The engagement debate between the United States and China has been marked by animosity, with anti-engagers accusing engagers of bias. This paper provides an analytic view of the engagement process, focusing on institutionalized links between government agencies and think tanks, research institutes, and other organizations. The paper also discusses the failures of the West’s “engagement” strategy, the elements of a different approach to China, and the division of Russia.
The engagement debate has been rooted in optimism and bipartisan support since Nixon’s breakthrough in 1972. However, history sometimes turns on bad luck, as well as policy intentions and misassessments. The paper also discusses the role of military artificial intelligence (AI) in advancing China’s military power, with General Secretary Xi Jinping setting ambitious goals for the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
The paper also discusses the challenges of bilateral US-China tensions, which take center stage. While trade and societal interaction did not yield the broader benefits for democracies, a strong American response is needed. The engagement strategy with China depends principally on bilateral relations, and the paper identifies the assumptions underpinning engagement and describes the counterstrategy that China’s actions may not be the most consequential bilateral relationship.
In conclusion, the engagement debate between the United States and China has been marked by animosity, with some critics arguing that the West’s “engagement” strategy was grounded in modest expectations for gradual reforms.
📹 Is the West Getting China Wrong? – Keyu Jin & Gideon Rachman | Intelligence Squared
China’s power has been growing for decades. A formidable and emerging power on the world stage, the China that most …
Is China communist or capitalist?
Edit: Some scholars say that China’s economy is like a form of state capitalism. This is because the Chinese government controls a lot of businesses, but they operate like private companies. They keep all the profits for themselves. This model makes us question why the government owns so much and whether the term “socialist” is still relevant. It has also led to debate about how state profits are distributed. Some call it “party-state capitalism.” In 2017, the government started encouraging state-owned enterprises to pay dividends to the government. Other reforms have transferred state-owned assets to social security funds to help finance pensions. The Shenzhen municipal government has proposed using state-owned enterprises to finance a social dividend system for residents. Chinese economist Cui Zhiyuan says James Meades’ model of liberal socialism is similar to China’s socialist market economy and can help understand it. Meades’ market socialism model involved public ownership of firms with independent management. The state acts as a residual claimant to the profits generated by its enterprises, but doesn’t control the management or operations of its firms. This model has the advantage that the state would have a source of income that isn’t taxed or borrowed, which would reduce taxes on people’s incomes and the private sector while promoting equality. Cui says that the Chongqing experience shows that the socialist market economy model works. The Chongqing model used state enterprise profits to fund public services, providing the main source of public finance. This enabled Chongqing to lower its corporate tax rate to attract foreign investment.
What countries are China’s allies?
China has treaties of good-neighborliness and friendly cooperation with nine countries: Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea, Russia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan.
⑥China’s largest trading partners are Pakistan, North Korea, Russia, the Philippines, South Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Cambodia, Malaysia, Mongolia, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Japan, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Singapore, Indonesia, and Vietnam.
⑦The 25 neighboring countries that have signed Belt and Road cooperation documents with China are Afghanistan, Timor-Leste, Russia, the Philippines, the Republic of Korea, Kazakhstan, Laos, Cambodia, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Brunei, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Maldives, Singapore, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Indonesia, and Viet Nam.
How much does China owe to the US?
The United States owes China about $850 billion.
Who are America’s allies?
These countries are Fiji and Brazil. Japan and South Korea also have special relations with the US. A US report says the UK and Canada are the US’s closest allies.
Does the US depend on China?
China is the third largest U.S. trade partner after Mexico and Canada. In 2021, China imported $2.8 trillion worth of goods from the US, while the US exported $1.8 trillion worth of goods to China.
Who are Israel’s allies?
Arab–Israeli alliance: Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Jordan. The Arab–Israeli alliance is an unofficial security coalition between Israel and Arab countries. It was formed to protect the Gulf Cooperation Council from Iran. The United States has been promoting it since February 2019.
History The alliance started in the 2000s because the Israeli–Palestinian conflict was less important and there were tensions with Iran. By 2016, GCC states wanted to cooperate with Israel, which was involved in a conflict with Iran. The coalition emerged in November 2017. Relations between Israel and the Gulf States improved, and the media paid attention to this in February 2019. This week’s summit in Warsaw will test the main pillar of the Trump administration’s policy in the Middle East. Some believe that Israel and key Arab states can form an alliance against Iran, even though peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians seem unlikely. The Trump administration tried to create a Middle East Strategic Alliance (also known as the Arab NATO) including the GCC states, Egypt, Jordan, and possibly Morocco. In April 2019, Egypt said it wouldn’t take part. The pact has not been announced as of January 11, 2021. The UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco agreed to normalize relations with Israel in late 2020. This could have been an alternative to the Arab NATO alliance.In 2020, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco signed normalization agreements with Israel as part of the Abraham Accords. The Marshall Center looked at the Abraham Accords in October 2020. It said that the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain were involved, but that Sudan and Morocco hadn’t taken action yet. The Marshall Center said that the Abraham Accords made it easier for countries in the region to work together against Iran.
Why does China have tensions with the US?
Trade tensions are rising. The U.S. trade deficit with China rose from $273.1 billion in 2010 to $295.5 billion in 2011. The increase accounts for most of the growth in the U.S. trade deficit for 2011. In March, the United States, the EU, and Japan asked China to talk about its restrictions on rare earth metals. The United States and its allies say China’s quota is wrong, forcing companies to move to China. China calls the move “rash and unfair,” while vowing to defend its rights in trade disputes.
Dissident Flees to Embassy. On April 22, Chen Guangcheng, a blind Chinese dissident, escaped house arrest in Shandong province and fled to the U.S. embassy in Beijing. U.S. diplomats negotiate an agreement with Chinese officials allowing Chen to stay in China and study law in Beijing. But Chen changes his mind and asks to go to the United States. The development could damage U.S.-China relations. But both sides avoid a crisis by letting Chen visit the United States as a student, not as an asylum seeker.
New Chinese Leadership. The 18th National Party Congress ends with a big change in China’s top leaders. About 70% of the country’s top leaders are replaced. Li Keqiang is the new prime minister, while Xi Jinping is the new president, general secretary of the Communist Party, and chairman of the Central Military Commission. Xi talks about making China stronger.
Why do the US and China not get along?
