The Cycle of the Commons: China’s 75-Year Struggle with Shared Resources

 

The Cycle of the Commons: China’s 75-Year Struggle with Shared Resources

Since 1949, China has swung between extreme collective ownership and rapid privatization. While these phases look different on the surface, they share a common thread: the "Tragedy of the Commons," where individuals (or officials) exploit a shared resource until it collapses.

1. The Mao Era: The Tragedy of "No Ownership"

Under Mao Zedong, the state abolished private property, turning the entire nation into a "commons."

• The Great Leap Forward (1958-1962): When villagers were forced into People's Communes, the "Common Mess Halls" became a literal tragedy. Because food was free and "shared," people ate everything immediately. With no individual responsibility for the grain supply, the "commons" was depleted, contributing to the Great Famine.

• Backyard Furnaces: To meet steel quotas, people melted down their own tools and communal resources to produce useless pig iron. The shared environment—forests and timber—was stripped bare to fuel these furnaces, a classic destruction of a common resource for short-term political "gain."

2. The Deng & Jiang Era: The "Contract" Tragedy (承包制)

Deng Xiaoping’s Household Responsibility System (家庭聯產承包責任制) is credited with saving the economy, but it created a new version of the tragedy.

• Short-Termism: Farmers were given land on short-term contracts. Because they did not own the land permanently,they had no incentive to maintain soil health. They used massive amounts of chemical fertilizers to maximize yield before the contract ended, leading to widespread soil acidification and groundwater pollution.

• Village Enterprises (TVEs): In the 1990s, local factories popped up everywhere. Since the rivers were "common" property, every factory dumped toxic waste into them to save costs. The result was the "Cancer Village" phenomenon—the economic gain was private, but the environmental cost was shared by the public.

3. The Hu & Xi Era: The Tragedy of High-Tech and Urban Space

Even as China became a global superpower, the tragedy moved into new sectors.

• The Bike-Sharing Collapse (2017): Under Hu and then Xi, companies like Ofo and Mobike flooded city sidewalks with millions of bikes. Because the "sidewalk" was a common public space and the bikes were "shared," users treated them with no care, and companies over-saturated the market. This led to "Bicycle Graveyards" that choked public squares.

• The Real Estate Bubble: Local governments relied on selling land (a finite common resource) to fund their budgets. This led to "Ghost Cities"—over-exploitation of the land for short-term GDP growth, leaving a massive debt burden for the next generation.

The Southern Cradle: Why the South of the Huai River Birthed China’s Great Rebellions

 

The Southern Cradle: Why the South of the Huai River Birthed China’s Great Rebellions

For the past five centuries, the political geography of Chinese revolution has displayed a consistent tilt. From the founding of the Ming Dynasty to the overthrow of the Qing and the rise of the Communist Party, the primary catalysts for systemic change have emerged from the south of the Huai River. This region—comprising the Yangtze Valley, the Pearl River Delta, and the rugged hills of Hunan and Fujian—has acted as an incubator for the figures who dismantled old orders: Zhu Yuanzhang (Anhui), the Taiping leaders (Guangxi/Guangdong), Sun Yat-sen (Guangdong), and Mao Zedong(Hunan).

The Historical Pattern of Southern Dissent

While the North was often the seat of imperial legitimacy and defense against nomadic incursions, the South became the laboratory for alternative ideologies.

• Zhu Yuanzhang (Ming Dynasty): Emerging from the poverty-stricken Huai River basin, he led the Red Turban Rebellion to expel the Mongol Yuan Dynasty, marking a rare instance of a southern-based movement conquering the North.

• The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom: Hong Xiuquan launched his "God Worshipping Society" from Guangxi, nearly toppling the Qing Dynasty by capturing Nanjing and mobilizing millions of southern peasants.

• Sun Yat-sen & the Xinhai Revolution: Born in Guangdong, Sun leveraged overseas networks and southern secret societies to end 2,000 years of imperial rule.

• Mao Zedong & the CCP: Though the party started in cities like Shanghai, its martial heart was forged in the mountains of Hunan and Jiangxi (the Jinggang Mountains).

Expert Reasons for Southern Radicalism

1. Economic Independence and "Grain Power" Experts note that after the Song Dynasty, the economic center of China shifted south. The South controlled the "rice bowl" and the tea and silk trade. This economic surplus allowed southern elites and secret societies to fund insurgencies without relying on the central imperial coffers in Beijing.

