锦涛同志今天去了安徽小岗村，肯定了小岗村当年"求温饱”——"分田单干”的历史贡献，对小岗村前年以来"奔小康”——"重走合作路”一字未提。全国人民都知道小岗村"重走合作路”了，锦涛同志不知道？安徽的同志和锦涛同志的随行人员都不知道？
Today, Comrade Jintao went to the Xiaogang Village in Anhui Province, where he confirmed the historical contribution of Xiaogang Village, in which villagers "searching for a way to feed and clothe themselves” "distributed the land to work individually.” But he didn't say anything about the village "returning to the path of cooperation” since last year in order to "pursue a better living.” How is it that people around the country know that Xiaogang Village has "returned to the path of cooperation,” but Comrade Jintao did not know? How is it that the comrades in Anhui and the comrades who accompanied Jintao do not know?
我党10月即将召开的三中全会将再次讨论农村改革，从锦涛同志的在小岗村的讲话中可知今后农村改革的方向了——推进土地"永包制”，加大土地流转，方便资本下乡，发展"公司＋农户”的现代农业。
In our party's upcoming Third Plenary in October, the delegates will again discuss rural reform, and from Comrade Jintao's speech in the Xiaogang village, we can see the future direction of rural reform—to promote "permanent responsibility system,” to increase the circulation of land, to facilitate the flow of capital to the countryside, and to promote the development of modern agriculture by combining "companies + rural households.”
"公司＋农户”的现代农业，不可能增加农民收入
我党最近几年的几个一号文件，始终都将增加农民收入作为核心目标。如何增加农民收入呢？一号文件的核心措施就是发展现代农业。什么是现代农业呢？一号文件中所指的现代农业就是"公司＋农户”。发展现代农业的措施就是农民将土地"流转”给公司，让农民做农工或"股东”。
Modern agriculture based on "companies + rural households” cannot increase peasant income
In recent years, several key party documents have identified "increasing peasant income” as a central objective. How can we increase peasant income? According to these documents, the key measure is to develop modern agriculture. What is modern agriculture? The documents define it as combining "companies + rural households.” That is, they propose to develop modern agriculture by "transferring” peasants' land to companies, so that the peasants become agricultural workers or "shareholders.”
发展"公司＋农户”的现代农业真的可以增加农民收入吗？理论和实践都证明是不可以的！从理论上讲，"公司＋农户”的结果，就是农民被迫从加工业、运输业、流通业、储藏业、生产资料生产和销售、农村金融、土地"农转非”收益等领域退出，让位于资本家，农民只能搞种植业和养殖业，甚至养殖业都不能搞了，如养猪和养奶牛就正在迫使农民逐步退出——公司化养殖。这样的农业现代化，结果只能是农民只获得种植业和少量养殖业收入了，农民收入会随着所谓的农业现代发展而下降。从实践上讲，最近一些年，农民收入的增加部分，主要是劳务收入，扣除农民家庭的"农民工”收入，农民收入是下降的，这有国家统计局的权威数据证明。严格来讲，"农民工”是产业工人，其收入是不应该统计在农民收入之中的。那就是说，中央最近几年通过"公司＋农户”——农业现代化、增加农民收入的努力是完全失败的！
It is true that the development of a modern agriculture based on "companies + rural households” can increase the income of the peasants? Theory and practice have proved that it is impossible! In theory, the result of "company + rural households,” is that peasants are forced to withdraw from the fields of processing, transport, distribution, storage, production and marketing of the means of production, rural finance, and transferring land from agricultural to non-agricultural purposes, in order to give way to capitalists in these fields. Peasants can only engage in farming and aquaculture, and even in aquaculture, as in pig raising and dairy farming, they will be gradually replaced by agribusiness. With this kind of modernization of agriculture, peasants will only be able to get income from farming and a small amount of aquaculture. With this kind of so-called modernization the income of the peasants will decline. In practice, in recent years the increasing part of peasants' income is mainly income from labor. If we exclude the income from "migrant peasant workers,” the income of the peasants is declining, as is shown authoritatively by data from the National Bureau of Statistics. Strictly speaking, "migrant peasant workers” are industrial workers, whose income should not be included in the statistics of peasants' income. That is to say, efforts to increase peasant income in recent years by promoting central policies of agricultural modernization based on "companies + rural households” have been a total failure!