The relationship between China and the United States has been complicated since 1949. Since the 1970s, the US-China relationship has been marked by disputes including Taiwan, the South China Sea, and Xinjiang. They have strong economic ties, but also compete for global dominance. China and the United States are the world’s second- and largest economies by nominal GDP and the largest and second-largest economies by GDP (PPP), respectively. Together, they make up 44.2% of the global GDP and 34.7% of the global GDP adjusted for purchasing power. One of the first major events between the United States and China was the 1845 Treaty of Wangxia. Trade grew slowly, and American capitalists talked about a giant buyers market in China. In 1900, the United States joined other countries in sending troops to China to stop the Boxer Rebellion. The Open Door Policy opposed the carving up of China into spheres of influence. American financial power didn’t become stronger as hoped. During the Taft presidency, efforts to help American banks invest in Chinese railways failed. President Roosevelt supported China during the Second Sino-Japanese War. The US supported the Republic of China (ROC), which had paused the Chinese Civil War. The ROC and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) fought the Japanese together after the US joined the war in 1941. After World War II, the US tried to negotiate a settlement between the Nationalists and Communists. The Communists won, drove the Nationalists into exile on Taiwan, and proclaimed the People’s Republic of China in 1949. The US and China’s new government didn’t get along. The Korean War was the first major conflict of the Cold War. China joined the war against the United Nations, sending millions of troops to prevent the US from entering China. The US refused to recognize the PRC as China’s government. It blocked the PRC’s membership in the United Nations. After the US ended the Vietnam War and the Cultural Revolution, President Nixon’s 1972 visit to China shocked many observers. It marked a change in US–China relations. On January 1, 1979, the US recognized the PRC as the legitimate government of China. However, it kept supporting the ROC on Taiwan, working within the framework of the Taiwan Relations Act. This issue still causes problems between the two countries. Every US president since Nixon has visited China, except Jimmy Carter. The Obama administration signed many agreements with China, especially on climate change. This was despite tensions caused by the East Asian pivot strategy. The Xi administration started a new period of tension with the United States. This was made worse by President Donald Trump, who promised to be tough on China during his campaign. He started to act like this when he became president. China was accused of militarizing the South China Sea, manipulating its currency, and spying on the United States. In 2017, the Trump administration said China was a strategic competitor. In January 2018, Trump started a trade war with China, which China called an unjustified containment strategy. The United States government banned American companies from selling equipment to Chinese companies linked to human rights abuses in Xinjiang. The US revoked preferential treatment towards Hong Kong after the passage of a security law in the city. It also increased visa restrictions on students from China and strengthened relations with Taiwan. China responded by adopting a tough stance against the US. By early 2018, some observers were talking about a new Cold War between the two countries. On the last day of the Trump administration in January 2021, the US officially recognized the Chinese government’s treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang as genocide.
Is China a 1st 2nd or 3rd world country?
Edit. Third World vs. Three Worlds Mao’s Three Worlds Theory is different from the Western theory of the Three Worlds or Third World. In the Western theory, China and India are in different worlds. In Mao’s theory, they are both in the Third World, which he defined as nations exploited by others.
Third Worldism Third Worldism is a political movement that argues for unity among third-world nations against first-world influence and non-interference in other countries’ domestic affairs. The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and the Group of 77 help third-world countries and third-world and first- and second-world countries work together. Some say it lets dictators get away with human rights violations and political repression.
Since 1990, this term has been redefined to make it more correct politically. The term “third world” originally meant a nation was “under-developed.” Today, it is replaced by “developing.”
How has the relationship changed over time between the United States and China?
Tensions between the United States and China have introduced new challenges, especially related to economics and defense. China is a big trading partner for the United States, but it is also developing its military. This makes it harder for the U.S. military. Also, foreign students and scholars—about a third of whom are from China—have helped universities with research and developed many of the country’s leading civilian and defense technologies. Some foreign students and scholars may share sensitive information with their home countries, which could harm U.S. interests.
Federal agencies could do a better job of addressing these issues.
In 2018, the Commerce Department found that the global economy was hurt by too much steel from China. In response, the President placed tariffs on some Chinese and other imports of steel and aluminum in 2018. Commerce can sometimes exclude products from these tariffs. Commerce rejected thousands of requests because companies made mistakes. The agency also took too long to decide most of the requests. Commerce changed its procedures for deciding such requests, but did not update its public guidance. Universities do important research for the government, but face challenges and risks. U.S. agencies have found that students from countries like China may be more likely to share technology with foreign entities. ICE keeps a database about these factors, but hasn’t assessed if it needs to be updated. Also, some ICE data on students’ access to technology is incomplete. Researchers must also disclose any information that could indicate a conflict of interest. However, federal grant-making agencies need to improve their policies to protect U.S. research from foreign influence. Agencies involved in addressing threats to university research have emphasized education and outreach, and they have targeted their outreach by analyzing risk factors to identify universities at greater risk. However, the Commerce Department has not set up a way to check these risk factors again and again to see if new threats have emerged. Universities also report challenges working with the DOD because of inconsistent interpretations of export controls, including how to assess whether a university is engaging in fundamental research.
Does the US agree with one China?
The United States did not say whether Taiwan is a country in its three joint communiques with China in 1972, 1979, and 1982. The United States said that both China and Taiwan want to be part of one China. The United States has not said that China has the right to rule Taiwan. The United States has not said that Taiwan is a country. The United States has not said that Taiwan is not a country. On December 2, 2016, US President-elect Donald Trump and ROC President Tsai Ing-wen talked about the close ties between Taiwan and the US. On December 6, Trump said the US doesn’t have to stick to its one-China policy. On February 9, 2017, Trump and PRC Paramount Leader Xi Jinping talked about many things. Trump agreed to honor the one-China policy at Xi’s request.
📹 What America gets wrong about China and the rest of Asia | David Kang | Big Think
David C. Kang is Maria Crutcher Professor of International Relations at the University of Southern California, with appointments in …
i am age 72 and was following US USSR AND China Politics since the Cuban missile crises also Vietnam US War. i appreciate her speaking about poverty pre 1980s yhat i followed because I was living in Canada since 1974 and Saw all the negatives but also facts on US Media. if US has 1.4 billions like China how would compare Their current per Capita growth to China now???😅😂
As a Westerner who lived in China, I found this very interesting and am most impressed with Jin Keyu, she has good insights into modern-day China. The interviewer however seemed to continuously focus on the negatives, so we didn’t get to hear some of the positives of China that we can all learn from. Very typical of a Westerner, I’m afraid. World Bank numbers show the percentage of China’s GDP associated with manufacturing value-added at 27%, which is at odds with her statement that China is still primarily a manufacturing-based economy. I wish the interviewer knew enough to question her on this.
Any of the questions thrown at her could very easily lead down to common Western media talking points and it’s amazing perusal her defusing them one by one. I’ve also noticed the host slowing down mid-sentence several times changing his wording to avoid sounding judgemental, great display of respect and professionalism.
One thing I don’t get is people always say US is so rich but if they are so rich then Why I see so many homeless people living on the street in US and why are people saying most Americans are living on pay check to pay check and why are most Americans have no savings and in deep credit card debt meanwhile most Chinese have savings and they don’t have credit card debt like the west thus please define rich again?
It felt like I was in a time machine back to 2019, pre-Covid, pre-Russian invasion, pre-spy balloon, pre-property market crash, etc. Alot has changed in the past 4 years that cannot be ignored, even though that is exactly what Keyu Jin did with lots of cooperation by the interviewer. We are now living in a different world with different expectations that cannot be undone. Get real, get now, baby!
I watched this interview. As a native Chinese myself I don’t think west hugely misunderstanding China(biased in some aspect maybe). In my opinion, what Miss.Jin trying to do here is just trying to rationalizing CCP’s policy decisions, nothing new or different from those Wolf warrior diplomatists, only she is more gentle and sweet-soft.
Productivity is the efficiency of production of goods or services expressed by some measure. Measurements of productivity are often expressed as a ratio of an aggregate output to a single input or an aggregate input used in a production process, i.e. output per unit of input, typically over a specific period of time.
