George Galloway, former British Member of Parliament and leader of the Workers Party of Britain, has observed China’s development for more than three decades. In an interview with Beijing Review reporter Zhang Shasha, he shared his views on the country’s five-year plans, whole-process people’s democracy and economic transformation; challenged Western perceptions of China’s rise, and discussed how competition can coexist with cooperation in an increasingly uncertain world. Edited excerpts from the interview follow: 

Beijing Review: China’s five-year plans have attracted increasing attention in the West. Some people see them as drivers of long-term development, while others argue that such planning represents excessive government intervention in the market. What’s your take on them?

George Galloway: Western capitalism is about “me” and “now.” China’s five-year plans are about “us” and “always.” This is the key distinction between the Western capitalist model and socialism with Chinese characteristics.

Socialism with Chinese characteristics is one of the most important theoretical developments in human society since the Industrial Revolution. It combines the revolutionary strengths of the market with a long-term development strategy set by the Communist Party of China and the state. China has created something new, something that the world has never seen before.

The Western political system is incompatible with long-term planning, because elections are the only thing that ultimately matter. The political class has one primary objective: to remain the political class, because it is a very good job. And if you are only thinking four years ahead, you are inevitably going to make mistakes, even if you have the good intentions, but most of them do not.

Infrastructure is what interests me most and particularly the pursuit of equalization, not only among different Chinese people, but also among different regions and provinces.

Recently, I was in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, which was a very poor place only a few decades ago. Today, it has new infrastructure, new development and public services that are comparable with much richer areas. In many Western countries, a region like Xinjiang would simply be left to decline.

I know someone who runs a railway system in a capitalist country. He could not understand why China invests so much money in railways to places where no Western country would ever consider building one.

His attitude was: “These projects will always lose money.” But people like that know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

The value to China of connecting all parts of the country is greater than the financial cost. Price is accounting. Value is economics. And beyond that, it is an example of socialism with Chinese characteristics.

An effective governance system also requires channels for people to express their views and influence decision-making. What’s your view on China’s whole-process people’s democracy?

Only a minority of people will devote themselves full-time to political life, but everyone has political views, especially those who are directly affected by decisions.

You need to know how people are affected by the decisions they have to live with, and they need a way to tell the leadership what is working, what is not working and what could be improved. It is easy to create a complaints procedure. It is much harder to actually respond to those complaints: to hear them, evaluate them and take action.

I hope China continues to get that system right, and everything I hear suggests that the developments China has made are moving in a positive direction.

For generations, our people believed that we were the democracies, and that countries like China were dictatorships.

But it turns out that China has more democratic elements than we do. And that is quite a cultural shock for many people in the West to come to terms with.

Beyond democracy, there are also many misconceptions about the Chinese economy. Some argue that China suffers from overcapacity, and some have even portrayed China’s development as creating a “China Shock.” What’s your opinion of these arguments?

The idea that China’s economic demand is weakening, or that China needs the export markets of the West, is false. But more than that, it is intentionally false.

Even China’s economic system is something that many in the West find difficult to accept. The West invented capitalism. For hundreds of years, they used it to conquer the world. And now it is difficult for them to accept that someone they once looked down upon has become richer than them and has built a society that, in many ways, functions better than theirs.

The Chinese people themselves are a living contradiction to the constant anti-China propaganda.

China began with the manufacturing of cheap goods but China has developed into a manufacturer of sophisticated products, producing things that are now often more advanced than what many Western manufacturers and retailers have to offer.

Take air conditioning as an example. This has been an extremely hot summer across Europe, and I think also in North America. Can many of these countries make their own air conditioners anymore? No.

Not because they’re not clever enough. They are. It’s because they have deindustrialized their countries and lost the means of doing so. That tells you something about how dependent the world has become on China’s manufacturing capability.

The same transformation has happened with cars. I remember when Japanese cars came from nowhere and how dismissive people were of them. Cars were something we thought the British and Americans, and maybe the French, should make. Today, Chinese cars are among the best in the world. If I had to choose a car, I would choose a Chinese one.

Chinese companies are making better cars at better prices, and consumers are choosing them. Isn’t that what capitalism is supposed to be about? The market decides. The customer is king. The customer is king until the customer chooses to buy Chinese. Then suddenly, it is no longer called competition. It is called an “invasion.”

For years, we were told that electric vehicles (EVs) were the future. Before that, they told us diesel was the future. But when China started making some of the best EVs in the world, suddenly buying Chinese EVs became a problem.

They talk about standards, security, environmental questions and all kinds of other reasons. But these are often excuses for their own failures. That is where the misunderstanding comes from.

My own country once had an extraordinary industrial base. We made Aston Martins, Rolls-Royces and Jaguars. We had an industrial heritage so rich that those names are still famous today.

But our manufacturers were weakened by decisions made by our own political and economic systems. Profits were often taken out rather than reinvested in the future, and we gradually lost much of our industrial capacity.

Their weakness is that our political system and our economic system are no longer suited to the 21st century. China’s system is. That is why my party, the Workers Party of Britain, is unapologetic. We say openly: We want an economy like China’s. We want to be like China--but with British characteristics.

Eventually, I believe everyone will come around to that point of view. I promise you, within the lifetime of my youngest child--she is 6 years old now--people will reach that conclusion.

It’s reasonable that every country wants to grow and become stronger, so how should we strike a good balance between competition and cooperation with other countries, especially in this world full of uncertainties and change?

It is difficult to describe the current world situation. Calling it “uncertain” is definitely an English understatement.

We are facing a very dangerous period. The recklessness of some political leaders when it comes to matters of war and peace is something I have rarely seen in my lifetime.

I thought I grew up in uncertain times, but looking back now, those years seem much more stable compared with what we are experiencing today.

In such an environment, it may seem difficult to imagine countries cooperating--investing in each other’s economies and working together in areas such as space and AI.

But there is no other way for humanity to move forward. If countries continue to look at each other with suspicion and treat each other as permanent enemies, we will not be able to solve the challenges facing humanity.

When I was last elected to Parliament, only two years ago, I was questioned by police officers at Gatwick Airport. They asked me, “Did China tell you to return to Parliament? Were you spying for China in Parliament?”

This is the most vulgar and the most ridiculous question anyone has ever asked me in my entire life, I told the officer.

If you go through the world with this kind of mentality, you will never catch the car in front of you. And the car in front of you is China.

Copyedited by G.P. Wilson

Comments to zhangshsh@cicgamericas.com