I'm French, we've never been colonised (Romans and Gauls are too remote to be emotionally resonant) but we've been defeated and (partially) occupied a few times in emotionally relevant timescales.
So while I cannot fully understand the depth of the humiliation Chinese (or Xi?) feel about the 19C occupation and colonisation of China, I'd say I can imagine.
It's still moronic to declare yourself the mortal enemy of said foreign powers which, if they have not formally apologized for colonisation (have we? maybe?), were certainly doing their best to integrate you into the wider world and let you spread your wings, even at the expanse of some other people (Tibet, most notably ; and we would have closed our eyes to the Uyghur genocide too).
I am not an expert but I honestly don’t think you can equate Taiwan to Alsace Lorraine, if just in terms of relative size and historical economic significance.
But, more to the point, if the Taiwanese do not want to be joined with China, I think we should respect their wishes. Had China evolved differently and been able to “seduce” Taiwan into a merger, I’d have been happy with that outcome too…
The feelings of the Chinese are not central to the question and them refusing to acknowledge that is revanchism, on par with Putin declaring that Ukrainians shouldn’t have autonomy and should rejoice being Russians…
Fifty years ago, at the height of the cultural revolution, I nearly got a PhD. in classical Chinese history and literature. I read more original Confucian texts than most Chinese today, though not nearly as much as a candidate for the traditional Chinese civil service.
At that time, I concluded to myself that Confucian society, which promotes individuals as members of their families in concentric circles of influence and protection, had tremendous potential as a capitalist power. This structure encouraged economic risk-taking and creativity while protecting its members from the worst effects of setbacks. Chinese entrepreneurs have powerful support systems pushing them on. I saw this in the lives of pre-Han Confucians and in the great traditional Chinese novels. I see this as a driver behind China's tremendous success before its subjugation to the west during the decline of the Qing dynasty. Read Needham's Science and Civilization in China to understand the scale of that success.
The last few decades have confirmed my early conclusions.
Will I continue to be right? I'm not at all sure. Xi may be now promoting the worst part of the Chinese legacy: sycophancy and family-based corruption. Noah's suggestion that Xi is a mediocre guy who has taken advantage of his position as a prince of the elite sounds familiar to a reader of Chinese novels.
Networked computer communication provides more Chinese with a view of what is happening in the world outside their family compound or village than ever before. Their view reaches the U.S. and Europe even as Xi tries to suppress it. They see more possibilities than ever before. Correction may come faster than anyone expects.
Excellent piece. I wouldn't say China chose Xi, though. It's a tragedy of massive (of course, because it's China) proportions, but collective agency problems are very difficult to solve. We see the same issue in Russia.
Noah, you nailed it back when. Xi is a marginally-competent guy who leads by threats, but we have in the US at least four crime family bosses who are better at it. China deserves better, but I’m not sure that their political system can get them the leadership they deserve in time for it to mean anything. Meanwhile, people are suffering.
Execution of managers who violate international laws which don’t hold internally to China not only does not impress the world, it scares us. I’m thinking of the long-ago cat food horror, but there have been several more recent. The Obamas documentary made me think differently about how Chinese firms are run, but not so far as to reconsider that they are essentially enslaved to the Chinese government by force of habit and culture.
The biggest threat to our freedom/democracy was the January 6th insurrection attempt and corresponding attempt to throw out the election results because "Trump can't lose". The lockdown was fleeting and necessary. It is nothing like the zero covid control exercise going on in China still.
The Jan 6th insurrection was almost `ridiculously bad`. I was on the other side of the fence with lockdown, and in favour of the Great Barrington Declaration, and look what happened to them.
My main concern for Democracy is that it is being quietly subsumed by supranational issues, so that while the right to vote will remain, no vote will make a difference. You are right about the destructive nature of the Chinese lockdowns; that was where the idea came from. Remember the WHO praising them ? Now they are in trouble on various fronts, mostly to do with a lack of freedom of one form or another.
"And this, I think, is why China’s political and governance structure — an authoritarian one-party oligarchy — is far more inherently flawed than it appeared during the Deng and post-Deng years."
Continue to enjoy your content as it requires risk and opinion to be insightful.
Centralized control, especially extended to the provinces in the name of loyalty removes one of the last levers of remote innovation in the CCP. There's has been a great economic miracle and has brought hundreds of millions into the middle class. A return to centricity and authoritarianism prevents the one lever China desperately needs and that would be to extend taxing authority to the provinces. This would be the inverse of the strongman Xi and his consolidation of power.
The real estate bubble is almost certainly a result of the distortion within the provinces where the only ability to provide governance for booming population is to condemn and sell the underlying land to developers in a cycle that has now begun to undermine its value. As the only asset a newly middle-class citizen retains as an option, if real estate is simply at the whim of a national strongman, the future is dim.
I would add revanchism to Xi's list of sins.
I'm French, we've never been colonised (Romans and Gauls are too remote to be emotionally resonant) but we've been defeated and (partially) occupied a few times in emotionally relevant timescales.
So while I cannot fully understand the depth of the humiliation Chinese (or Xi?) feel about the 19C occupation and colonisation of China, I'd say I can imagine.
It's still moronic to declare yourself the mortal enemy of said foreign powers which, if they have not formally apologized for colonisation (have we? maybe?), were certainly doing their best to integrate you into the wider world and let you spread your wings, even at the expanse of some other people (Tibet, most notably ; and we would have closed our eyes to the Uyghur genocide too).
I am not an expert but I honestly don’t think you can equate Taiwan to Alsace Lorraine, if just in terms of relative size and historical economic significance.