I moved to North America in 90s from China. I was a doctor working in a general hospital before then. Comparing to North American education system, China’s colleges and universities are more focus in academic achievement instead of hands on skills. We have BCIT in Canada where many Chinese immigrants and their children learn how to fix cars and build houses and fit into the society very well. This kind of institutes are not popular in China. There’s a mentality in mainland Chinese community that people with higher degree would get better job better name and therefore more respectful. That might mislead some Chinese to choose a wrong college at the beginning. Even moving to overseas some Chinese people are still struggling if they should get a MA PhD or just a diploma from a college with practical skills. I would say the concept of social status and values are part of their obstacle for their choices.
my take is that she is of the generation which has experienced hardship and also reap the rewards of China fast growth. Her views reflect some of the older generation and also the new generation. Most western citizens probably has not experienced these mix, so would not understand the Chinese mentality.
The “private tuition” situation is not exclusive to China. It is a cultural issue as it is the same in Singapore, Malaysia etc within their Chinese communities. It has its place but in general just like any system it’s been abused and become counter productive. Their evolution into a whole process democracy has not been understood by our western centric mainstream media. Case in point the lack of basic understanding of Gideon was very apparent during this dialogue. That said a big shout-out to Gideon for this attempt to bridge the gaps and hopefully promote understanding void of inherent biases. In order to create the right catalyst towards win-win synergy, fabricated smearing propaganda has to be eliminated for the sake of everyone.
“Since 1979, do you know how many times China has been at war with anybody?” Carter asked. “None. And we have stayed at war.” He said the US has only enjoyed 16 years of peace in its 242-year history, making the country “the most warlike nation in the history of the world,” Carter said. This is, he said, because of Washington’s tendency to force other nations to “adopt our American principles.”
The hardships that Ms. Jin described in the 1980s (even going back to 1949 after the CCP seized power) were all caused by the disastrous policies and measures of the CCP, nobody else to blame. The West is not “getting China wrong”. On the contrary, Western countries are now closer to recognizing the true colors of the CCP than at any time in their history. The so-called “misunderstandings” are becoming less and less, not more: this greatly benefit the West. The only concern of the CCP, especially their tiny elite, is their political power, not anything else. The Western value system and political system are an existential threat to the CCP, so there is no so-called “mutually beneficial middle ground” between the CCP and the West, and only one side can exist in the future. No matter how Ms. Jin sugarcoats it, it can’t cover up this cruel situation. In fact, the CCP’s elite know it well.
Yes china became the biggest producer of evs, but the interviewer didnt ask how they did that. Its a chinese con, the make and register 1000s of ev which are then left in fields to rot! Each car is register so that the count as being sold when they’re not. The ev companies gets grants on the sales figures but the cars are all owned by the manufacturers. As i said a typical chinese con job!!
I think she is very wrong about the aging causing the economic slowdown. It is a major headache and cause. China and Japan are also different when it comes to the aging issue. Japan has experienced a gradual aging problem over decades, whilst China has a much more sudden aging issue due to its 1 Child policy and ‘femicide’. Secondly, Japan’s wealth distribution is a lot more equal compared to China’s. China is skewed so uneually that you could say there are 2 countries in China; east and west. Lastly, I do not think that she offers an unbiased perspective of China. I see her several times walking into Communist Party rhetoric.There is not a freedom of expression, so she cannot freely express her opinions as it is clear she still has roots in China.
An awesome conversation.. I got lot of new insight s about China. Hailing from a small state of India in the southern most coast KERALA, I have seen how many of my friend s in business of Furniture, LED, s and Fancy fittings and toys made millions between 2000-2015 by investing their capital with Made in China products… Now I got a glimpse of its organization culture and their vision..
Its not a system if people gets so desprite that they have nothing to loose so they protest. Then, and only then, the government takes note and changes but also records who were the organiser of said protest only to have the government arrest said organisers. Explain to me how that is an effective feedback system??
Well done, Ms Jin. I have listened to a few China born speakers who studied and stayed on in the West and they tend to say things their Western audience wants to hear. Like Gideon Rachman who appears to have a pre-conceived ideas of what present day China is like, ie., China the authoritarian regime and China the repressed society !! Like Tings Chak, Ms Jin speaks well and she presents China in a fair manner, backed by facts.
29:00 There is a misconception in the west that the CCP are so highly oppressive, that demonstration or social outburst is rare in China. In fact that is NOT the case in my experience. While it is true the Chinese people are in general more receptive and the authority is much more condescending, in fact “social demonstration” is quite common when there is a “injustice” or social need by groups of people, eg factories not paying salary, villagers not happy with village head etc. Like Keyu said, the social mechanism in China is for the authority to address the concerns raised when there is a social uprising. And the authorities are expected to act quick to resolve those uprising, or else they’ll lose their job. The quick removal of covid measure after the uprise has a positive note to the people, that it shows how quickly the authority can listen and act on social issues, although ideally they should have made it a much smoother process like in Singapore.
From reading the comments before listing to the interview, I was hoping for some insight into what the West gets wrong about China. Most of the comments were how unbiased the interview was, but I didn’t see that at all. The questions were softball questions that shed zero light on why the West sees China as a “formidable and emerging power on the world stage, the China that most Westerners think they know is an intimidating, authoritarian nation which plans to take over the world.” Except for the very last question of the interview when he finally asked a tough one. The information she gave I’m sure is very accurate, but most of it in a simplified form is known by Westerners already. Yes, we know about the shrinking population, the unemployment rate problems of college graduates, the push to increase the population, etc. All of this can be found on even the weakest news sites in the US, which is how I know. Where were the tough questions regarding China’s own racism problems, “bullying” of its neighbors, spying, industrial espionage and many others? What does the Chinese government really want? Frankly, I was very impressed with her knowledge of economics which is understandable given her pedigree. She is clearly liberal by American standards, but I not overly so. However, she comes across as one of many Chinese nationals that I have conversations with that spout the same old things about China just wanting to compete fairly without confrontation. Well, good luck with that. The reality for anyone who understands human nature and human history knows that it is inevitable that a superpower will start pushing people around, taking more than their share, try to dominate, hoard resources, etc.
Great interview. Just relax about China already. Their younger generation have the same aspirations as the west and therefore governing party is not interested in extending their hegemony. Note that she said all her chinese acquaintances are from a one-child-family however the Uyghur family she knew was allowed two. That anecdote must mean that the Uyghur in China are actually not a severely oppressed minority. And she is so articulate.
1. Jack Ma & Ant Group: This would have created a huge monopoly that would have dominated quite a few digital markets, not just e-commerce. The end group would have a quiet other major gaming companies, online entertainment, ET see… what does government it? What’s the prevent such a monopoly from taking place; to encourage more innovation and competition. 2. It also shows that in China, the billionaires and corporations do not run the government, and the government does oversee that business contributes to the people in the country, and not just benefit it’s billionaire owners. 3. Dissection may have wiped value from the stock markets; which benefit the rich. But by allowing more innovation from small start ups, they will provide more jobs and opportunities for the other 95%. 3. The US has broken up huge corporations in the past to allow fair competition, i.e. using the Anti-trust laws to break up Bell Telecommunications. They could’ve done more since…
This young woman presents herself as a seasoned China expert, which she clearly is not despite her upbringing in China. Her incomplete and rather one dimensional understanding of Chinese policy and economic development is at times charming but not basis for a serious discussion. Her father is a prominent Chinese government official and to a large extent her opinions reflect the opinions of the Chinese government, wittingly or otherwise.