我党2003年以来，一直致力于"缩小城乡居民收入差距，可城乡居民收入差距却在不断扩大。这其实也证明中央最近几年增加农民收入的措施是失效的。
没有达到增加农民收入的目标，不是检讨农业现代化——"公司＋农户”模式的弊端，却认为是土地流转不畅，导致农业现代化——"公司＋农化”——资本下乡的步伐太慢。所以，我党10月即将召开的三中全会就是要为"资本下乡”开路。这样的想法，和上个世纪30年代的菲律宾是一样的。
Since 2003, our party has been committed to "narrowing the income gap between urban and rural residents,” but the income gap between urban and rural residents continues to grow. This is further evidence that the central authorities' policies designed to increase peasants' income have been ineffective.
Although the "companies + rural households” agricultural modernization model has not achieved the goal of increasing peasant income, not to mention its other defects, they believe the problem is that land transfers are not free enough under this model, slowing down the movement of capital to the countryside. Therefore, in the upcoming Third Plenary in October, our party is preparing to open the way for "capital to move to the countryside.” This idea is the same as that implemented in the Philippines in the 1930s.
菲律宾衰落与日韩和我国台湾崛起
The decline of the Philippines and the rise of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan
从上个世纪30年代开始，菲律宾经历了30年左右的快速发展，被西方人称为"亚洲典范”，现代化水平仅次于日本。在菲律宾快速发展时期，香港、台湾、南北韩的大量劳动力输出到菲律宾就业。
Starting in the 1930s, the Philippines experienced 30 years of rapid development; it was called an "Asian model” by the West, and its level of modernization was only a little behind Japan. During this period of rapid development, the Philippines attracted workers from Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea and North Korea.
但从上个世纪60年代中期开始，菲律宾经济衰退、社会动荡、政局不稳，人民生活日趋艰难。今天的菲律宾，有30%的人生活在贫困线以下，每10个菲律宾人中就有一个背井离乡，总计约800万人在海外打工，仅在香港就有70万接受过高等教育的菲律宾女佣。在菲律宾走向衰落的同时，日韩和我国台湾却迅速发展起来，成为亚洲的新典范。
Starting in the mid-1960s, however, the Philippines was beset by economic recession, social unrest, and political instability, and people's lives became increasingly difficult. In the Philippines today, 30% of the people live below the poverty line, one out of ten Filipinos works away from their homes, and about eight million people work overseas. In Hong Kong alone, there are 700,000 college-educated Filipina maids. With the decline of the Philippines, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and China have developed rapidly, becoming Asia's new models.
菲律宾的日益衰落和日、韩及我台湾的快速发展，原因也许是非常复杂的，但有一点是非常关键的，那就是在现代化过程中，怎样对待农民、农村和农业。在学界，很多人都在研究中国"拉美化”的问题，却很少有人将菲律宾和日、韩及我国台湾进行比较研究，从中得出有益于中国现代化的启示。
The reasons for the decline of the Philippines and the rapid rise of Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, are complex, but one problem is very crucial: how to deal with peasants, rural areas, and agriculture in the process of modernization. In academic circles, many people are concerned about the possibility of China "becoming Latin Americanized,” but very few people carry out comparative study about the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and China, to shed light on the best way to modernize China.
在人口密集、农民占多数、人均资源少的国家实现现代化，到底该走什么道路？中国是该学欧美？日本？还是菲律宾？这是需要讨论的重要话题。
What kind of road should we take to achieve modernization in countries that are densely populated, in which the majority of population are peasants, and per capita resources are limited? Should China follow the example of Europe, the United States, Japan, or the Philippines? This is an important topic to be discussed.
菲律宾与日韩台：不同的农业现代化道路，不同的结局
Philippines, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan: Different paths of agricultural modernization with different outcomes
1898年美国从西班牙手中接管菲律宾。在美国的影响下，菲律宾师从美国，在农业和农村现代化道路的选择上，精英阶层坚定认为，农业和农村的现代化必须依靠资本的力量改造小农和农村。
In 1898, the United States took over Philippines from Spain. Under American influence, the Philippines followed the example of the United States in choosing the road for modernizing agriculture and rural areas. The elite firmly held the view that the modernization of agriculture and rural areas had to rely on the strength of capital to transform the small farmers and villages.