But, more to the point, if the Taiwanese do not want to be joined with China, I think we should respect their wishes. Had China evolved differently and been able to “seduce” Taiwan into a merger, I’d have been happy with that outcome too…
The feelings of the Chinese are not central to the question and them refusing to acknowledge that is revanchism, on par with Putin declaring that Ukrainians shouldn’t have autonomy and should rejoice being Russians…
Fifty years ago, at the height of the cultural revolution, I nearly got a PhD. in classical Chinese history and literature. I read more original Confucian texts than most Chinese today, though not nearly as much as a candidate for the traditional Chinese civil service.
At that time, I concluded to myself that Confucian society, which promotes individuals as members of their families in concentric circles of influence and protection, had tremendous potential as a capitalist power. This structure encouraged economic risk-taking and creativity while protecting its members from the worst effects of setbacks. Chinese entrepreneurs have powerful support systems pushing them on. I saw this in the lives of pre-Han Confucians and in the great traditional Chinese novels. I see this as a driver behind China's tremendous success before its subjugation to the west during the decline of the Qing dynasty. Read Needham's Science and Civilization in China to understand the scale of that success.
The last few decades have confirmed my early conclusions.
Will I continue to be right? I'm not at all sure. Xi may be now promoting the worst part of the Chinese legacy: sycophancy and family-based corruption. Noah's suggestion that Xi is a mediocre guy who has taken advantage of his position as a prince of the elite sounds familiar to a reader of Chinese novels.
Networked computer communication provides more Chinese with a view of what is happening in the world outside their family compound or village than ever before. Their view reaches the U.S. and Europe even as Xi tries to suppress it. They see more possibilities than ever before. Correction may come faster than anyone expects.
Well written. Would recommend reading Fukuyama's "Bad Emperor" problem. https://www.the-american-interest.com/2012/05/28/chinas-bad-emperor-problem/?_ga=2.261411204.803161483.1666020309-1793206309.1666020309
So would this make Xi the CCP's Brezhnev?
And maybe, just maybe, 10-15 more years of "Xi stagnation" brings us a Gorbachev. Or maybe -most likely, I guess- not.
Does it require a war that becomes a quagmire as well?
Excellent piece. I wouldn't say China chose Xi, though. It's a tragedy of massive (of course, because it's China) proportions, but collective agency problems are very difficult to solve. We see the same issue in Russia.
Noah, you nailed it back when. Xi is a marginally-competent guy who leads by threats, but we have in the US at least four crime family bosses who are better at it. China deserves better, but I’m not sure that their political system can get them the leadership they deserve in time for it to mean anything. Meanwhile, people are suffering.
I should have said “we have in the tri-state area alone”
That’s all, as you were.
Execution of managers who violate international laws which don’t hold internally to China not only does not impress the world, it scares us. I’m thinking of the long-ago cat food horror, but there have been several more recent. The Obamas documentary made me think differently about how Chinese firms are run, but not so far as to reconsider that they are essentially enslaved to the Chinese government by force of habit and culture.
Fascinating piece!
What a great analysis! It summarizes a conclusion I've seen other observers increasingly struggle to reach as they express doubts and dismay.
Mr. Smith, you are awesome. Thank you.
Wow, thanks!!
This article is a nice sequel to the Economist podcast- “The Prince”.
Snap! https://twitter.com/JohnQuiggin/status/1581849749732618240
Ironic that China and Russia are showing that the suppression of freedom doesn't work, while in the West we have freedom and want rid of it !
We want to get rid of freedom?
What did I miss?
The lockdowns, Cancel culture, big tech censorship.....
The biggest threat to our freedom/democracy was the January 6th insurrection attempt and corresponding attempt to throw out the election results because "Trump can't lose". The lockdown was fleeting and necessary. It is nothing like the zero covid control exercise going on in China still.
The Jan 6th insurrection was almost `ridiculously bad`. I was on the other side of the fence with lockdown, and in favour of the Great Barrington Declaration, and look what happened to them.
My main concern for Democracy is that it is being quietly subsumed by supranational issues, so that while the right to vote will remain, no vote will make a difference. You are right about the destructive nature of the Chinese lockdowns; that was where the idea came from. Remember the WHO praising them ? Now they are in trouble on various fronts, mostly to do with a lack of freedom of one form or another.
Yeah I know people don't want to be held accountable for their words or take any responsibility for anything. Like spoiled kids.
Xi...sshh
"And this, I think, is why China’s political and governance structure — an authoritarian one-party oligarchy — is far more inherently flawed than it appeared during the Deng and post-Deng years."
I think the flaws were always there (see this HIV tranfusion story: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-nov-27-la-fg-china-blood-20101128-story.html or this one: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/08/world/aids-afflicted-villagers-say-chinese-police-attacked-them.html). For various Western elites didn't want to see that (because $MONEY$ for one thing) and China obviously worked to hide them.
"It’s almost as if democracy has something to recommend it after all. "
The West has one huge advantage in any contest with China: it's not ruled by the Chinese Communist party.
elm
peek through the holes punched in the masquerade and it looks a lot like the soviet union looked from the inside
Continue to enjoy your content as it requires risk and opinion to be insightful.
Centralized control, especially extended to the provinces in the name of loyalty removes one of the last levers of remote innovation in the CCP. There's has been a great economic miracle and has brought hundreds of millions into the middle class. A return to centricity and authoritarianism prevents the one lever China desperately needs and that would be to extend taxing authority to the provinces. This would be the inverse of the strongman Xi and his consolidation of power.
The real estate bubble is almost certainly a result of the distortion within the provinces where the only ability to provide governance for booming population is to condemn and sell the underlying land to developers in a cycle that has now begun to undermine its value. As the only asset a newly middle-class citizen retains as an option, if real estate is simply at the whim of a national strongman, the future is dim.
Nice.
Some countries have avoided one party state collapsing into dictatorship, such as: Vietnam and Singapore.