When you compare the property market between Japan and China, you cannot ignore the control of the Chinese government on the “market price” of the property market. This include the government giving orders to set a minimum price for sellers. No other governments in the free world can do that. If you travel in China, you can see many “ghost towns” in many medium and small cities •••••••••blocks of new buildings sitting there with no or just a few occupants. This even occur in the outskirts of some big cities like Xian. This was my personal experience as early as 4 years ago when I travel to the north western provinces in China. Even in more prosperous cities around the so-called Greater Bay Area next to Hong Kong and Guangzhou, you can see the same phenomenon. I am sure you would not see this in Japan, a totally free commercial market, before the property bubble burst. My point is, the “market price” is not falling in the Chinese property market doesn’t mean it is still healthy as professor Jin believes. It only means the bubble will be much bigger than that of Japan’s when it burst. And the harm it brings might be in decades.
What being said here economically is not largely misunderstood. So what’s misunderstood or understood is not really being addressed; Elite arguably corrupted political system and emperor-like leader she dares to touch? Hope the discussion goes much deep and beyond, not dictated by the contents raised in the book which are known facts hardly misunderstood.
The statement that 20% of collegue graduates are unemployed is not correct because the number correspond to the statistics for 16 to 24 year old population, of which most of them are not collegue graduates, but the labor force without a higher education degree. For those with higher education degree, the number drops to about 3%, which is normal among all big economic entities. I believe that it’s better for Prof Jin to study and dive more in the statistic facts before run into the conclusion.
With the state set to consume China’s property industry, what could go wrong? For a start, state firms face dangerous debts. Local-government firms sit on estimated collective debt of 75trn yuan, or about 60% of gdp. When such firms buy land from local governments they merely shift money from one pocket to another. These transactions have kept money flowing into local coffers, but are building up unsustainable burdens. Some local-government firms have started to issue bonds for the sole purpose of paying off other companies’ debts. Analysts fear that this level of spending cannot continue much longer, especially in poorer provinces.
All very well and interesting, but does it all mean that the politbureau will desist in nationalist expansionism? Or will it lead to even greater nationalism and expansionism in order to stifle criticism of the elite and demands for greater freedoms? Will these changes in her social bubble (educated, coastal society – “for me and also a large swath of the Chinese people who have had education in the West,” her ivory tower? – as opposed to the rest of the 1.4bn, working class, much less wealthy – poor – inland societies) alter how the Chinese politbureau relates to the neighbouring countries, like Vietnam, Philippines, etc?
This will not age well, especially her suggestion that the property sector is fit for purpose, the govt made it illegal for developers to lower prices for a start!! And when property is the only place to put your money because their is no alternative, you are on thin ice as an economy. Factor in the 100+ million over count since ‘one-child’ . Their demographic pyramid is in reality very much like S Korea with fertility rates below 1 in major cities. On the up side having 4 grandparents to every one grandchild is going to sort out childcare 😉
‘Tofu dreg’ construction is causing problems throughout China. Also, Typhoon Doksuri recently created a lot of devastation; Chinese people in certain areas very unhappy with central government (e.g.) about release of flood waters–‘to save’ Beijing–into places like Zhuozhou, among many other problems. Forbidden City flooded for the first time in 600 yrs. Bad omens as it were. China and US seem dangerously vulnerable right now. Chinese and Americans should be talking publicly and privately to each other…regularly. This is an extremely important relationship–and currently very fraught, as everyone knows.
What I wonder about is the attitude of the young in China with regards to the west. Let’s take this seemingly lovely lady. With her dad being a CCP guy, I find it hard to remain open to her thoughts and put on a big big shield. Let’s say I’m wary. And I feel justified in it. So do the youth in China also display this wariness towards western people and their opinions and motivations? Because with this type of distance, I find it hard to see any corporation.
There’s not a property bubble in major cities because expectations about the future justify the high prices? I don’t think that sounds right. It’s come out the stock market playbook. If Chinese incomes are much lower than western countries, yet home prices are as high, there’s clearly an affordability issue. It sounds like things have become highly speculative. That’s surprising because it points to possible lending issues, which you’d expect a state directed economy to regulate more judiciously.
“Property is an obsession of the Chinese”… except they can’t OWN it… they can only “lease” it from the government for a given period (usu. 100 years), but even then the government, local and national, may take it off you arbitrarily for whatever reason, including corrupt officials who want to enrich themselves building an unnecessary project using national subsidies.
then, why are so many Chinese, and families coming to the US, buying houses, and sending their kids to private schools? from where I live, the numbers are growing recently, those, of course, could afford to come here. those who don’t come here, because they could not afford it, most likely still love to come.
We just have to see how Cuba and North Korea are struggling to survive as a nation under trade embargo & economic sanctions by US & its Allies …… in order to understand & visualize how tough & difficult it was then (from 1949 to 1979) for PRC (aka Red China) on the mainland, under Chairman Mao, to survive as the new China in comparison with ROC (aka Free China) on the Taiwan region, under Generalissimo Jiang Jieshi who was then having excellent diplomatic, economic & trade relations with US & its Allies. It was only in 1972 that the CPC govt of PRC was accepted as the legitimate representative govt of China (as the KMT govt of ROC was expelled from the U.N.) …. and after 6 years later, in Yr 1979 that US decided to establish diplomatic relations with PRC. Henceforth, PRC under Chairman Deng Xiaoping was ready to engage fully in international trade and to invite foreign investments in its state-planned capitalist economic system (blended with the socialist principles) to propel China forward to become “advanced developing nation”, (even though it may become No.1 economy) in order to improve the living standards & conditions of several millions of the Chinese people in China. But, if I’m not wrong, according to Prof John Mearsheimer …. US must always be No. 1, second to none ….. and US will never allow any country (whether it is Russia, India, China or any other nations) to take over its No. 1 position (even if each of those nations is as democratic as US, with a 100% similar Constitution & voting system) .
I still remember when my grandmother told me to “eat all my vegetables” because kids in China were starving. But in 2002 I first ventured to China (mostly metropolitan areas of (Shenzhen, Shanghai, and Guangzhou) and many smaller areas. I have returned over two dozen times. What I found was that as I walked though these area there was an enormous amount of available food of which I partook. I love to try different cuisines and enjoyed walking through the street markets giving me that opportunity. The people of China were very friendly and accommodating to someone only speaking a modicum of Chinese. People too often confuse governments with the people of the same country.
This episode reminds me a very popular documentary “7 Up” – Give me a boy (/Child) when was 7, then I will give me a man (/woman). So she could fit between 3th and 4th ones? It would be interested to listen to her when she reaches 6th or 7th stages late. I view on the current Cold War II is based on a recognition 40 year Productionalization Upshift. Her memoire like narrative is factual based. But she hasn’t touch profound social bases that shores up Cina Leninism based authoritarian regime and its special structure historically and sociologically. Therefore, her defense on the Regime, if there is such, is very thin and not worthwhile to raise a particular concern to me socially. Maximum, without prejudice, it has been one of masterpieces of the United Front which was ranked as number one treasure by Mao in 1939.