在菲律宾政府和知识精英的主导和支持下，西方农业跨国公司和本国资本家控制菲律宾农业和农村的金融保险、土地交易、农产品加工、流通、仓储、生产资料生产和销售、技术服务和基础设施等诸多领域。农民只能从事种植业和养殖业，大量自耕农和佃农在大公司的挤压下破产，被迫失去土地做资本家的农业工人。然而随着技术的进步，农业资本家和地主所需要的农业工人越来越少，大量的失地和失业农民涌进了城市。
With the support of the Philippines government and the intellectual elite, Western multinational corporations and national agricultural capitalists gained control of many fields of Philippine agriculture, including rural finance and insurance, land transactions, agricultural products processing, circulation, storage, production and marketing of the means of production, technology services, and infrastructure. Peasants were only able to engage in farming and aquaculture, and a large number of peasants and sharecroppers went bankrupt. Under pressure from big companies, peasants lost their land and were forced to become agricultural workers for the capitalists. With technological advances, however, agricultural landowners and capitalists needed fewer and fewer farm workers, and so a large number of unemployed and landless peasants went to cities.
但随着韩战的结束和冷战的趋缓，城市的就业岗位增长下降，进城的很多"农民工”找不到工作，失业问题转化成社会问题和政治问题，军人走上政治舞台，政局不稳、社会动荡，经济衰退，反过来失业更加严重，以致恶性循环。菲律宾的劳动力源源不断输出日本、韩国、台湾、香港及世界各地，菲佣成为菲律宾整个国家的"名片”——真是三十年河东，四十年河西啊！
In the wake of the end of the Korean War and the slowing of the Cold War, job growth in the cities declined, many "migrant workers” in the city couldn't find work, the unemployment problem turned into a social and political problem, the military entered the political stage, and political instability, social unrest, and economic recession in turn exacerbated unemployment, resulting in a vicious circle. A steady stream of Filipino labor power flowed to Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and around the world, and Filipina maids became the "calling card” of the country. It was certainly 30 years on the east side of river, and another 30 years on the west side of river!
在菲律宾农业和农村现代化的过程中，实现了五个快速转变：农村问题快速转变成了城市问题，农民问题快速转变成了工人问题，失业问题快速转变成了社会问题，经济社会问题快速转变成了政治问题，国内城乡矛盾快速转变成了国际贸易摩擦。
Philippines' agricultural and rural modernization led to a rapid transformation in five aspects: rural problems rapidly became urban problems, peasants' problems rapidly became workers' problems, the unemployment problem rapidly became a social problem, economic and social problems rapidly became political problems, and domestic conflicts between urban and rural areas rapidly become international trade conflicts.
应该说上述五个转变，导致菲律宾社会出现严重两极分化和冲突，政治出现严重腐败和对抗，经济完全受制于国外。基于菲律宾上述情况，很多研究菲律宾的人都认为，农业和农村现代化道路的错误，是导致菲律宾由"亚洲典范”走向"亚洲病夫”的主要原因之一。
It should be said that the five above-mentioned changes in the Philippines led to serious social polarization and conflict, serious political corruption and clashes, and the economy became completely controlled by foreign countries. Based on the above situation, a number of studies of the Philippines have come to the conclusion that one of the main reasons the Philippines went from being an "Asian model” to being the "sick man of Asia” was that it took the wrong road of modernizing agriculture and rural areas
菲律宾在经历了半个世纪的曲折之后，认识到了本国现代化道路的错误，从上个世纪的60年代中期开始，以日本、韩国和我国台湾为师，收购土地资本家的土地，分配给无地的农民和流民，这项改革至今还没有结束。这是多大的一个弯路啊！
在菲律宾走向衰落的同时，同样是人多地少、且同属美国势力范围的日韩和我国台湾却迅速崛起。当然，菲律宾走向衰落和日、韩及我台湾崛起的原因是复杂的，但日韩及我国台湾选择了和菲律宾完全不同的农业和农村现代化道路——"日本模式”，应该是一个重要原因。
The Philippines, after experiencing half a century's twists and turns, has become aware that it made mistakes it made on the road to modernization. Starting in the mid-1960s, it began to follow the example of Japan, South Korea and our own Taiwan, buying land from capitalists and allocating land to landless peasants and migrants, a reform that continues to this day. But what a big detour it took! While the Philippines has gone downhill, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan have risen rapidly. All of these countries faced situations similar to the Philippines: they had large populations relative to their land, and they were all under the influence of the United States. Of course, the reasons for the decline of the Philippines and the rise of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan were complex. But the fact that Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, chose an entirely different agricultural and rural modernization road—the "Japan model”—was certainly an important reason.
