Deng Xiaoping is the complete opposite of this, emphasizing tranquility, calmness, patience, and so on. In fact, even when he died, Deng Xiaoping did not respond to Mao. Because Deng Xiaoping has no grave. He refused a grave and a mausoleum. He died like that. He had his ashes scattered. He was buried there. So, this kind of thing has always happened within the Communist Party of China. So, can you also talk about that anti-corruption thing? We left you halfway. Flies and tigers. That's what it is. It's one of the most important campaigns launched by Xi Jinping. In my opinion, it's also important for the party. It is forbidden for a CCP member and high-ranking official to accumulate capital or property without the state's knowledge, but they do it a lot. In China, since everything is digital, and even payments are largely digitized, there are many CCP officials who have received bribes and stored them at home or elsewhere. Because operations are carried out, they can be caught. We know that. This is the data that has been caught. But these numbers seem funny to me. I don't know if they seem funny to you and our viewers. For example, let's say someone is removed from their post and exiled for hiding $300,000, or sentenced to death for taking a $500,000 bribe. Now, the story in China is a bit different for this reason. In these anti-corruption campaigns, the following has also been criticized: Xi Jinping is doing this, but the CCP also has an elite. You know, their money and so on. The issue is not really like that. I saw such things in the Western media. Xi Jinping's annual salary is around $20,000. But he doesn't live in poverty or like a monk. Because in China, elites are not those with a lot of money, but those with a lot of opportunities. There's a difference. A high-ranking CCP official doesn't need to spend money. They are prioritized everywhere. Roughly speaking, they get on the taxi first, etc. I couldn't think of very rich examples, but... I understand. So, please go ahead. Sorry. No, no. Okay, okay. Finish the tigers and flies thing. I keep interrupting. The last sentence. Therefore, in these anti-corruption campaigns, especially the news of this, I pay attention to these things because of my profession. Because you need to pay attention to this: Who are the rich in China? Are they party members, billionaires? That's not the case. Yes, they have many opportunities. But there's another issue there. Xi Jinping called them tigers and flies, and he amplified it. Have they become like oligarchs? That is, the leaders don't need money. Okay, they don't need money, but in terms of power, the political elites can actually do whatever they want. State power is embodied in them. That's why they can do whatever they want. They don't need money. That's why, to do whatever you want, you need money in Turkey or France. Freedoms work for you then. But it's not like that in China. You need to be a member of the CCP elite for everything to work for you. Yes. Yes. There are some very privileged groups in China. These are the "princelings," for example, especially during the Cultural Revolution. People whose parents or themselves suffered are thought to have a privilege. For example, Xi Jinping is like that. His father was also exiled. Deng Xiaoping was like that too. Yes. His son, they threw his son out, didn't they? Out of the building. Yes. They threw his son out. From the university dormitory or something. Then they sent him to work in a tractor factory. He worked there a lot. By the way, there's an interesting thing during the Cultural Revolution. They send them to be punished, but the Red Guards or Maoists themselves often go to the fields. There are Chinese youths who leave university and go to work in the fields in large numbers. Is our energy like that? Like [laughter]. Yes. That is, due to proletarian ideological belief. Due to ideological belief. Since that person believed in this method, he goes and applies it himself. Maybe he does it to be a role model. He's like saying, "Let's go too." Okay, after Deng Xiaoping retired, Jiang Zemin came to power, right? Hmm. Jiang Zemin. Zemin. There seems to be someone else in between. Zemin. His main thesis is this: They are developing production relations. Developing production relations is our primary task, but they feel a deficiency in opening up to international trade. Now, Jiang Zemin, of course, is not his invention. It started during Deng Xiaoping's time, but in my opinion, Jiang Zemin's greatest talent is the opening up of coastal port cities like Shanghai and so on to foreign investment and the initiation of trade from there. Very significant steps were taken during Jiang Zemin's era, and Jiang Zemin is truly, in my opinion, one of the least attached to socialism among the leaders. He really loves trade and getting rich, and he expresses this at every opportunity. Perhaps not as much as Deng Xiaoping and other leaders. I had prepared a speech by him, it's long, I won't read it, but as you said, he loves trade. When I read that speech, it conjures up an image of someone like Şener Şen's father playing the grocer in Yeşilçam. He loves it. Yes. Yes. Then Hu Jintao comes. You might remember Hu Jintao being forcibly removed from a meeting a year or two ago, but it's said he was ill. We don't know the details of what happened. Why don't we know these things, Erkin? They don't tell us. Can I ask something? Wait. Ah, sorry. In terms of media, for example, is there more media in Turkey? Let me put it this way. In China, there are so many media outlets, so many televisions. When I went to China most recently, I turned on the TV in the hotel and then turned it off and watched your first broadcast there. That was a correct decision. You made a very correct decision. There are nearly 600 television channels, all active, and these television channels, including the print media. The channels are different from each other, but they have different concepts. For example, there's a TV channel, I don't know its name because I don't know Chinese. It only shows Mao films. There's a series of such TV channels. Only Deng Xiaoping films, and so on. It's the same on airplanes. I got on a plane in China, and I wanted to watch a movie. Hollywood, blah blah blah. Then I pressed the "Red Legacy" option. There, they seem to have piled up full Deng Xiaoping films. So, the media is very diverse, but it's very different from what we understand as media. It's not connected to the rest of the world. For example, let me give you an example. A journalist I knew here in Istanbul passed away years ago. A Chinese vlogger made a documentary about him. I asked, "Where will this documentary be published?" He said, "On Bilibili.com." I said, "What is Bilibili? Isn't it the YouTube of the Chinese?" But its name is Bilibili. What's going on? Then he sent me the link. The documentary he uploaded was watched by 2.4 million people in a few days [laughter]. But it didn't catch on there, did it? The population, again, the scale, the scale issue. That's exactly where we're going. They're not watched by Chinese people. They're not watched, sir. In terms of media, social media, or technological capabilities, they have so many options, and because they don't see the outside, they don't... For example, what's a good viewership number? Hundreds of millions? I guess so. Millions was good. Okay. Do they not see the outside at all? Are there no VPNs or anything? Can a Chinese person not access them? Is it impossible? For example, I went to Iran. Iran adopted this system