Development in Japan and China after WWII Essay

Development in Japan and China after WWII - Essay Example For along time Mao was a leader of Chinese people and their ideological tutor. He announced the policy of "leaning to one side" meant commitment to the socialist bloc. According to the socialistic economic model the transformations were made in the economic and social life of China. The citizens of China were divided into four social classes namely workers, bourgeoisie, peasants, and national-capitalists. The four classes were ruled by the China Communist Party (CCP) leading by the Chinese working class. In 1945 the territory of Japan was occupied and placed under international control, but in 1952 the Treaty of Peace granted Japan with full sovereignty. It should be mentioned that the level of influence between Japan and the USA was less than in China-USSR relations, and that is why the political priorities of Japan was free from strict ideological obtrusion. So, the outcome of WWII changed the political priorities of both countries, as well as their political ideology, which had a great influence on economic growth and development of China and Japan. The economy of Japan is often characterized as a "Japanese miracle". This extensive economic growth made it possible to recover the economy in a short period of time. From 1950s the governement of Japane had supported the extensive economic development which resulted in a first-rank economic power of the country. It should be noted that the economic miracle was impossible without the government considerable freedom aimed to oversee economic development in the long term. Through extensive state investment and guidance, and with a support provided by technology transfer from the USA, Japan rapidly rebuilt its heavy industrial sector (almost destroyed during the war) and agreculture. In contrast to Japan, the territory of China was not occupied, but the communist ideology, imposed by the Soviet Union, played the same role as an occupation (Sholler, 1997). China adopted the Soviet model of economic development based on a five-year plan. The model of the Soviet economic and technical ass istance was expected to play a significant part in the implementation of the plan. In contrast to industrial Japan, the urgent need for China was agricultural sector of economy. According to the post war census (1953) the population of China was about 583 million, and to solve the problem of famine the government of Mao started the process of collectivization. Despite internal disagreement of collectivization, which at least for the time being was resolved in Mao's favor, preliminary collectivization was 90 percent completed by the end of 1956. In contrast to Japan, Chinese government provided the policy of nationalization of banking, industry, and trade. Private enterprises in mainland were virtually abolished. China had a one-party democracy, but the formal existence of certain liberties was useless because they were not exercused in practice The post-war settlement transformed Japan into a genuine constitutional party democracy, but, extraordinarily, it was ruled by a single part y throughout the period of the "miracle". (Fairbank, 1986). So, taking into account the first post war decades it is possible to say that China and Japan developed different sectors of economics: China needed a strong agricultural sector, while Japan developed industry and banking sector. To some extent these similarities were caused by the post