"日本模式”不是依靠资本改造和消灭小农，而是在土改的基础上，在限制大资本下乡的同时，扶持小农组织起来——建立以金融合作为核心的综合农协，变传统小农为组织化的现代小农，包括金融保险在内的农村经济都由农民协会主导发展，农民不仅分享种植业、养殖业的收益，几乎分享了农村金融保险、加工、流通储藏、市场资料生产供应、技术服务、农产品超市和土地"农转非”等诸多方面的绝大部分收益。
Instead of relying on capitalist transformation and the eradication of small peasants, the "Japan model” was based on land reform, restrictions on large capital in the countryside, and simultaneous support for small peasants to organize themselves. The model transformed traditional small farmers into modern organized small farmers by establishing financial cooperation as the core of comprehensive peasants' associations, which included finance and insurance and led rural economic development. Peasants not only shared income from farming and animal husbandry, but also shared the proceeds of land transfer to non-agricultural uses, and the benefits of rural finance and insurance, processing, distribution and storage, information about production and markets, technology services, supermarkets for rural merchandise, and many other aspects.
日韩和我国台湾限制大资本下乡，大约经历了数十年甚至百年的时间，有限制地准许大资本下乡是在农业和农村现代化——"组织化的现代小农”基本实现之后的事情。
日韩和我国台湾在农业和农村现代化的过程中，农地转移只许在农民之间进行，没有出现过小农在短期内大量破产的现象；农村劳动力转移更不是被迫的，进城的农民和城市居民都同等享受国民待遇；农民的收入和城市居民收入是基本相当的。
Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan put restrictions on large capital in the countryside for several decades, even up to a century. They allowed large capital in the countryside, still under restricted conditions, only after agricultural and rural modernization was completed and "modern organized small farmers” had come into existence.
In the model of agricultural and rural modernization followed in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, the transfer of agricultural land was only allowed between peasants, and the phenomena of widespread bankruptcy among small farmers and forced migration of rural labor never existed; peasants enjoyed the same citizenship benefits as the urban residents, and the income of peasants and urban residents was roughly the same.
日韩和我国台湾在现代化的过程中，农民逐步减少，但没有出现农民工问题；农村经济比例逐步下降，但没有出现农民贫困问题；城市化、工业化高速发展，但基本没有出现污染和社会两极分化问题。在日韩和我国台湾崛起的过程中，经济繁荣、社会和谐、政局稳定。
In the modernization process in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, the number of peasants was reduced gradually, and migrant workers never became an issue; the rural portion of the economy gradual declined, and poverty among the peasants never became a problem; there was rapid urbanization, and industrialization, but basically no problems with pollution and social polarization. During the process of development, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, maintained economic prosperity, social harmony, and political stability.
比较菲律宾和日韩及我国台湾农业和农村现代化道路，我们可以得出一个基本的结论：日韩和我国台湾道路是有效的。并能达成一些共识：
首先，人口密度较大的农业国家，在现代化过程中，农业和农村现代化道路选择对全局有决定性的作用。如果选择资本消灭小农的道路，农民将被迫非农化，劳动力价格会非常低，虽然有利"吸引外资”，但内需会严重不足，国家经济自主性不强，社会和环境等问题也会非常多，风险是非常高的。如果选择小农合作（组织化）发展道路，农民自主非农化，农民和工人收入会同步增长，内需会随着发展而扩大，经济自主性强，各种风险是可以控制的。
Comparing the roads of agricultural and rural modernization followed by the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, we can draw a basic conclusion: The road followed by Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan was effective. And we can reach a consensus: First, for agricultural countries with great population density, the methods chosen for agricultural and rural modernization is of decisive importance to the overall situation. If a country chooses the road of using capital to eradicate small peasants, the peasants will be forced to be non-agricultural, and the cost of labor will be very low. Although this is beneficial for "attracting foreign investment,” it seriously limits domestic demand, weakens the country's economic independence, and leads to many social and environmental problems. The risks are very high. If a country chooses the road of organized small peasant cooperation, peasants will leave agriculture at their own discretion, peasants and workers' wages will increase at the same pace, domestic demand will expand with development, there will be stronger economic autonomy, and a variety of risks can be controlled.