2. Geographical Fragmentation and "Mountain Governance" The South is characterized by complex topography—mountains, river networks, and dense forests—unlike the flat, easily policed North China Plain. This geography provided natural "guerrilla zones." Experts like James C. Scott (author of The Art of Not Being Governed) suggest that such terrain allows heterodox groups to organize out of the immediate reach of the state.

3. Maritime Exposure and Foreign Ideas Coastal provinces like Guangdong and Fujian were the first to encounter Western and Japanese ideas. Sun Yat-sen’s republicanism and the Taiping’s distorted Christianity were products of southern maritime contact. The South was a "window" that made the existing Northern-centric system look archaic.

4. Cultural Resistance and the "Dual Identity" Historians often point to the "Southern Song" legacy and the Ming-loyalist sentiment after the Manchu conquest. The South retained a strong "Han" identity that viewed the Northern-based Qing as "alien" rulers. This cultural friction made the South a fertile ground for "anti-Qing, restore Ming" (fanqing fuming) secret societies.

5. The "Buffer" Paradox The Huai River serves as a climatic and agricultural boundary. Historically, when Northern administrations became corrupt or focused on northern border defense, the administration of the far South became "loose." This laxity allowed local militias and radical intellectuals to grow in strength until they were powerful enough to challenge the center.

 

The Shadow in Harbin: How Three Nations Remember the Death of Itō Hirobumi

On 26 October 1909, at the Harbin railway station, the first Prime Minister of Japan, Itō Hirobumi, was shot and killed by the Korean independence activist An Jung-geun.
The assassination became one of the most symbolically charged events in modern East Asian history—not merely because a statesman died, but because three civilizations recorded the same moment with three very different hearts.

Japan’s Record: A Fallen Elder Statesman

In Japan, Itō Hirobumi was remembered as a genrō—an elder statesman who helped modernize Japan and shape the Meiji Constitution.
Japanese accounts of the time framed his death as:

• A national tragedy,

• A murder of a respected diplomat,

• A disruption of Japan’s role in “stabilizing” the Korean Peninsula.

Newspapers portrayed Itō as a peace-seeking figure who opposed the harshest forms of colonial rule—though historians still debate the accuracy of this portrayal. Nevertheless, in the Japanese memory, Itō’s death symbolized an attack not only on a statesman, but on Japan’s rising international prestige.

Korea’s Record: A Martyrdom of Resistance

In Korea, the same event is remembered in an opposite light.
To Koreans, An Jung-geun is not merely an assassin, but:

• A patriot,

• A freedom fighter,

• A man who sacrificed himself to resist Japanese encroachment.

Korean history textbooks record his act as righteous resistance against Japan’s tightening colonial grip, especially after the 1905 Protectorate Treaty. An’s writings in prison—arguing that Itō was responsible for Korea’s suffering—became part of Korea’s national consciousness. The Harbin gunshot was, in Korean telling, the strike of a nation refusing to die quietly.

China’s Record: A Stage for Foreign Powers

China, where the assassination occurred, had a more detached but symbolically significant perspective.
Harbin at the time was a frontier city entangled with:

• Russian influence through the Chinese Eastern Railway,

• Japanese expansion in Manchuria,

• Qing decline.

To Chinese observers, the event revealed:

• The weakness of the late Qing,

• The intrusion of foreign powers on Chinese soil,

• The turbulence of East Asia on the eve of revolution.

While China had no direct stake in the Itō–An confrontation, the assassination highlighted how Chinese territory had become a battleground for the struggles of others.

Why the Differences Matter

The death of Itō Hirobumi demonstrates how history is never a single story.
It is a national mirror.

• Japan saw a fallen architect of the Meiji state.

• Korea saw a spark of liberation.

• China saw a symptom of imperial intrusion and national weakness.

These divergent memories reveal deeper questions:

• Who has the right to define justice?

• How do nations turn trauma into identity?

• How do shared events become unshared histories?

The assassination in Harbin is not simply an old event—it is a reminder that East Asia’s present is built on the layered memories of its past. And until these memories are understood, reconciled, or at least acknowledged, the shadows of Harbin will linger.

Beyond Borders: How Ancient Chinese Governance Mirrors Modern Corporate Empires

 

Beyond Borders: How Ancient Chinese Governance Mirrors Modern Corporate Empires

The administrative structure of the Yuan Dynasty (1271-1368 AD) often sparks debate, particularly when comparing its "Xingsheng" (行省) or Branch Secretariats to the provinces of today. While a modern province typically functions as a mere administrative arm of a central government, the Yuan's Xingsheng held far greater sway, wielding extensive military and administrative powers. Yet, crucially, they lacked any semblance of independent autonomy. To truly grasp this sophisticated system, one can draw a compelling parallel to the intricate dynamics of a modern multinational corporation (MNC) and its country-based subsidiaries.