from China, this internet blocking, VPN blocking, and so on. You can't get in with a VPN there. You can't download it. You absolutely can't download it. Of course, there are workarounds. You go to a phone repair shop, and they do it, and so on. They do that too, but it's really difficult. It's not easy. If you upload it from here and go to Iran, it works, but you can't upload it there. It's really a problem. They also attack VPNs. I have Chinese friends who use VPNs. They can access Instagram and so on, but it's not just a ban. I'll get into the reason for the ban separately, but Chinese people have all their applications integrated. Elon Musk is also trying to do something similar with X. Everything they pay for, shop for, use social media for, watch something with a friend for, it's all in one application. Their identity, their wallet, everything is in one application. WeChat is both mandatory for this and it really serves its purpose. At least they've put something in place that would prevent it from being blocked, unlike Iran, I think. Yes. There's nothing in Iran. True. Google was in China, if I remember correctly, at the end of the 90s or early 2000s. It was even said that Google opened an office in China, but I don't remember exactly what happened during the Hong Kong protests, something about Hong Kong's sharing. And for that reason, and two, due to the dispute between Google and China over where to store data, China banned Google. They don't allow data to be taken out of the country. They say that if there is a Google server, it must be a Google server that you open in China. And when that was not accepted, the deal fell through. But they can access it with VPNs, and so on. But from what I've seen, they don't really need it, and they are being watched in a way, they know what's happening in the world. I understand. Erkin, can I ask something? I'll forget again. I'm afraid of forgetting, so I'll ask now and relax. There's a system called the Hukou system. Yes. I was born in a city, Adapazarı. I went to work in Istanbul. It's like I'm working in another country. Yes. Yes. Can you explain that system a bit? So, no one is actually a citizen of the People's Republic of China, but I feel like I'm a citizen of Adapazarı, going to the country of Istanbul. Like, if you work here for 5 years, you have the right to live here. Is that it? It's a system like that, I guess. Can you explain the system? I'm very curious about it. Yes. The reason for this is fundamentally the rural-urban divide. Because through this system, they can do both population planning and labor force planning. So, this system has two important functions for the Chinese state. Of course, it has some aspects that can be seen as negative, as you said. But they defend it this way: This is not freedom of travel, because everyone can travel anywhere in China. Because they can work, I guess. They can work. Yes. There's a very strong domestic tourism sector. There is travel in China, you have a work permit. But all of these are... you can't just go and settle somewhere else. The place where you were born is already an autonomous region system. For example, is it like this? Is it like this? I'm asking to make it better understood. I was born in Adapazarı. I benefit from the health and education there. I have rights related to there. Within the country of China. Then I come to work in Istanbul, but I can't benefit from the health and education there. Is there such a distinction because of this? It's like this: If your working period in Istanbul ends, you can't benefit much. Like Mehmet Aurelio, if your 5 years are registered and you need to be there, as far as I know, you can benefit. But the intention here is... But until you obtain this right, there are such distinctions. Uh-huh. I understand. Of course, of course, there are. Definitely. They say there must be a reason for it. There must be a reason for your presence here. That's the essence of it. Because the population factor is also important here. The public services to be provided there are planned according to a certain population. It's a planning job, actually. Yes. There's a saying, I'll copy it a bit. If the Soviet Union hadn't collapsed for another 2-3 years, with the development of computer technology, it could have planned better. If it had lasted 2-3 more years, it could have been very successful in these matters. There's a narrative like that, for example. Is this really true? China's computer systems and so on. Looking at what you're describing, I'm paying attention. Technology is at the core of everything. Without technology, China couldn't do any of what you're describing. Yes. That is, money transfers from here to there, everything is technology. If the Soviet Union had lasted 2-3 more years, could something have happened? What do you say about this? The level that would have been reached after 2-3 more years seems a bit short to me. Let me put it this way. We would have seen the seeds of what would happen in 2-3 years from the beginning. But I agree with the fundamental logic or the fundamental notion. Because the Chinese are already prioritizing technological development for this reason. I mean, they are already focused on the issue of technology transfer, as I said. Let me give you an example. In April 1987, Deng Xiaoping said, "Let's produce stages." In '87, he said, "In the first stage, from 2020 to 2035, a moderately prosperous society will be completed." And then he talks about the next 15 years, after 2035, until 2049, and so on. In all of them, he says: economic and technological power. That is, he emphasizes technological power entirely. Now, if the Soviet Union had lasted 2-3 more years, I think truly, things could have been very different, but would those 2-3 years have saved the Soviet Union? I'm not very sure about that, to be honest. Because the issue with the Soviet Union is not just about economic conditions. It's not about any country. Ultimately, the decay of the party is also a factor. This is the fundamental criticism of Deng's followers. They couldn't save the party from decay, unlike the Soviet Union. Erkin, maybe we can add something here about central planning. Perhaps you'd like to explain some of the differences between Chinese-style central planning and Soviet-style central planning. And I'm asking this question because central planning is something that liberals and neoliberals really struggle with. "How can you plan 5 or 10 years ahead? Society's needs are unlimited, but resources are limited. What do you mean?" The most fundamental economic disagreement starts here. Can you elaborate on central planning? They make 10-year development plans, these socialist states. They go from the heart. How do you do that? That's the thing they can't stand the most. Efficiency and central planning. Can I develop the question? Let me add a small point. Let's get to the 90s. For example, in telecommunications and some other sectors, China has made incredible progress in the last 30 years. That's what's always seen. We'll talk about the fear of America separately later, perhaps. On the other hand, as part of this planning, they also made a plan to become competitive in certain sectors. There's also that kind of planning involved. Today, it seems that has also yielded results within its own logic. Yes. Well, economic planning is also a political choice, isn't it? To make an economic plan and to try to guide the entire society towards achieving these figures. Whether it succeeds or not is another matter. And creating