其次，农村人口基数较大，减少农民是一个长期过程，农村经济是农民收入的主要来源，要保护农民分享农村经济（金融保险、农产品加工、储藏、流通、生产资料生产供应、技术服务、土地转非和交易等）的收益，而不应该假现代化之名，行抢农民饭碗之实。否则，会出现菲律宾式的"五个转化”。
Second, where there is a huge rural population, reducing this population is a long-term process, and where the rural economy is the main source of income for peasants, it is necessary to protect the peasants' share the benefits of the rural economy (including from finance and insurance, processing of agricultural products, storage and distribution, production and supply of the means of production, technical services, and proceeds from land transfer to non-agricultural uses), rather than—in the name of modernization—robbing the peasants' rice bowl. Otherwise, we will end up with the Philippines-style "five transformations.”
第三，农业和农村现代化的主要力量是农民，不是非农民。最关键是要帮助农民提升能力或保护农民或组织农民或武装农民头脑或增强农民经济实力，而不是靠资本家救农民或带农民。指望资本家救小农是靠不住的。
Third, the main force to carry out the modernization of agriculture and rural areas should be peasants, rather than non-peasants. The crucial thing is to enhance peasants' abilities, to protect peasants, to organize peasants, to develop peasants' mental fighting skills, and to augment peasants' economic power, rather than to rely on capitalists to save peasants or lead peasants. To expect capitalists to save small peasants is unreliable.
第四，金融在现代经济发展中具有核心作用。如果日韩和我国台湾的综合农协没有"农信部”，综合农协就没有生命力；农民的金融自主权，还是实现和保护农民土地产权的基础。保护农民首要保护农民的金融自主权。日韩和我国台湾用了数十年、甚至近百年时间保护农民的合作金融，限制私人资本下乡办银行。如台湾乡村出现私人银行只是近10年左右的事情。
Fourth, finance has a central role in modern economic development. Without "agricultural credit departments,” the comprehensive agricultural associations in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan would have had no vitality. Peasants' financial autonomy is also the foundation for the realization and protection of peasants' land property rights. In order to protect peasants, you must first protect their financial autonomy. In Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, peasants' financial co-operation was protected and private capital and banking in the countryside was restricted for decades, or even a century. In Taiwan, for instance, private banks have emerged in the village only in the past 10 years or so.
中国农业和农村究竟该走什么样的现代化道路
What path should China's agriculture and villages follow?
亚洲的发展中国家都有同样的特点——人口基数大，人均资源少。依靠资本改造小农和农村，是难以走通的道路。中国主流话语是从欧美留学归国人员创造的，和30-40年代的菲律宾话语十分相似，这样的话语50-60年代在我国台湾也出现过，但台湾及时发现了问题，及时阻止和纠正了错误政策，选择了"日本模式”。
Asia's developing countries have the same characteristics—a large population base and fewer resources per capita. To rely on capital to transform small peasants and villages, is a difficult path to follow. The mainstream discourse in China has been developed by those who have studied abroad in Europe and America. It is similar to the discourse in the Philippines during 1930s and 1940s; this discourse also appeared in Taiwan in the 1950s and 60s, but Taiwan identified the problems in time, so it was able to prevent and correct their policies and choose the "Japan model.”
笔者认为中国错误的农业和农村现代化政策已经产生了严重的后果。
The author believes China's mistaken agriculture and rural modernization policies have resulted in serious consequences:
首先，第一个后果是：小农依赖农民工工资维持小农家庭经营，如果长期这样下去，农民工在城市安居乐业就不可能，减少农民也不可能，城市化就会彻底失败；如果没有农民工工资维持小农家庭经营，小农就会大面积破产，"五个转变”就不可避免。中国高速发展30年了，农民人数并没有减少，小农也没有现代化，农村也没有现代化。这样下去，中国的现代化是不可能实现的。
The first consequence is that the family-run small-peasant economy depends on the wages of migrant peasant workers. If this continues in long term, it will be impossible for migrant workers to settle down in the cities, it will be impossible to reduce the number of peasants, and urbanization will be a total failure. Without migrant workers to maintain family-run small-scale peasant economy, huge numbers of small peasants would go bankrupt and the "five transformations” would be inevitable. Although China has developed rapidly for 30 years, the number of peasants has not been reduced, there has been no modernization of small peasants, there has been no modernization of rural areas. If this continues, it will be impossible to realize China's modernization.