If the western countries want to move ahead further, it is good that they understand China. And Keyu Jin’s book helps in this matter. But it is equally important for the western people to understand themselves also because, as the great Chinese strategist wrote in his famous book “The Art of War”, if you know yourself and know your enemy, you will win one hundred battles. But if you know your enemy but you don’t know yourself, or if you know yourself but not your enemy, you have only 50% chance of winning. And if you don’t know yourself and don’t know your enemy, you have 0% chance of ever winning a single battle. The biggest and most important difference between China and the western countries is their different economic models. The economic model that China uses is based on the hard work and ingenuity of its people, and on trade and peaceful cooperation with other countries. This model makes China rich and allows China to help other countries to become rich also. The Belt and Road Initiative, which the Chinese government launched in 2013, is one example of how China cooperates peacefully with other countries for the benefit of all the countries that participate in it. And all countries are invited to join the program. On the other hand, the economic model that the Western countries use to enrich themselves is based on stealing the wealth of the non-western countries, using brute force (military might) and other devious means such as lying, cheating, sanctioning, blackmailing, coercion, threats, etc.
China has had peace for 40 years and had not engage in major warfare for 60 years. But her success and influence is threatening the status quo or “rules based international order”. For China to maintain that peace, it must be able to deter aggression. Russia has pretty much remained safe while it declined because of its military might, a lesson for China. If you want to be left alone, you need to discourage any thought of aggression. You do that by being a giant gorilla, like Russia or US. You either have a huge nuclear arsenal or a huge military force or both, money can only be used for appeasement or influence but not deterrence.
You know what? Gideon got it right on the very first statement – a clash of interest. But here, the aggressor is the US, who wants to continue to be the world’s number one. The defender is China, who does not want the the US to hold it back by whatever means. All the other noise are just the excuses put in place by the aggressor to achieve its aim – human rights, freedom, Tibetian suppression, Xinjiang suppression, “national interests”. Keyu has to talk about these topics delicately, as she is living in a western economy. The world is gravitating into two major blocs, the old G7 bloc + followers (the western bloc) and the China- Russia bloc + followers (the southern bloc). Much will happen before one bloc decides to work well with the other bloc. This time will come unless .. We just hope that no hot wars happen whilst the two blocs are positioning themselves.
I’ve heard this “stability and harmony” slogan zillions of time already. I start to believe that Chinese really think that stealing intellectual property is OK as long as this bolsters their imperialist agenda (“for the people!”), and spending less on weapons than USA make them basically a “peaceful nation”. USA has its own imperialist mindset but the real difference between them is that, for the time being, China simply does not have the tools to do exactly what USA did/does. Not to mention that their culture of “stability” for the West means simply curbing the freedom of expression and silencing the voices of dissenyt (Ai Wei Wei knows something about that). There is no “cultural misunderstanding”. It’s civilizational difference. Just like with Putin, for the Westerners electing yourself for life (Xi is just precious…) is pathetic, however hypocritical West might be on ther issues. End of story
The root of Western civilization, “Monotheism”, is characterized by double standards.\r During the period of ancient Roman city-state civilization, monotheism was used to distinguish “believers” from “pagans”, thus forming a national system and building a Western society.\r For example, in the middle world, if you don’t believe in God, no matter if you are white or black, whether you are a commoner with high morals or a robber who commits all kinds of crimes, you are not considered a “human being” in the West at that time, and any believer is Can kill you and rob you of your wealth without breaking the law.\r So that’s the basis of Western slavery.\r At that time, if you were a “pagan” you were a slave, you were not allowed to own property, all your labor output was occupied by “believers”, and “believers” could freely exchange and distribute these slaves huge wealth generated. (Note: 90% of the city-state population in ancient Rome were slaves, and less than 10% of the real civilians)\r In the so-called “Renaissance” in the West, the religious power of the Renaissance began to decline, and the bourgeoisie and the powerful began to take power.\r These new power holders need a new set of “monotheistic” rhetoric to package their bloody and barbaric or profitable means. “Theory of Civilization” was born\r The West under this system of discourse is “civilized”, while the non-“West” is all barbarians.\r “We civilized people enslave you to bring you civilization.” This is what the West wanted to say at the time.
I don’t know what she wrote but I don’t hear her saying anything new here. The Chinese played the game of ‘you abused me’ for the past hundred years against the West all the while benefiting greatly from the very imperialism that they were accusing of, half genuinely, and becoming herself the de facto, very genuine and even worse type of, imperialist. Think of what happened to and still happening to Southern Mongolia, East Turkistan and Tibet, etc. and how a tiny country of China expanded to what we see as ‘China’ on today’s world political map, at least partially thanks to the greed and idiocy of the major Western powers. Now, the Chinese started playing the game of ‘you misunderstood me’ and I believe they are going to play it for another hundred years or longer, unless they find something even better en route. She I believe is one such type. I don’t know where she draws the line between what she’s calling the old and new so called generations, but to me, no matter how many generations they are talking about, all these smooth-talking, sleek looking and somewhat ‘Western educated’ Chinese, they all have one thing very in common. That is their intellectual dishonesty.
Graduates in non-graduate jobs isn’t unusual in many countries, so it’s not surprising that there are graduates in China in non-graduate jobs, it’s a very similar picture in the West. There are graduates in the west working in fast food outlets making minimum wage. The world sold this generation that going to University was the best solution for future success, now many countries have a lack of those qualified in vocational skills that don’t require a degree. Then on top of that you have a section of the younger generation who have basically given up, the sort of why bother, when house prices are beyond reach, rising inflation and low wages. They feel like they take one step forward and two steps back, constantly failing to catch up, and have just become fed up with the whole system.
Too many softball questions. How about the impact of Xi’s aggressive Wolf Warrior Diplomacy, with no justification enforced their claim to almost the whole South China Sea, oppressing all the other countries? No mention of what has caused almost all of China’s close and far neighbors to form military alliances against it: from Japan, India, south Korea, Philippines, Vietnam Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, even far off Australia, Now even NATO is doing FONs in the SCS. The UN Tribunal at UNCLOS has ruled against their land grabs in the SCS but China has doubled down. These are the most presing issues that have caused almost all their neighbors to be against China, Not good at all. This Chinese economist paints China to be a Saint! She’s a shill and agent for China embedded in the West. Wake up people. The West is always bad and China is always good. Propaganda!
I like to hear both sides of things but to say China has a positive outlook while in 2023 only 45 billionaires left China LOL I know everywhere has its problems but to basically lie to the interviewers face and say falling real estate prices weren’t much of a worry is ludicrous. 30% of China’s wealth is tied up in real estate and it’s estimated in some capital cities houses fell by up to 80%.. also less demand for iron ore and other metals which is a clear sign of manufacturing reduction. Sorry but you can suspend the youth unemployment figures all you want but the truth will get out eventually
She is relatively eloquent, but something is not quite right. Of course, she knows the Western appetite very much and made the mesmerizing recipe to convince the West that it’s reasonable to hold some hope and expectation for China. The current problems are just technical issues in the implementing procedure, and China will be negotiable and cooperative through Xi’s fine-tuning and sophisticated adjusting.
This kind of conversation and understanding is necessary. Even though no human and country are completely perfect. However, clearing the prejudices, especially ’cause “the fog of misunderstanding” that has been deployed by the US/Western media generally, important and necessary for the world community.