the tools for this guidance and management is something that liberalism has opposed from the beginning. It's something that aligns with what we call autocratic states today. Because when a state makes economic planning, its tools are incentives, economic packages, subsidies, etc., but fundamentally it's coercive power. Now, China, and I think perhaps, I'm not a sociologist, of course, but if there are friends who know sociology better, they should write about it. By also benefiting from the collective spirit that is characteristic of Asian societies, they are much more successful in guidance and management compared to the Soviets. They can mobilize their... Due to the cultural situation, there is ease of mobilization due to cultural differences. And let's compare it again with the Soviets. China is a very closed country. China is still, in my opinion, a very closed country. We talked about it earlier. They don't really need to open up, to exaggerate. You still can't easily find someone who speaks English in certain places in China. Therefore, the Chinese people have no benchmark. That is, the Chinese people, or let's not say the people in China, the people who determine the politics in China, the party, other parties, all dynamics, their only benchmark is China itself. Their only benchmark is 10 years ago. They even concretize it like this. Go and talk to a CCP member today. "Brother, what is this problem? Is this socialism?" and so on. How is the economy? It's like this, but 10 years ago, it was five times harder, minus five times harder. We did this now. It was like this 10 years ago. Therefore, China's... For example, let me give you this example. They see themselves at the center of the world. They believe that this is the true interpretation of Marxist-Leninist ideology or the path to socialism. They openly say this, and they are extremely happy to be at the center of the world, to be closed. For example, during Donald Trump's first term as president, he visited Beijing. There's a video of it, viewers can watch it. Xi Jinping shows Trump around Tiananmen, the Forbidden City, and so on. He says something like this, it might not be exactly like this, but he says, "The person who lived here 5,000 years ago is the same as me." Now, for us, this is something. I won't say backward, but perhaps we don't like it very much. Developing, mingling, innovating, blending, and so on. These things are in our world, in our code. Therefore, in China, it's the opposite. In fact, Ender Abi, Ender Ercüloğlu wrote about this in an article. The Chinese navy was very advanced during an emperor's reign. They built a very strong navy. I forgot the emperor, but the emperor had it burned because he said it wasn't necessary. All the people, he said it wasn't necessary. That is, he said, "This is it," he said, "It's us." This kind of mindset, this is always said, we see this in pro-China content. "5,000 years of civilization," and so on. These are truly decisive things. Now, on top of this kind of culture, a socialist claim has been added, a socialist government, and this party is the socialist party, the Communist Party, the largest political party in the world. It's the party that governs the world's second-largest economy. They don't care. Erkin, can we say this? Can we say this? That is, this 5,000-year-old empire, this nation has incorporated socialism into its own culture. It seems so. Mao also constantly. Because I know the Mao era better, of course, compared to the period you're describing. That's our fault, of course. But he always talks about this. In fact, they say this, you know it too. Maoism is seen as another interpretation of Marxism. In some places, it deviates from Marxism. I mentioned it last episode. Voluntarism, and so on. Incredible. Because it seems to be something specific to Chinese culture. Voluntarism, that is, voluntarism. We will all go and do these things. Even if bombs are dropped on us, we will still do it, for example. I explained it very absurdly, but this is something specific to Chinese culture. But by incorporating it into Marxism, and Maoism being something like that, Maoism is actually a more Confucian-influenced interpretation of Marxism, even if it rejects it, it's influenced by Chinese culture. And after Mao left and things reversed, they still have this narrative that they have managed to make it inherent in this China, this 5,000-year-old Chinese empire. Yes. I think so too. Because this inherence has provided them with an advantage, and culturally, they are disconnected from the world. For example, in China, there is a racist perspective, and I don't mean this in a bad way. For example, there are black African vloggers living in China on YouTube. When they walk down the street, people touch their hands and mouths immediately. They did something like this. They made the Chinese New Year a year of China-Africa solidarity a few years ago. It was a big official celebration, a state celebration, and they painted themselves black, like our Flash TV. Shall I tell you the opposite? They think it's a good thing. Let me tell you something very funny in return. I went to India. I traveled for 60 days, covered 9,000 km in India. I must have taken selfies with at least 500 people. They would put babies on my lap. They come and look. It's a very different culture, the East.

The culture is different, brother. I am white, different from them. I have a beard, long hair, and I wear a hat. Like a fedora. That's the kind of person I am. A spastic, spastic tourist. Do you understand? They come like this, brother. It's very funny. You will see these things. Look, you will see them. When you watch these travel shows, you will see them. I get tired, I sit under a tree to rest. I light a cigarette. I get a tea. Brother, I swear to you, 15 people stand around me, looking at me like this. >> [laughter] >> Look, it's really like this. When I do an India episode, I will tell these stories. It's very funny, a very funny thing. >> But this is a cultural thing. For example, it's not bad, or they come and touch me, do this and that. Children, especially children, are shocked. What kind of person is this? Who is this? They look at me like an alien. I am a normal man. We are normal people. Why are you looking at me? >> Very much so, brother. Their perception is very different. For example, let's go back to the CCP. The CCP's socialism. I repeated the issue of scale so much, like a parrot, please excuse me, but for example, there are Marxism universities in China. Most universities have Marxism departments, academies. I had a friend who worked in a Marxism academy in China. They collect all the leftist publications they can find worldwide. They translate them into Chinese. Analyze them. Okay? They have separate meetings with ruling communist parties. With opposition communist parties, they have something like an international, in a sense. Now, their perception is so different. I have a CCP friend living in Shanghai. I ask him sometimes when we chat, "You are a communist, right?" He says, "Yes." He says, "I think the world will go towards communism, and so on." I say, "What does communism mean to you?" He says, "Being rich." Fundamentally correct. Okay. >> He understood the essence correctly, but his answer is very different. He says being rich. America. Wouldn't that suit you too? He talks about Mercedes, yachts, mansions. He talks about Müslüm Baba. He talks about Müslüm Baba. >> Living under the same conditions as people from Adapazarı. >> Yes. Yes. Ah, go ahead, brother. You