第二个后果：中国农村经济占GDP总量的12％弱，其中种植业和养殖业大约占5％左右，只有这5％是农民的，其余都被非农民占有了。5％的GDP，要养活60％多的人口，是不可能的。两极分化是必然的，全面小康是不可能的。
The second consequence is that China's rural economy, accounting for only 12% of the country's total GDP, of which farming and aquaculture account for about 5%. Only this 5% is for peasants and the rest has been taken over by non-peasants. It is impossible to feed 60% of the population with 5% of GDP. Polarization is inevitable, and general well-being is impossible.
后果之三：中国农民正在失去国内和国外"两个市场”，国内的土地密集型农产品市场正在逐步被跨国农业集团占领；国外的劳动密集型农产品市场正在被进入中国的日韩等"高科技农业园”抢占。可以预见的是，保护市场和抢占市场的斗争将非常激烈，贸易摩擦将会非常突出，国内问题转化成国际问题将是不可避免的。
The third consequence is that Chinese peasants are losing "two markets”—at home and abroad. The domestic market for land-intensive agricultural products market is gradually being taken over by transnational agribusiness. The foreign markets for labor-intensive agricultural products are being seized by Japanese, South Korean, and other "high-tech agricultural parks” that are being established in China. It is foreseeable that protection of markets and the struggle to seize market will become very intense, trade friction will increase, and in that way it is inevitable that domestic problems will be transformed into international problems.
毫无疑问，中国应该学习的是日韩和我国台湾农业和农村现代化模式，而应该避免走菲律宾失败的老路。因此，我们必须刻不容缓地纠正一系列错误的农业政策：
立即纠正"扶持龙头企业带小农”的错误政策，大力扶持农民合作经济和集体经济发展；立即纠正扶持私人资本下乡办银行服务小农的错误政策，归还农民的金融发展权，并优先扶持农民合作金融的发展；
China must certainly learn from Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan's agricultural and rural modernization, and avoid the failure of the Philippines. We must, therefore, correct the mistakes of a series of agricultural policies:
We must immediately correct the mistaken policy of supporting "leading enterprises to lead small peasants,” and strongly support peasants' economic cooperation and collective economic development.
We must immediately correct the mistaken policy of the supporting the movement of private capital into the countryside to do banking services for small peasants, return to peasants the right to develop financing, and give priority to the development of peasants' financial cooperation.
立即纠正扶持日韩等农业资本集团在中国建"农业园区”、利用中国廉价土地和劳力生产同质农产品抢占中国传统市场的做法，大力扶持中国农民组织和企业扩大劳动密集型农产品在日韩和欧洲市场份额；
立即纠正鼓励跨国集团并购中国农产品加工企业、帮助外国农产品抢占中国市场的错误政策，大力扶持农民合作经济组织和集体经济组织成为农产品加工业的主力军。扶持中国企业并购外国农产品加工企业，帮助中国劳动密集型农产品抢占外国市场，并确保不丧失参与主要农产品的定价权；
We must immediately correct mistaken policy that allows Japanese and South Korean agribusinesses to build "agricultural parks,” which utilize cheap Chinese labor and land to take over traditional markets for Chinese agricultural products, and strongly support Chinese peasants' organizations and companies, so that they can expand their share of markets for labor-intensive agricultural products in Japan, South Korea, and Europe.
We must immediately correct mistaken policies that encourage transnational corporations to acquire Chinese agricultural products processing enterprises, as these mergers help foreign agriculture products take over the Chinese market. We must strongly help peasants' cooperative and collective economic organizations become the main force in processing agricultural products. We must support the acquisition of foreign agricultural products processing enterprises by Chinese enterprises in order to help China's labor-intensive agricultural products seize foreign markets, and to ensure our right to participate in setting the prices of major agricultural products.
立即废除现在的征地制度，在落实《宪法》规定的"土地农民集体所有”的基础上，保障农民土地所有者地位——让农民拥有分享土地"农转非”资本化收益的权利。
We must immediately abolish the current land requisition system and, on the basis of implementing the Constitutional provision for "collective land ownership by the peasants,” secure the peasants' status as land owners, so they make use of the capital benefits of land transfer to non-agricultural uses.