Of course the West is considering China wrongly, but the real problem is that it is a result of the West’s persistent dominant and imperialist ideology.\r \r China, like any country or group of people, represents wealth and opportunity. The terrible mistake of considering China a “threat” is not only disrespectful, but an indicator of ignorance and obsolescence of the West’s identity.\r \r The West has a lot to repair, and curiously, that repair is in the future the solution to the confluence of consequences that the imperialist mentality has developed and, unfortunately for everyone, continues to develop.\r \r In any case, China is a wonderful opportunity and the Silk Road is the most interesting project that has never emerged before in the magnitude that could be developed today. But not to try to dominate the project but to shape it by sharing opportunities and coordinating responsibilities.\r \r The West must reflect on its persistent dominance mentality. It is not about dominating but rather contributing and shaping. These are not vertical masculine structures but horizontal equality. Peace
China has five thousand years of history, culture and civilization and knows very well that mutual trust and respect are extremely important to foster good relationships among countries. China also has the motto not to entangle with the national policies and internal affairs of other countries. Theses are the pillars of China’s success which the US and the west can never copy.
Just because the Chinese government changed after protests by the young, does not mean there is a system in China to allow changes. Similarly, just because black people protested against police shooting and caused charges to the officers, it does not mean the US system worked to address the problems. If the system worked, people did not have to protest.
To the haters here who say she has a vested interest because of her background … She also has a vested interest in helping to keep UK top universities leading, and financially viable, and make sure UK students remain competitive. She is a professor at LSE. So you want to talk about her dad, be fair and also talk about what she is doing to contribute to the West and its understanding of China. In any case, I think most in the UK are smart enough to discern between the likes of “lying through his ass” Trump and Boris Johnson. And the smarts of Margaret Thatcher and Ms. Jin. Then again, many in the West are also blinded by racism and misogynism.
She is speaking the party line to answer every question. I could guess every answer she gave because I’ve heard it from official Chinese mouthpieces before. That said, there is value in hearing what the Chinese government has to say to understand and predict behavior. Also, of course, the Chinese perspective has valid points.
Unfortunately, she didn’t have any serious concerns about China’s real estate bubble at this point. However, in reality, China is facing a debt crisis ten times the size of Japan’s bubble burst. With this level of awareness from economists, it is no wonder that the general public does not notice the bubble. 25% of college graduates are unemployed, so how can they buy real estate? The structure of local government support for businesses that she boasts about is the structural flaw in the real estate bubble. When real estate investment, the source of funds for local finances, collapses, where can the funds for local finances come from? Does she have an answer to this question?
“we were so poor that we had to read by candle light” Lin the truth. Jin was born in Beijing, China. Her father, Jin Liqun, is an economist and politician who previously served as the vice minister of finance of China and is the current president of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. At the age of 14, Jin moved to New York to attend Horace Mann School and later to Cambridge, Massachusetts to attend Harvard University, where she received her B.A., M.A. and PhD. Jin currently resides in London.
To understand China n their people, one must know the historical events that shaped the current political n economic approach. A couple hundred years ago China was bullied n stampled upon by the western n Japanese aggressors. She remembered that humiliation and has been determined to become strong through hardwork and pragmatism, so that no countries can bully her again. By the way, China has never used invasions nor colonisation to get ahead, so far preferring the peaceful route of economic development n cooperation. And under Xi Jin Ping successfully wiped out corruption. China has done so well, they have lifted millions of their people out of poverty, and the world also benefited from cheap products made in China. Many people’s perception is that the west and India are jealous n hurls all kinds of accusations against china (human rights, Tibet, Taiwan) trying to interrupt china esp in technology. No one benefits from all these tensions. In fact the world is getting more dangerous, trade disrupted, unstable, n more difficult to work together.
Her father is a Chinese politician and is currently the President of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). He was formerly the Chairman of China International Capital Corporation, the Vice President of the Asian Development Bank, and the Vice Minister of Finance of the People’s Republic of China. Would she say anything out of line that would put her father in danger? An academic like her can be both critical to the West and China but chooses to be silent re China and just refers to issues as challenges.
One could see the conflict between US and China rising for the past 20 years. Fundamental issues are at the heart of it, that are not being discussed: 1) Human nature, which acts in accordance to the system imposed upon it, be it west or east, 2) culture of course, etc. From there one can start to talk about history, economics, politics. China and US are in conflict because of great differences in fundamental perspectives about themselves and the world. The global world, which has become very small over the past generation is controlled by those who grew under different circumstances and are unable to look at the big picture from a fundamental perspective, getting lost in the conversation about communism, capitalism, control, freedom, and on and on. Fearing the other side is natural and in reality healthy under the current circumstances. But fear is also part of the equation leading to poor decisions and played on by leaders for the purpose of maintaining power. Under the current circumstances, which seem and are insurmontable do to the basic nature of the divisions, the lack of wisdom of people in general and leaders in particular. Decoupling is the right path for both nations (and the world) and hopefully it is pursued peacefully. The best we can hope for is that with some significant decoupling. that in the future all sides, run by a new generation who see the world with a bit more insight and wisdom, with India likely becoming the most powerful nation added to the mix will bring about a new world order more beneficial to us peasants who must live under circumstances imposed on us because we haven’t the knowledge and wisdom to see things as the truly are: limited to our own circumstances, education, experiences.
Don’t get China wrong, all the 20s and 30s people right now are NOT all highly educated (though you could say that if you compared them to their parents). She might be talking about those who have “made it” academically and are mostly in the first tier cities. That represents a lot of people, but it’s not a majority of this age group. They are not very very smart and educated on the whole. But, a good portion is. Strokes too broad and generous there.
The problem is technology is misunderstood: the believe a ford automobile is equal to an EYE phone the reason why you have a techno feudalism which is the process of a new feudalism where industrialists and bankers take onece again a back seat. and you get a a correct feudalism where intelligence rules rather than economy. Rê-Atoum, le dieu créateur
Interesting. My comment on the core teachings of Confucius was posted just last night. It’s already been deleted. Indications of this being propaganda. Edit – What I had written about the teachings of Confucius was this. In the first chapter of the first Book (there are a total of 4 books) of the teachings of Confucius, which are collections of his teaching by his students, it says… To put to use (to practice) what one learns, is this not delightful? To be visited by a friend who has come from a far distance, is this not happiness? To live your life as you know you should, though you are not famous, is this not the way of the gentleman? Note ; To practice what you know – not to preach To find true happiness without the need for material wealth To take responsibility for your own decisions in life and not rely on the opinions of others. These are the basic tenets of Confucianism. Note that Confucius did not make the governing of people the main concern of his teachings. The ethical and moral lessons, themselves, would result in good governance if one should fine himself/herself in such a role. That’s why a ruler should treat his/her subjects as a father/mother would treat their own children. Let’s see if this addition to my post is deleted.
I have no idea what to think. She seems genuine and speaks well, but it’s possible to have a bias and do that at the same time. Everyone does, but if the most strong points she makes against China are mild and always couched in good things, does that point to a complete marriage to balanced thinking and objectivity? I really don’t know. Maybe all the bad stuff we hear about China is just wrong, but maybe it’s a little of that stuff being right and a little of her being too positive while still being right about stuff as well. I’m not taking this as my new view on China yet.