were saying something. >> I think we have about an hour left. Let's get to Xi Jinping and the present day. Then I have a few important questions. Let's not leave them out. Who is Xi Jinping, for example? Is Xi Jinping a Maoist? They say so. They say he is closer to Mao. Are these things true? Why do they say that? Well, one reason is that it originates from China, or to disprove you, I'm saying this. We don't know for sure, it's all speculation. But during Xi Jinping's era, it is said that there is an unnamed thing. There are these Asian journalists who gossip about the CCP. I've been saying this for years. Now, Xi Jinping is a complete party cadre, raised from the grassroots. He has served in positions from small regions to mid-level regions. Appointments can't be like that. He is a loved party cadre. He has matured within the party. After Xi Jinping came to power, I'm skipping over those parts quickly, we've talked about them a lot. His initiation of an anti-corruption campaign so fiercely earned great appreciation from the public. Despite everything, these are seen and known. Secondly, they say that China's Xi Jinping is more "leftist," in quotation marks. The reason for this is that, as a head of state, he frequently expresses the need to quickly eliminate income inequality. Why? If a country's head of state says income inequality is bad, and we are working hard to end it, and so on, it means that this problem exists in the country. Therefore, he directly addresses societal issues at the grassroots level. Xi Jinping travels a lot. He is not a leader who stays confined. He goes everywhere, to openings, and so on. He displays a more active image. He is advanced in age, but still considered young and dynamic. Another important issue is that he doesn't spare anyone, even those close to him, in this corruption saga. But at the same time, they also call Xi Jinping a balancer. There isn't really a leftist wing in the CCP, but there are tendencies. There's the traditional Deng Xiaoping line and then the more leftist, or rather, hawkish politicians, as they say, who are tougher on America, and so on. Between these two factions, there isn't a break or anything like that. >> No, definitely not. But there's still gossip. Xi Jinping's son, who was expelled from university and injured, is still alive. He holds a high-level position in China, Chairman of the China Disabled Persons' Federation, a member of the People's Political Consultative Conference, I can't recall exactly now. It is claimed that he criticizes Xi Jinping. This is not confirmed, of course. The reason is that he is increasing tensions too much. Because what is there? The basis of Deng Xiaoping's theory is a country that will develop economically. The only thing that can disrupt this is war. Therefore, Deng Xiaoping's line was to never participate in war, never engage in any armed conflict, and never comment on the internal affairs of any country. >> Not waving the red flag. Exactly. This stance allows him to work with the Taliban, with the AKP, with the Vietnamese Communist Party, and so on. Now, in the new situation, there is a theoretical addition by Xi Jinping. It has been added to the constitution. In the new era, let's say, the Xi Jinping perspective, and implementing more aggressive, or rather, more noticeable policies, making statements, and so on, leads him to appear more on the left, like a leftist. It creates such a perception. >> So, can we say something like this? As history progresses, each leader who comes to power in China, the CCP secretary, president, president, what do they call him? >> President. Uh-huh. >> The president also becomes the president of a more serious international actor. >> Yes. Yes. Each one is stronger and more respected on the international stage than the other. This must also impose a responsibility, I think. It definitely does. But there's an issue here. I mentioned the leadership generations earlier. This has changed with Xi Jinping. His circle has changed, but he hasn't. This is actually a situation that goes against the unwritten rules, in quotation marks. At the same time, Xi Jinping's theory, although not a very theoretical thing, has been added to the constitution. So, China's official ideology is Marxism-Leninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory, and in the new era, Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. >> He wrote a three-volume book, you know. >> Yes. On the governance of China. >> He started distributing the Confucius Institutes for free. >> Uh-huh. This is also problematic in a way. I have a friend. This book is that, by the way. >> I have a friend. He is Chinese. He is a member of the Democratic Party. That is, a member of another party. By the way, in China, if you are a registered member of another party besides the CCP, your chances of finding a job increase because those parties are also represented. He was saying that when this book, "The Governance of China," was newly released, they send it to us, but he says, "No one reads it," but there's that aspect. There's also a critique of bureaucracy. >> A association from Turkey sent it to me. They sent it to Turkish-Chinese business associations in Turkey. They immediately started asking around. "We received 3-4 boxes of books from China, do you want us to send them?" It came to me like that too. >> Well, this book wasn't directly written by Xi Jinping. It emerged from his speeches and so on. Another reason why Xi Jinping appears more on the left is, of course, other leaders are too, but Xi Jinping is more about this. He starts almost every speech, I'm talking about party meetings, with the question of why the Soviet Union collapsed. Therefore, he takes his reference from there, and why we shouldn't collapse, how we shouldn't collapse. >> But this is also like a trauma that has lasted for generations, isn't it, for a communist state? >> Yes. Yes. Yes. They were very happy when, I forget the date, last year or the year before, the duration of the CCP's rule exceeded that of the Soviet Communist Party. They almost celebrated. They were like, "It didn't happen to us, we are so strong here." They were very happy about that too. >> This issue of 100 million members also seems to have been quite significant. It was probably surpassed last year, the threshold of 100 million members in the CCP. >> Of course, they also expel members from time to time. >> What for? >> Well, sometimes there's a surge in membership, and they "refresh" the passive members. Erkin's internet had a problem. I'm having a heart attack. >> Nothing will happen. Nothing will happen. It's recovering. >> Hopefully, it will recover. Now. >> Aziz Yıldırım also said, "I cleaned up the members up to 20,000," he said. Cleaned up. >> Aziz Yıldırım's registration number. His 1 million. >> Exactly, he said something like that. [laughter] >> I'll ask something. >> Because CCP membership grants privileges. They don't just join for nothing. >> Exactly, that's what I was going to say. Yes. They say, "Let's not give this power to useless people." So, is healthcare and education free in China? Is it private? No, but compared to other countries, like our country or other Western countries, it is very cheap. Regarding housing, there are data. The homeownership rate in rural areas is approaching 100%. >> This is expected from a socialist state. >> Chat also asked this a lot. >> We didn't give it as praise. It's the same in the cities. Let me explain it like this, brother. If you want, you can get a more luxurious