Filed under: Comment
“I’ve learned 2 things:
One, fear nothing. Two, be optimistic. Take the long view – when you do that, you can cope with anything.”
DENG XIAOPING, 1964.
You might not know who Deng Xiaoping is, but if you were to look at his history, you’d find he was probably one of the great capitalist – not to mention political – visionaries and strategists of our time.
OF. OUR. TIME.
People talk about Warren Buffett, but Deng Xiaoping was on a whole other level.
In essence, this is the man who created the masterplan and blueprint to make China one of – if not the – richest countries in the World and he did it in a way that still allowed them to maintain [or at least the illusion of it] their communist beliefs and credentials.
OK, so his situation and political influence was different to Buffett’s, but then so were his obstacles to success … which is why I find it so powerful to hear someone talk about the value of taking the long, long view rather than being obsessed with hitting the next quarters targets.
Sure it’s easier when you know you and your cronies are still going to be in power in 100 years time, but when you see look at the mess the World has got itself in with their quest for short-cuts to profit – and the fact they have the shortest memories since the goldfish – maybe it’s time to accept speed of growth can also mean speed of collapse, especially if the people who make all the cash don’t have to be around when everyone else is losing it.
How funny that this ‘get rich’ attitude is so prevalent in the financial industry when in marketing, they adopt an attitude of “don’t fuck things up”, even though their job tenure is a similar 2 or 3 years.
Maybe both industries could learn from each other a little bit, though not as much as the World’s economists might learn from an old communist.
47 Comments so far
Leave a comment
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I’d trust a commie more than a banker these days. Mind you, I’d trust dominos pizza more than a banker these days.
Comment by DH October 19, 2011 @ 6:34 amGood point. At least they deliver what they say on time or happily pay a penalty.
Comment by Rob October 19, 2011 @ 8:49 amCommie.
Comment by Billy Whizz October 19, 2011 @ 6:47 amInteresting post Rob. Of course it helps when you have over a billion people ready to do whatever you tell excessively excessively low levels of income.
Comment by Pete October 19, 2011 @ 6:53 amBut I get what you mean and the SAR districts he set up were amazing examples of his economic vision an powers of diplomacy and negotiation.
Comment by Pete October 19, 2011 @ 6:56 amstop trying to look like youre fucking worldly. its not working. or i dont want it to fucking work.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 7:49 amYes he had a lot of people at his disposal … yes their cost base is much lower than most other countries … but also the volume of infrastructure that is necessary to make it all work together is at a whole other stratosphere so while I’m not saying you can easily compare the situations, I think it’s also too easy to say one had obscene advantages over the other. Besides – as you point out – the way he structured ‘commercial regions/countries’ has nothing to do with people-power and everything to do with commercial understanding and vision which is why I still think his achievements are easily measurable to the best the West can offer and why I view his quote at the start of the post, so powerful and important.
Comment by Rob October 19, 2011 @ 8:55 amwhat the fuck have you done pete.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 9:10 amProof marketing managers don’t know how to make money.
Comment by DH October 19, 2011 @ 6:54 amid cancel all my agency, design and packaging contracts and hire me. then id cancel all fucking media spend and do so some social media bollocks then resign in 6 months looted and booted. i would give marketing managers a good fucking name. with satan.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 7:52 amThe thought of you as a marketing manager is not nearly as scary as you’d like it to look. However this comment is certainly scarier than I intended it to sound.
Comment by Rob October 19, 2011 @ 8:51 amget me the gig and well see whose fucking right then.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 9:11 amHe looks like yoda.
Comment by Billy Whizz October 19, 2011 @ 6:57 amAt least he could walk down wall street.
Comment by DH October 19, 2011 @ 7:02 amIf he’s in a coffin, he’s been dead for years.
Comment by Pete October 19, 2011 @ 7:13 amif this is your way of trying to make me think that ill get the money back that i sunk into she who is with childs dream house its not fucking working.
thank fuck it was in canadian dollars because thats not real money and im not totally fucking financially fucked.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 7:43 amThis is the most relevant, insightful post in a while – IMHO (don’t you hate those.
Comment by Ciaran McCabe October 19, 2011 @ 8:08 aminsightful? campbell? are you on the fucking guinness again ciaran?
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 8:39 amive just had to look up what imho means. thats 28 seconds of my life ill never fucking get back.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 8:39 amin the time you wrote “(dont you hate those(” you could have written “in my humble opinion” its even one fucking letter less if you take away the fucking brackets that you wouldnt have needed if youd written it properly.
i like you ciaran. i like you a fucking lot. but dont become one of those acronym fuckers because like you pointed out, i fucking hate those.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 8:42 amoh you crafty fucker, you only used one bracket. ok, so its the same number of letters. it still doesnt make it exfuckingcusable.
and where is dodds and lauren? where the fuck are they?
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 8:43 amI might be wrong Ciaran, but I think Andy is opposed to acronyms. Glad you liked the post – it makes a change. Hahaha!
Comment by Rob October 19, 2011 @ 8:46 amThere’s a lot that can be learned from Deng Xiaoping and leaders like Zhou Enlai. They weren’t the typical party line, and paid the price multiple times in terms of exile and jail for not being “pure” in their communist ideology.