SHOCKING!! I find that Rachman’s questions display a deep undertone of western superiority – despite him having spent many years in the Orient. He seems STILL incapable of grasping that the Western model is broken and that maybe – JUST MAYBE – there might be alternative ways of running a country/nation/regime which can achieve a successful and peaceful outcome without the need to grandstand and chest beat – which is what is largely coming out of Western countries. It was actually best summed-up by Hassan Al Thawadi, the Chief Executive of Qatar’s World Cup organising committee. When confronted about laws concerning gays in public bla bla bla, he responded by saying that in the West, the emphasis is on INDIVIDUAL welfare and prosperity, whereas in the Middle East the emphasis is on the COL:L:ECTIVE. Whilst that was referring to personal liberties and moralities, the same could largely be applied to china too. Yes, its’ different, but in no way inferior – indeed it is in many ways far superior. As to Keyu Jun – wow – what an impressive young lady she is!!!
What struck me about her very last comment, where she said that Peace and avoidance of war is number 1 priority of the CCP. If you look at the conduct of the Chinese Coast Gurd in the South China Sea, they just dieing to start an armed confrontation with all other nations patrolling in the area. So, waht she said does not match with the conduct of the CCP in the South China Sea. So, what should we think of her? A credible independent academic or a front for the CCP?
Ms. Jin put up so many things so obvious and make so many explanations on Xi’s policies both on politics and economy without any points of views of her own. She even wouldn’t cast any doubts on Xi’s Z-turns in the past ten years. It feels like a hollow mind which make herself a propaganda machine other than a professor on China issues.
Whoever is saying that she’s very intelligent and well prepared..they failed to notice that the opposite person has no idea of Chinese language or system to do counters. She lied easily bcz ther other was so unprepared. I really want to see her against someone like “Palki Sharma”, Dr. S. Jaishankar, Sumit Peer, Major Gaurav Arya etc. Or the analyst who has expertise on China and has better questions to ask, and is prepared with data and facts to counter her lies…
There is no misunderstanding. Keyu Jin’s generation saw China’s enormous growth and opening up. However, Xi is reversing course and reinstating Marxist, repressive policies. Chinese Gaokao, the high school graduation exam, requires answering questions about Xi’s thoughts !!! Unless the CCP is overthrown and replaced by democratic rule with a free press and the rule of law, China’s CCP is the greatest threat to world peace and the welfare of the world’s people. I am Chinese, admire Chinese people and proud of the historical achievements of China, but the CCP is a scourge on the people of China from the 1960 famine to the Cultural Revolution and now the dictatorial, repressive rule of Xi Jing Ping. Does Ms. Jin dare to say anything negative about the CCP? Does Ms. Jin dare to say anything even mildly critical of Xi? She is either a propagandist of the CCP or she lives in a fantasy world.
China has not been in a war lately….. but has a lot of issues with its neighbours… and has had a very aggressive posture towards its neighbours in the southchina Sea,as well as with its biggest neighbour in the north. ( India). Just today, the USA signed agreements to cooperate with India in the field of economy, high technology, and military. This will become the biggest threat to the Chinese economy. India has got the talents that it takes to benefit from a diversification of investments from the USA and the European Union. Will China survive?
This seems very much a failed performance. In comparison, there is a cadre of young English speaking ladies on internet sharing the peculiar backgrounds that make China acts the ways they do today. While they have not gone beyond official talking points, ranging from 5000 years culture to 100 years of humiliation, all are quite articulate, take a softer approach with skills honed in soliciting empathy. Therefore, they did succeed to various extents in reducing animosity. This guest is probably less effective in that aspect. She showed no appreciation or interest of where the “haters” are coming from. She is more like a rapid fire topic-trained ChatGPT whose answers are at the end about China system being better and government decisions being correct. (Btw, one cannot help thinking she had memorized all the party lines given that sometimes she had to say “let me start over” before pouring out a swathe of talking points in response to certain questions). Propaganda is not debate if your target is behind enemy line. This debate style works if the propaganda target is actually your own folks who want to feel “strong” and “winning”.
China is technologically very, very strong. According to ASPI, China leads the world in 37 out of 44 technological fields. Let’s look at some of China’s most remarkable technological achievements… China is the first, and only, country to land on the far side of the moon. China is the third country to land a rover on Mars… on its maiden attempt without a hitch! China built its own space station, Tiangong, after it was banned from the ISS. China is the only other country capable of building super aircraft carriers. The first one, Type 003 Fujian, launched last summer and China has 3 more on order. China has hypersonic missiles while the USA does not (yet). China has one of the world’s most advanced stealth fighters, J-20. China leads the world in 5G and 6G. China leads the world in green energy technology, including EV batteries.
I am sorry but if we are citing survey/data sources from China, a massive bag of salt is needed. If the young people in China doesn’t feel inspired by western democracy and economy, why so many want to leave and go overseas? Why do they not want to get married and start a family? People say a lot of things but actions speak louder than words.
She sounds like she’s aiming for a nice CCP job. I’ve been teaching Chinese students for over 20 years and lived there for a number of years. The students I have now don’t talk like she does. Xi has shown them that China is heading in a dangerous direction and they are really against the CCP now. Actually, she talks like the Chinese people I know who have lived in the west for a long time. For some reason they are always more supportive of the Chinese ‘system’ than the ones who actually still live there.
Interesting interview, but maybe not quite for the expected reasons. Ms Jin comes across less as an academic, but more as a journalist stitching headlines and personal views together. She has views on economics (fair enough), politics, software, demographics, the housing market, the education system… and it shows quite regularly by contradictions and inconsistencies… there is also a remarkable willingness to explain and excuse CCP action. Plenty of important issues receive no mention at all (Taiwan, city-rural divide, government sponsored industrial espionage…). I don‘t think I will put her book on my reading list.
Jin keyu seems to be overall quite China-positive. There are several points on which her positivity rests but are not well explained/reasoned, eg why there was no massive property collapse like Japan, but doesn’t mention cheap government money at all; an ageing population will not be a massive future drag on economy, but why?; Chinese people are pro Party, but doesn’t mention huge government propaganda spending in the last decade; tries to say that the end of covid policies shows Party listens to the people, but doesn’t mention why they choose and persisted with such ruinous policies in the first place…
In Prof Jin’s new book “The New China Playbook”, at the beginning, there is such a comment: The biggest difference between socialism and capitalism is dynamic innovation—capitalism’s most fundamental virtue, delivered by mechanisms such as property rights protection and competition, which are notably weak in socialist systems (Table 1.1). Innovation is NOT capitalism’s main virtue! The Internet, for example, was invented by a US state-funded venture! What more example do you need for how innovation is not that? Anyway, Imma continue reading, other than this comment, the openning has been a good read so far. edit: In that same paragraph Prof Jin continues to say how China’s different. China’s success is not an exception to the rule. The rule itself is simply false.
The U.S. and China should jointly sponsor the creation and management of a canal through the Kra Peninsula in Thailand. This would lower shipping costs for everyone on earth and its effect would be lasting and substantial. it would diffuse the whole Malaca and Sunda Strait game of geopolitical checkpoint to a good degree. The US should promote protectionism strategically: for example, we would have to invest tens of billions to bring solar panel production here and no one in government is promoting that kind of investment. Sooo: why is there a 40% tariff on solar panels from China? That’s very much against American interests (but fully in line with fossil fuel lobby interests). The US government is almost completely captive to military industrial and other giant corporate lobbying interests… the very structure is designed to thwart the popular will, from the existence of the senate, to the electoral college, to the lifetime appointment of Supreme Court judges (3 justices should be appointed each presidential term and each justice tenure should last 12 years). Likewise, the PRC crushes popular dissent and is drug between the excessive power plans of one strongman to the next. Sometimes these plans deliver benefits, many times they don’t. BOTH countries are locked into a course which is suboptimal, unjust, undemocratic, and highly influenced either by state control of media and communication or heavily consolidated corporate control of media, search, and content. There is not a lot of room, given these realities, for course correction, either internally or in relation to one another.