apartment by paying for it. There's a legal process for that. But if you don't pay, you can rent very long-term housing. Some are for 70 years, some for 90 years, and so on, and the rents are cheap. So, they have developed such a system. There is renting or buying a house, etc. Land ownership is absolutely not possible. Even private companies can operate a piece of land, with the necessary permits, but they cannot own that land. For example, you are a private company. You build a luxury apartment building. You put it up for sale. When you put it up for sale, you are essentially collecting the land rent that you would have paid to the state from the tenant. There are limits to that. >> Okay, okay. What about the ownership of the means of production? What's the situation with a factory, for example? Is there something like that? Is it owned by the capital owner? >> Well, regardless of the industry or what it is, what Chinese company are we talking about? >> Yes, let's say so. Exactly. >> Think of it as operating like a private company. It makes profits, enters competition, produces, engages in international trade, and so on. But it has to pay more significant taxes than other countries, both for the factory it establishes, the workers it employs, and the capital it accumulates. >> Can we ask something here? Ah, it didn't freeze, did it? Now, for example, you said healthcare, education, etc., are not free. Then something else might come to mind. From a social security perspective, what is the situation with investments there? For example, regarding poverty, homelessness, and so on. I'm asking this because one of the most frequently mentioned things in the last few decades was that the labor regime in China is a terrible labor regime. >> Well, there is no homelessness. This is the CCP's statement. I don't know if there are homeless people here and there, but they officially state that there is no homelessness in China. So, I don't know if there is or not, beyond the official data. Now, labor and intensive workforce is also a critical area. I believe there are serious negative aspects there. Now, it depends a bit on the situation, brother. Are you a company directly supported by the CCP, or are you foreign capital, or are you a completely capitalist enterprise? These are all monitored step by step, but some can evade supervision. There are laws, labor laws. Everyone can work 8 hours, but since the worker will receive a bonus, they can tolerate working 10 hours. There is a lot of abuse known at this point. But this is especially observable in port cities. I'm talking about businesses that are heavily involved in commercial activities. It is a fact that labor exploitation and mobbing are much more prevalent there compared to other inland provinces. Of course, officially, there is a supervisor from the Communist Party, but if these things are happening, it means that the supervision is not being carried out properly. Yes. >> Erkin, let me ask something too. At the beginning of the broadcast, someone wrote a question. I think it's a very good question. They are asking, does the average Chinese worker have more socialist benefits than the average European worker? Is their quality of life better? I think they definitely do. Because, how can I explain it? A Chinese worker, putting aside their situation in China, I'm talking about it. >> Çağın Öztürk asked that question. >> Uh-huh. Thank you for the question, by the way. Firstly, there are certain different practices there. For example, if you are a Chinese worker employed in a foreign-funded enterprise, your rights are a bit more. In case of any dispute. First of all, if you are a Chinese worker, there is a certain standard. But, not paying severance pay, filing lawsuits, reaching the responsible parties, there are institutions that directly deal with these in the Chinese Labor Law. There are points where a worker can directly find their counterpart. And regarding wages and rest hours, as I said, it's optional, it can vary depending on the situation, but even changing sectors, for example, a worker can apply to the state and say, "I want to change the sector I'm working in." This is their right. Family allowances, financial aid, or loans. They are called loans, but they benefit more from things like loans spread over a very long period. >> What about participation in elections? Erkin, what's the participation rate? Someone asked about participation in democracy. Tibet Kayal, what about participation in democracy? >> Well, in China, there are eight other political parties. First of all, let me say that. But these parties do not contest elections. This is evaluated as both a political system and a tactic, depending on how you look at it. The general chairmen of these parties are automatically in executive positions in the government, so they say, "We are already in parliament, what's the need for elections?" Also, since the constitution and law state that the rule of the Communist Party cannot be changed, there is such a thing. There are elections for representatives. There are direct and indirect elections. Village committee elections are held every 3 years. It's a bit like, those who are members of political parties will understand this better. You have a unit. You are elected from the unit. From the unit, you go to the provincial election. From the province, you go to the National People's Congress. It's like that. There are no elections held every 4 years, as we know them. There are elections for the National People's Congress. These are the only direct elections, and they are held every 5 years. And these are not directly elected by the people, but by delegates elected through elections held at a lower level. So, it has a multi-layered structure. A Chinese citizen does not directly vote for the Chinese president or any other Chinese official. The party decides that anyway. >> You mentioned something while you were talking that caught my attention, and I'd like you to elaborate on it. You said they are very apolitical, especially for young people. Let me ask this in that context. Education is, of course, something that is very much wondered about. I saw a question in the chat, but I'll ask it in this context. From a Marxist perspective, is there an education with an ideological aspect? Or where does this apolitical nature come from? How did you arrive at that observation? >> Well, there is an education system called "12 Core Values." This is taught in various ways in schools at all levels. They are called "12 Core Socialist Values," and among the subjects are Marxism, Leninism, Deng Xiaoping Theory, Mao, the Chinese Revolution, and conceptual things like patriotism, diligence, freedom, equality, justice, camaraderie, friendship, democracy, modernity. Now, this is actually progressive, in my opinion, but it is also one of the diseases of the reform period and the process that opened up with the reform period. I see a risk that everything will be on paper. Because they study, they sit down and study Marxism, go to the library, study it like a lesson. Because the world, because in that, let me give you an interesting example without deviating too much. I asked a Chinese friend, "Why are Chinese young people so apolitical? Why do they care about what's happening in the world, or politics?" I got the answer: "He is living his life." Do you understand? His basic needs are already met. His state is socialist. His future is guaranteed in certain aspects, even with risks or while developing. At least he won't be homeless. He