The Yuan Dynasty's Revolutionary "Xingsheng" System

The Yuan Dynasty, founded by Kublai Khan, inherited a vast and diverse empire. To effectively govern such a sprawling domain, the central government devised the innovative Xingsheng system. These provincial-level bodies were not just geographical divisions; they were formidable regional governments. Each Xingsheng was headed by a powerful council, often comprising Mongol aristocrats and skilled Han officials, who held significant authority over local military affairs, tax collection, justice administration, and infrastructure development. They effectively managed the daily governance of massive territories, adapting policies to local conditions.

However, despite this seemingly vast delegation of power, the ultimate control remained firmly in the hands of the Emperor and the central government. The officials at the Xingsheng were appointed by the imperial court, their tenures were subject to imperial discretion, and their major decisions required central approval. There was no "constitutional" guarantee of their independence; their power was granted by the Emperor and could be revoked at will. This created a delicate balance: powerful enough to govern effectively, yet ultimately subservient to the imperial will.

The Modern Parallel: Multinational Companies and Their Country Subsidiaries

This historical model finds a striking contemporary echo in the structure of today's global corporate giants.

1. The Headquarters (HQ): The Emperor's Seat

Consider the headquarters of a multinational corporation like Apple Inc. in Cupertino, California, or Alphabet (Google's parent company) in Mountain View. The HQ is the undisputed center of power. It dictates the overarching strategic vision, allocates massive financial resources, controls core research and development, safeguards intellectual property, and maintains ultimate financial oversight. Decisions regarding major investments, global product launches, or company-wide restructuring originate here. Much like the Yuan Emperor, the HQ holds the ultimate authority to appoint, remove, or reassign the leadership of its various global entities, and can exert decisive control over their budgets and operational guidelines.

2. The Country Subsidiary: The "Xingsheng" in Action

Now, let's look at a country-based subsidiary, such as Samsung India or Coca-Cola Japan. These entities possess significant operational autonomy within their respective territories. Samsung India, for instance, manages localized marketing campaigns, adapts product features to suit Indian consumer preferences (e.g., specific mobile payment integrations or camera optimizations), handles vast sales and distribution networks, and manages a large local workforce. Similarly, Coca-Cola Japan might develop unique local flavors or marketing strategies tailored to the Japanese market, operating its own bottling plants and distribution channels.

These subsidiaries, much like the Yuan Xingsheng, wield substantial "military and administrative powers" in their operational sphere. They manage their own profit and loss (P&L) statements, recruit local talent, and engage directly with local governments and markets.

However, crucially, their existence and powers are not guaranteed by any independent "constitution." Samsung India does not have sovereignty from its South Korean parent company. Coca-Cola Japan cannot decide to independently change its core brand identity or deviate drastically from global financial reporting standards. The HQ can, at any moment, change its CEO, alter its budget allocation, introduce new product mandates, or even decide to scale down or divest from that market. The ultimate control rests with the headquarters, reflecting the Yuan Emperor's ultimate authority over his distant Xingsheng.

A Crucial Distinction: Today's Provinces vs. Yuan's Xingsheng

It's vital to differentiate this from the role of a typical modern province in a unitary state (e.g., a province in France, or China today). These contemporary provinces are primarily administrative extensions of the central government. They do not possess independent military authority, their fiscal powers are tightly controlled by the national treasury, and their policy-making capabilities are largely limited to implementing directives from the capital. They are more akin to a regional branch office or a department within a larger organization, designed for efficient execution rather than semi-autonomous governance. They lack the broad, delegated military and administrative authority that characterized the Yuan Dynasty's Xingsheng or a modern MNC's powerful country subsidiary.

Conclusion

The Yuan Dynasty's Xingsheng system was a stroke of administrative genius, allowing for effective control over a vast empire by balancing delegated regional power with absolute central authority. By viewing it through the lens of a multinational corporation and its dynamic subsidiaries – where regional entities execute strategy with significant local autonomy, yet remain ultimately accountable to the central headquarters – we gain a richer, more nuanced understanding of this pivotal chapter in administrative history. It's a timeless lesson in governance, revealing how effective control can be maintained even across vast distances, by wisely balancing empowerment with unwavering oversight.