Keyu Jin gives us an intimate insight into the experience of the average Chinese citizen. Her understanding of the international repercussions of Xi Jing Ping’s “Wolf Warrior diplomacy”, however, is non-existent. So her predictions on the possibility of war in some form or he other cannot be trusted.
Re EV outputs- it has been shown that these have been hugely skewed. There are vast stores of registered sales of vehicles, that are now rotting in the 10 of thousands in fields. Car sharing now Car graveyards! I appreciate a different perspective but she seems blind to problematic issues. The same happened with bikes. Products I have purchased from China are of a poor standard. Comparable quality are of a comparable price.
I teach Chinese language with humor and cute pictures.\r Learn Chinese to get firsthand information about China. Life is all about perspective. The sinking of the Titanic was a miracle to the lobsters in the ship’s kitchen.\r Chinese characters still retain their pictographic origins. Knowing what the characters look like originally can help understand the meanings and remember them vividly. \r I’ve spent about 100,000 hours studying English humor and Western culture, and many years studying Chinese culture and jokes. My native language is Chinese.
Rachman seems to have problem believing that Chinese people are preferring their way of living than Americans. It is incredible how we west people, we are stuck in our Capitalism Paradigm. The US is one of the most inequitable country on the planet (internally and toward other countries). And we still look at them as a kind of role model. Better to change our role model if we want to go through the climate challenges in front of us, and in way that will equitable for everyone, including the global south!
Terrible… so much people, so big unemployment, so huge vacancies…. In Germany the same… I think our systems are not good. … But nannies from Columbia are guaranting great education of children… I think this is not bad…. The job is the last what I look at as a necessary base for the lucky life…
To be very frank, even some in the current Chinese leadership got it wrong. 「大同」has always been the main stream thinking 「思維」of China. Dynasties that can achieve and sustain it are glorified, supported and embraced, and considered as 「天命」or 「天名」or 「天意」(i.e. blessed by God). Outstanding and longest ones are Han, Tang and Qing dynasties (all lasting for over 3 centuries). KMT under Dr. Sun (孫中山) and Chiang failed to achieve it. CPC under Mao and later Deng have barely achieved it in 70 years. Going forward into the future, we don’t know. However, as I said before, according to 「易經」, China (and perhaps the whole world) has just come out of 「否」卦 (over last 3 years) into 「同人」卦 (it could be any of the 64 oracles 卦, but, however, my view, its 「同人」卦), with its essence and meaning as “forming alliances, friends…” (which is what happening now). Whether the outcomes are favorable or unfavorable, good or bad, according to the concept of 「因果」, we don’t know but in anyway, it is relative regardless. My view.
Biggest part of business is trust. How do you trust CCP’s words of 50 years of 1 country 2 system disappearing in just 20 years? How about China’s support for invader Russia in Ukraine war? China latest use of military force were 8964, Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong. All internal wars. Lure them in, close the door, and beat them to submission has been repeated for 30+ years. 🤷🏻♂️
Only partially true of her characterization of China， an example: she said that students coming back to China after studying abroad with high aspirations and meanwhile Columbia graduate back to China work8ng on the cigarette assembly line. There are many problems TODAY s China are facing while she was not touching on. Yes there are many EV chargers thanks to the government’s directives but there are 100s billions $ wasted by the government’s directives to investments in the semiconductor industry.
Generally ones strength has the seeds of its weakness…past 1 child policy will lead to shrinkage of population, thus reducing manufacturing labor; my way or the highway philosophy of China’s rulers which makes them agile as mentioned by the interviewer will become suicidal for newer generation because they will be under so much debt that economic break down will be wide spread; I don’t think there are a lots of rich chinese…
Prof Jin is very articulate but she avoids the fundamental issue of china’s governance. In a totalitarian system, all major policies are made at the top and can not be questioned. She seems to defend the Chinese government for those policies that have serious adverse effects. She talked a lot about the phenomenon but little about the central role that Chinese communist party play in people’s daily lives
If she is not a professor teaching at a university in the West, I would not be concerned about what she says. However, this interview has left me feeling uncomfortable and worried. I believe that she invisbly represents the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Those who don’t know much about China, particularly its CCP political system, might be believe what she says that the westerners really misunderstanding of CCP’s view. Throughout the interview, she consistently defends the CCP using various social and economic examples. Let me highlight two important points she raises: First, at the beginning of the interview, she emphasises that the West, specifically Western governments like the US, misunderstand China. It is important to ask her to clarify what she means by the West’s misunderstanding of China and how this misunderstanding manifests. It is worth noting that she uses the term “China” rather than “CCP.” I believe she intentionally does this to associate “China” with its long history, rich culture, and its people. However, the CCP does not represent any of these aspects; it solely represents a group of elites. By doing so, she confuses the audience regarding the distinction between the CCP and the people of China. My point is that CCP doesn’t or cannot represent “China” and its people. Second, she claims that many young Chineses no longer admire or find Western government systems attractive due to events like the rise of Trump and other social issues. For instance, she mentions that they (young Chineses) saw cases of shootings in Western countries.
The comment that Keyu Jin is daughter of senior CCP member and her eloquent narration is essentially CCP talking points may very well be true. However, if she is even half factual and half talking CCP narrative, one needs to pay attention. There are many who believe China’s downfall is classic case of aging before becoming rich. Technology, AI can significantly mitigate such issues. China can indeed surprise those making doomsday predictions.
The Art of Omission: When discussing the ‘Cultural Revolution’ generation no one should ignore the 65 million killed by Mao. Yet she failed to mention that. She brushed over the blatant and violent threats to Independent Taiwan. She ignored all the human rights abuses. She ignored the invasions of other countries like Tibet. She ignored all the border disputes with almost every neighbour. She ignored the massive property collapse. She ignored the collapse of Evergrande and other building companies when all their buyers lost all the money they’d paid up front for apartments that were never built. She ignored the massive number of factory closures. She ignored the exodus of hundreds of foreign companies like Apple. She ignored that people don’t own houses in the PRC, they buy a lease for between 15 and 30 years. Now many people are finding it not worth renewing their lease, so they just abandon the property. She mentioned Alibaba but brushed overJack Ma’s disappearance and re-education. She ignored the blatant IP theft by the CCP and their criminal gangs. She ignored the use of the Chinese Mafia to attack the residents of Hong Kong. she ignored the CCP’s juvenile teenage attitude of Wolf Warrior. Most of all she ignored the massive corruption especially in the PLA, the worst being tens of billions going missing from the PLAN’s Carrier program. Why did she omit all those things? Because if she didn’t, she’d disappear.
the silly Chinese woman was first bragging about the high quality education that the particular generation had in china, but then when being asked why China has so high rate of unemployment among the young people, she explained saying that was due to the lack of right education. Never seen such a contradiction view. Is she really from LSE? I doubt it.