will get an education, and so on. Why should he care?" I think this is a culture, but it is dangerous for the world. For China. Because this generation, including Xi Jinping, is the last generation that knew the most vibrant periods, the struggle. From now on, the 90s, 2000s, and so on, as apoliticism increases, I think the rule of the Communist Party in China is also endangered. To answer your question precisely, studying socialism like a lesson is actually a good thing. I wish we taught socialism to everyone in our schools. But if this is a condition for joining the party and becoming a civil servant, and if there are no other dynamics to develop your mass ideological work or mass ideology, then it becomes dogma and a mere formality. >> Erkin, shall we go to a Q&A for a bit? Is there anything else you want to explain? >> Yes, yes. I'll wrap it up with a final sentence. I apologize if it was a bit scattered, but please forgive me. It was very good. >> No, no, it was very good. >> So, from Mao's death to the present, in one sentence: the entire motivation has been focused on economic development, significant achievements have been made, and I think it is indeed following a different path than Western capitalism. Socialism is also related to the conditions of the geography where it is applied. Perhaps there was another way to do things in China, we don't know, but the CCP members claim that they have done the most plausible things. Now they say that in 2049, we will complete the first stage. If we are alive in 2049, we will see whether they have truly reached basic prosperity or not. Other than that, there's not much else. You can look at the questions. >> Now, I'm going to ask you a question. I'm curious about this. When I went to Niger, Agadez, I was staying in a hotel. I was looking out of the hotel window, I remember this. There were two construction sites, one was a Convention Center and the other was a hotel. The Convention Center was being built by Turkey. Limak Cengiz, one of them. They had made an agreement with Niger, with Agadez. They were building it. The hotel was being built by the Chinese. There was a very obvious difference. >> Uh-huh. >> Which was, I could see it from above the construction site. On the Turkish construction site, all the workers were brought from Turkey. >> Turkish workers were brought, Turkish workers were working. >> Turkish workers were brought. >> Yes. When you looked at the Chinese construction, I'm not exaggerating, it was 10 times the size of the Turkish construction, with Nigerien workers, and a system like 7-8 workers in a group with a Chinese man at the head, someone who looked like him. Now, when I went out and talked to people on the street, the Nigeriens complained. They told me, "Turkey is building here, but they are not employing us. We are not earning money. The Chinese are not like that. The Chinese are employing us." Or I saw this in another place, in Tanzania. Coffee plantations, the Chinese came there, took over the coffee plantations, managed them, did them, Tanzanians were working. They built a highway from the coffee plantations to the sea. The Chinese, they benefited the country. They also built a port by the sea, and they transport it from there. Now, China, especially in countries like Africa, you know, those who have been there know this. The West has a very heavy burden. If you talk to any African, they will never forget colonialism, slavery, and so on. They are viewed very negatively. But China and Russia are viewed very positively. We have never been harmed by them. They have never heard of such a thing in history. And they think that the Chinese developing these coffee plantations, employing many Nigeriens in hotel construction, Tanzanians, Africans, and providing great benefit there. But on the other hand, these are also things that resemble the actions of countries pursuing an imperialist path. From a leftist perspective, what do you say about this situation? Is there really an imperialist path and progress happening with China, especially in Africa, by pleasing the local population and creating a soft consent, creating that soft power that Western universities love so much? >> Destruction. Let me answer according to China's theses first. Firstly, according to China's theses, there is certainly no imperialist expansionism. Because China, with the countries it establishes relationships with, especially economic relationships, as I mentioned earlier, does not interfere in their political affairs. This is according to China's theses. Secondly, regarding China's investments in Africa, the media calls it a debt trap. Yes, debt trap. >> But I think that issue is a bit different. Because China's investments in the region, you said they are building consent. How are they building that consent? They are actually providing significant infrastructure benefits to that country. And another issue is that China provides much more favorable and long-term loans compared to Western countries regarding borrowing, which increases China's influence in the region. And in various situations, for example, in 2024, I don't remember the exact year, there are debt forgiveness situations for more than 20 countries in the region, depending on the progress of affairs. They are approaching it more with a grant-oriented approach. For example, the same applies to China's relations with Latin American countries. They leave the facility they established or the infrastructure they built for a mineral they produced there entirely to that country. In some cases, they share ownership from the beginning. If they lend money, they do so with very comfortable interest rates for that country. And as in the first example you gave, this applies to regions that have serious unemployment problems. It provides significant employment. This is the visible and official face of the issue. Whether this will evolve into an imperial level, I cannot predict. If you combine it with the Belt and Road Initiative, let's bring that in and explain it to people. >> It was invented in 2013. We are talking about Xi's will, but the biggest issue that emerged during Xi's era is the Belt and Road Initiative. The Chinese have a reference for this. The historical Silk Road, development together, all countries will benefit from this, we will invest in those countries, and so on. But one of the reasons why America opposes it so much is that it is an alternative trade route planned and built by China, which is entirely in China's interest, within the existing world trade system under American hegemony. This is the first story. That is, the Chinese take very firm steps with very positive and soft messages. That is, the CCP is a political party that implements its policies like this. Therefore, with this Belt and Road project, China is charting a course that extends to Central Asia, where Western interest is increasing again, and to Europe, which is eagerly awaiting it due to the deterioration of relations between China and America. The Belt and Road project, as I said, despite the soft messages, is a significant narrative against America, according to a new narrative. It is also said that the Turkish-Kurdish peace issue, which we are currently experiencing in Turkey, is being put forward against the Belt and Road Initiative to sideline it. We will delve into this issue in future broadcasts. >> Yes. Well, of course, we shouldn't get too sidetracked, but I think it's directly related. We just need to think about it. Even, it might be too ambitious, but I think the