Communism as an ideology is merely fascism in practice, and it’s weapon of self sustenance is the continued poverty and dereliction of it’s people.
The China we see today was saved not by the communists, but by people like Deng and Zhou, who, to push through the sort of reform and fiscal policy they did, had to take a lot of personal risk.
A long view of history,
A willingness to do what needs to be done, at personal risk,
And always looking to build for the future rather than profiteering from the present.
3 things any leader must naturally have, I think.
Comment by Aditya October 19, 2011 @ 9:19 amTo claim Deng and Zhou were punished by their party for the reforms they undertook is not entirely true.
At it’s core, these were things they were specifically asked to do by their party – or at least the dominant members of the party at that particular time – because as you know, the ‘party’ rules China, the figurehead is simply a figurehead
I get what you’re saying and I have as many issues with communism as the next man, however back in the day, the ideology of communism was as fiercely protected as the ideology of capitalism [and most religions] and while Deng and Zhou brought more texture to what had been there before, it would not have occurred if it had not been sought by the wider party so to position them as mavericks [my words, not yours] paints a picture that is not truly reflective of what was going on at the time.
Comment by Rob October 19, 2011 @ 10:02 amTo practice communism, you have to be political.
Comment by Pete October 19, 2011 @ 10:04 amno fucker cares as long as they keep churning out the iphones that twats will queue up for days for.
i get the point. communists know how to make more cash than capitalists. got it. but like dave said, so does my exes and all they fucking do is spend spend spend my fucking cash.
bitches.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 10:09 am+1.
Comment by Pete October 19, 2011 @ 10:14 amI only understand what Andy is saying.
+1.
Comment by Billy Whizz October 19, 2011 @ 10:15 amThe +1 / +3 should be here. Your blog navigation is as bad as your blog.
Comment by DH October 19, 2011 @ 10:19 amI’ve read a number of times that Deng Xiao Ping was punished by Mao whom disagreed with his ideas.
?
Comment by Rob Mortimer October 19, 2011 @ 6:44 pmI’m not saying it didn’t happen – it did – however the overhaul of China’s approach to commercialism wasn’t done by him without major support because in China, that couldn’t happen and to infur he did it off his own back is wrong.
Comment by Rob October 19, 2011 @ 6:54 pmAh ok.
Comment by Rob Mortimer October 19, 2011 @ 9:30 pmAgree wholeheartedly with the point I should add.
I found this post fascinating to read, especially the debate regards Deng Xiaoping.
It is true Xiaoping encountered resistance from Mao over the course of his career, however it would be wrong to state this was due to the reforms he was undertaking. As one previous commentator stated, it is inconceivable an act of such importance could occur without the full acknowledgement and endorsement of the ruling party.
Keep up the good work.
Comment by Fascinated By China October 19, 2011 @ 11:23 pmwikifuckingpedia is a great thing isnt it. who gives a fuck whether a bloke whose name i can’t pronounce let alone fucking spell got in shit for what he did or didnt do, the one fucking thing we know for certain is thered be fucking hell to pay for letting campbell breathe their polluted air, never mind hes getting paid a disgusting fucking amount of cash for flogging a bunch of yankee brands to unsuspecting and naive as fuck commies.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 11:30 pmGetting in early. +1
Comment by DH October 19, 2011 @ 11:44 pmgetting in early? thats a fucking first mr mid fucking morning man.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 11:47 pmTried it, don’t like it. Back to being late and happy.
Comment by DH October 19, 2011 @ 11:54 pmwhat a fucking surprise.
Comment by andy@cynic October 20, 2011 @ 12:14 am+1 or +3
Comment by DH October 19, 2011 @ 10:17 amthick twat.
Comment by andy@cynic October 19, 2011 @ 10:19 am+1
Comment by Billy Whizz October 19, 2011 @ 10:22 am+2 (sorry Dave)
Comment by Pete October 19, 2011 @ 10:24 amWhen in rome. +3
Comment by DH October 19, 2011 @ 10:35 amtalking about the value of taking the long view in my opinion, CEO around the world should get out of the studio brain of committees meeting and spend time feeling what’s going on. Just feel it.
Comment by pele October 19, 2011 @ 10:44 amReading this reminded me of Higher Modern Studies 1987 when we had to study Deng’s China.
Anyway, I think a lot of marketing people are short term too, especially Brand Managers who want to become ‘famous’ in their company through a new campaign that sometimes means a new brand positioning too…
BTW Andy@cynic LOL PMSL
Comment by craigfraserwood October 22, 2011 @ 7:17 pmI think 95% of marketing people are short-term, that’s the problem. Actually it’s more than that. They’re short-term and have no appreciation of what their brand is – or what it’s capable of being – and so churn out some bland, pointless rubbish so they can pretend they’re leaving their mark on the company but really they’re just keeping the system slowly turning along.
Comment by Rob October 23, 2011 @ 10:14 amOh, and hello Craig.
Comment by Rob October 23, 2011 @ 10:14 am