new formation in the northern corridor of Central Asia, starting from the Organization of Turkic States, is directly related to these issues. Yes. >> Thank you. >> In the Africa story, the issue is, as I said, it's a cheap and affordable option. Firstly, China and Russia have no history of colonialism in the region. Secondly, with its immense economic power, it does things differently from what Western capitalism does. Westerners call this a debt trap. This applies to ports as well. China seizes ports, and so on. But those things are actually a bit different. The issue of seizing ports operates with a share system. They give shares, it's a bit like, how can I explain this? >> It seems like a fairer distribution. >> Yes. Yes. It seems like a fairer distribution. >> Here, of course, the question arises again. I'm very sorry, Erkin, but this question arises again. For those who have been watching until now, and for those who haven't watched our Niger program before, we mentioned the question of how much a country can be exploited ethically. These are the situations where those questions come into play. Because that country has nothing. It doesn't have the means to extract that coffee. But what will you do, for example? >> Let me add something. Regarding whether China's investments in underdeveloped regions are a form of colonialism or not, let me briefly explain how the Chinese see this issue. They see this not as an end result, but as a transformation. This is a transformation and a strategy. They are trying to say that they will do something completely different from the rule-based international order and societal order led by America and its economic adversaries. And at the same time, while China is doing this, it does not get involved in any conflict and constantly emphasizes international institutions like the United Nations, as if they are working very effectively. This also carries a parallel meaning. >> I want to ask you a general question. This will delve a bit into international politics, but let me elaborate and ask it all at once so I don't interrupt constantly. From America's perspective, until the 90s, the main enemy was the Soviet Union. China was in its internal development process and so on. After the 90s, the bipolar world dissolved, the Soviet Union collapsed, and so on. Anyway, we've come to today. In the 90s, some sectors, like the Huawei story, which is a well-known story, they build from scratch, enter the sector. In 20 years, they own a significant part of the market. It's like that in many other sectors too. They gain significant competitive power in certain areas, like the precious metals story. There was a story about the dissolution of the bipolar world. Today, we have something called BRICS next door, which Turkey is also engaging with at certain levels. Something is happening here. This is certain. The first problem here is America's threat from China. Because, in my opinion, America's foreign policy approach is to neutralize Russia, isolate China, and then confront China head-on. I'm giving a simple summary. Do you think America is right to be afraid of China in this regard? And will China's current breakthroughs bring China to a competitive level in this sense tomorrow? Because you explained that they don't interfere in internal affairs. This is an advantage in a way. They can establish relationships with any country they want. But one day, it could turn around and lead to a different kind of struggle, meaning they are accumulating something. >> Exactly. I think they are definitely right to be afraid. Now, we said, brother, that it started with not waving the red flag, a passive foreign policy. This has an economic equivalent. By the way, China does not recognize Crimea. They don't accept any border changes, not even for their allies. >> They ignore it. Therefore, in economic relations, the CCP's centering of the Communist Party during the reform period and creating unlimited room for maneuver for itself, for example, they say, "We will end America's dollar hegemony." Chinese theorists who support the CCP explain this by saying that China holds the most US Treasury bonds. While America wields the dollar like a whip over the peoples of the world, China, with its economic power, buys as much dollar as it can. This is a great risk for China, of course, but they might see it as a security buffer. >> It can't be that much, the logic. It can't be that much of a security buffer. Because if they sell all of it at once, they will also be ruined. >> Yes. Yes. They will also be ruined, but ultimately, it's the other way around. It's like the story of playing their game, playing like them. Of course. [laughter] It seems China is showing its real power in the matter of rare earth elements. >> This rare earth element issue. Let me explain briefly. Allow me. The rare earth element issue is not about elements that are rarely extracted. These elements are extracted, they are found. Their processing is rare. The world is somewhat dependent on China in this regard, isn't it? China seems to be using this as a weapon, perhaps more than those bonds. In their last fight with Trump, they hit there. They hit there. China. >> Currently. Currently, of course. I agree. Plus, in this regard, they are not soft. They immediately impose a ban. So, what you said is correct. This issue is also related to the Ukraine crisis. Precious metals are also related to Ukraine. Because Ukraine also has extensive reserves, although not as much as China. Even Joe Biden's son being a manager of one of Ukraine's largest energy companies comes into play here. I will say this: China is so flexible in this regard that it can impose very harsh sanctions in return. It can also move towards establishing very good relations with Ukraine. It can even reach an agreement with America. They see every move as possible because they have a certain political self-confidence. And in terms of socialist policy, there is no socialist government or a socialist party that can influence them to the extent that they have to account for it. They say, "I am the biggest." >> Erkin, I will ask a more general question. >> We have discussed a lot here, and people have written in the chat. Because the Western economic systems are different, and there is always a basis for hostility, there has always been negative propaganda against China in the West. Some of it is true, some is false, some is fabricated, and some has become like urban legends. Is there a topic that we haven't touched upon here, but that you would like to say, "I want to explain this too," a misconception, negative propaganda, or something that they exaggerate and focus on a lot? >> Well, there are actually many topics, brother. I saw the biggest example of that negative propaganda. It has continued since that day, but let me give an example. We read about China here, and I think China is guilty. I'll say that from the outset, as someone who follows it closely, because they can act much more agile and dynamic in terms of media. But they publish the foreign ministry's statements exactly as they are. They should be a bit more dynamic, like the BBC, like Fox. No. And they don't want that. They don't find it right either. By the way, I've seen this. I think this is a deficiency. I think one of the most important reasons for the success of negative propaganda regarding China lies in China's media approach. Because if the person opposite you, with a very serious production, tells you such a lie, and you just have the foreign ministry spokesperson say, "No, it's not like that," it won't work. The world is not like that. >> Okay. >> But, but, go ahead, brother. >> Sorry, sorry, sorry. Finish, finish. >> Let me summarize Semih's question with one sentence. Regarding this negative propaganda, unfortunately, it sounds like a conspiracy theory, but the source of most issues is actually media organizations supported by the CIA. I'll tell our viewers here too. After World War II, the CIA recruited a significant number of people who worked in the propaganda department of the Nazis. They established a new unit in America, and they founded the "Radio for Salvation from Bolshevism." The name of the radio broadcasting "Salvation from Bolshevism" was later Radio.

Free Europe was. Then they removed the Radio Free Europe part of Radio Free Asia. That is, the news we see related to China, even North Korea news is included in this. The majority of the false news is signed by Radio Free Europe. I mean, pardon, RFA. And all of theirs are like this. Now, China is guilty again. China is a closed society country, right? A source who did not want to be named said that something in China is like this, it's strange, etc. When you object to this, China cannot give a name anyway. The moment this person gives their name, they will be killed in an autocratic state like China. Do you understand? Therefore, they say. Yes, they say, therefore, there is a dilemma. In this propaganda story, a lot of propaganda was spread during the Hong Kong period. But as I said, the basis of these is the lack of knowledge about China, and unfortunately, China's not acting very dynamically in this regard, professor. I hope, now slowly, I have two questions. Then we will thank you slowly. They have been writing from the beginning. I left this for the end, specifically to mention it. This Xinjiang Uyghur issue. What do you want to say about this issue? There is oppression here. It is a fact that something is happening. What is the background? Of course, these are very complex issues, they would require a separate program. Perhaps, on a day you are available within a week, we can take the Xinjiang Uyghur history perspective and explain this for about 1.5 hours. I also have some knowledge on the subject. You probably know better than me. I can summarize it like this. But I think we should touch upon it in this program too. If you say something about it, we will be happy. I have a suggestion for those who approach the subject critically, and for those who approach it differently. Now, the issue is not only about the Uyghur Turks. It's not like a part of the Turkic world suffering oppression. The issue seems to be related to religion. Yes, religion, and the Chinese central government's, that is, the Chinese Communist Party's ruling power's policy towards religious beliefs in the country. Now, what have we discussed since the beginning of the program? The adaptation of Marxism to Chinese conditions, Sinicization. Now, the Sinicization of Buddhism, the Sinicization of Taoism, and so on, the Sinicization of Islam. Now, the disputes regarding the Xinjiang Uyghur region. What was in the previous program? You watched and remember. In the previous program, there was the Sinicization of Christianity during the Taiping Rebellion. For example, the leader at the beginning of the month was also doing that, right? Yes. The Chinese have this kind of thing, it's a central policy issue and it's not separate from China's other controversial policies. First of all, I humbly suggest this to our critical friends. Seeing it from there will not be enough. To understand China. Secondly, both in the issue of the Sinicization of Islam and in the issue of religious beliefs, it depends a bit on your perspective. China has a very strong card in its hand. It has a card, right? It's actually a bad thing, but I'm saying it by trying to look critically. What is that card? Radical Islamist groups, and its initial emergence not just in Xinjiang, Xinjiang being the center of the Belt and Road Initiative, and so on, there is a story that should create question marks in our minds. Now, these are very long and separate topics, but as I said, this is related to the Chinese state's approach to religious beliefs. The attitude is very similar to what was done to the Dalai Lama during the Mao era. Yes. The Dalai Lama was also expelled from there. Let's explain for those who don't know. Buddhism, in Lhasa, in Tibet, in the place called Tibet in China, similar things happened, if not to this extent, and finally, the Dalai Lama was expelled from there. He resides in India. I even visited his house. I will explain this in the India broadcast later. Good. Now I will share my last point on this issue. Brother, now there is a decision made during the Mao era in China regarding minorities, and in controversial issues or decisions that will affect the entire society, minorities were placed in a more advantageous position. This continues in the current period. What is this? The one-child policy was never applied to minorities, including the Uyghurs. Mother tongue education, the right to speak in the mother tongue. There is no problem here. By the way, I have also traveled to Xinjiang. I will mention that briefly. Today, Uyghur youth can take university entrance exams in their own language. They can speak their own language quite well, they live. Now, if someone says that Uyghurs, okay, that might be true, but what about the religious aspect here? I will talk about official prohibitions. You cannot establish your own school, for example. You cannot say I will provide education. They absolutely do not allow this. You cannot establish religious education outside of Chinese Islamic centers. Marrying more than one woman. These are written rules. Unfortunately, these have happened. We call them our kin, right? While they are experiencing this, we also need to think about these. There are prohibitions like not sending your child to school. Not sending your child to school is forbidden. This prohibition is applied to the Uyghurs. So, we need to look at this from a different angle too. As I said, it's about central policies, and I really want to talk about this. I have studied a lot. I think we should do one on this. It would be a very good broadcast. We will do it at a time when I can explain it better. It will be a broadcast. Now, I am asking you the last question, but a short answer. A yes or no answer. I am asking you from where Meri left off in the last broadcast. Now, China is experiencing an incredible rise today. We watch videos or see those who go, we look at those who travel. Life is easier than in the West. In some places, it is more beautiful, more prosperous, with incredible cities, bizarre architectures, they are flying. Right now. If Mao hadn't existed, would the current process have happened? Absolutely not. I understand. Then thank you. No, it's over. He, that's all. [laughter] Okay then, that's all. Çatay's eyes welled up. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. If Mao hadn't existed, a lot wouldn't have happened in the region or the world. So, you accept that the foundation of many things, even with its flaws and mistakes, was laid in those periods, as Meri said. Then you are also doing that to him. Do it like that. The CCP also accepts it. I understand. I understand. Then thank you very much, Erkin. It was really super. Wonderful. Thank you. I also thank you very much for giving me a place here. It's a place I watch with great interest. See you. Thank you very much. See you then.