This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
A few things in order.
The common Scientific argument for this belief is the famous civic honesty study where the Chinese returned lost wallets at the lowest rate among all samples including clear shitholes, 7%. The authors decided to exclude Japan (a famously Based and Honorary Aryan society) from the study because the Japanese had similarly low return rates due to idiosyncrasy of their policy around lost items.
In the study design adapted to local customs (eg including WeChat rather than email contact in the wallet – the Chinese don't use email), the return rates jump to 59%, which is around Canadian result in the original study.
It's just bog standard biased research, confirmation of prior belief. Western sociology is pretty hollow once you look at it closely, both in its woke «Science has Spoken» and based «forbidden knowledge» branches.
This has become a self-reinforcing belief because the more impressive results they get, the less it is trusted. As a matter of fact I think Americans lie more at this point. For example, Chinese infrastructure definitely gets built, we can see it from space. Is there graft? Certainly, and much of it is likely not even needed. But graft is not the main story. Americans meanwhile just collectively appropriate vast sums, do nothing of value and lie to themselves that it's mere «inefficiency». Chinese products, especially high-end ones, work well enough to drive dozens of countries into trade deficit, Chinese scientists are sought after in the most ruthlessly competitive companies, Chinese commitments are fulfilled, concrete Chinese threats are followed by promised retaliations (unlike American ones). Where's the lie? They certainly lie at times, but probably no more than your typical developed nation. And importantly, they have improved a lot in just a few years, many travelers like Molson note it. Even a Georgetown China hawk Fedasuyk writes: «If the pessimists are right about American decline, if we really are headed toward some kind of Pax Sinica, it won’t be because of how many EVs roll off the line at a BYD factory — it will be because China has rediscovered something we’ve lost: How to make people feel part of something larger than themselves; how to take pride in historical achievement; how to sustain the promise of a national project worth contributing to.» Like, you can dismiss it as more Potemkin village, of course. But it's getting very solipsistic.
«IP theft» was overwhelmingly done in the form of legal joint ventures, though there's too much noise written on this. Extraordinary estimates of lost value are premised on the false assumption that Western IP proprietors would have been able to produce at anywhere near Chinese scale. Currently they produce enough IP of their own to force Macron to beg for reverse tech transfer via JVs in France. I guess they've ran out of things to steal.
Does anyone? Americans are are currently trying to annex a piece of an ally they're treaty-bound to defend. What «society»? On the object level, over the last two decades they've done more to help developing countries with BRI than the entire West did in five, they are the ones building roads and power plants in Africa. Their model is transactional but much more powerful than hopeless charity.
For a very relaxed definition of genocide, I guess. «Cultural genocide» or something. Feels quaint after Gaza. More seriously it's just coercive modernization of a premodern people, and Uighur situation is arguably improved relative to pre-genocide times.
They deny their population certain political rights standard in the West, in exchange for improvement in life expectancy (already on par with the US), purchasing power and overall dignity of existence. Even in the last few years where real wage growth has been slow, they continually get more and better goods and infrastructure, with eg households consuming 8% more electricity year on year and already above the EU median. It's a very paternalistic form of oppression and I believe one preferable to something like Russia or the United Kingdom.
Yes they've made it very clear, have been very consistent on this, and forced roughly everyone to stop recognizing Taiwan as a nation. I would prefer nations that strongly disapprove of that to recognize Taiwan again. From their perspective it's an unfinished civil war, which is a legitimate cause for annexation. Given that the ruling party of Taiwan has discredited itself with bad governance and petty tyranny and the pro-Mainland KMT is likely to win, and considering abusive American treatment of Taiwan and better life/jobs opportunities in the coastal cities of the Mainland, they are increasingly likely to get reunification by peaceful means. I will concede that the insistence on getting ready to use force is immoral.
They are single-handedly solving climate change. They have driven costs of solar panels, batteries and wind turbines through the floor and continue to drive them lower. They've upgraded their coal fleet to pollute less, they're investing a lot in reforestation and cleaning up in regions with rare earth extraction etc. They pollute a lot becuse they do a lot of stuff, but they are in fact pretty sincere about ecology.
I have put vastly more effort into this than you did, but admittedly it's also mostly assertions that can be dismissed (I could support every one with a citation if I cared though). Just irritated at how easily people in rather mediocre societies can rattle off some half-baked condemnations.
Also to a large degree the inability of a Western country or Western-adjacent one to deal with issues of Islam in a sensible, structured form of oppression like China handled the Uyghur is why you end up with massive shitfests like Gaza. Israel has been sufficiently handcuffed from actually reshaping Palestinian society (and the Gazaites are just another level of insane death cultists) that it produces forever wars and lingering issues.
More options
Context Copy link
You wrote more but that does not mean I'm convinced about most of your points:
RE: Lying - The West typically attempts to have objective reliable processes outputted by the government and corporate sectors that represents various things. China does not. For a recent and important example consider COVID policies, statistics, and information.
RE: IP Theft - I don't believe your statements on this are factually accurate.
RE: International Society - The U.S., Western Europe, and the weaker countries all at least pretend. China acts like the other "evil" countries. That is not good company.
RE: Genocide - Meh, I'm not particular excited about this one but the genocide people seem to argue that it counts.
RE: Oppression - You can get disappeared just as easily in China as Russia. You can get welded into your home during COVID. From the rich to the poor nobody has any rights unless they are an in favor party elite, all it takes is to get noticed. To add to the angst is an anarcho-tyranical element, petty corruption is everywhere and the country just sweeps through areas every once and awhile to execute or imprison anyone misbehaving. The superficial competence of the regime makes it worse not better.
RE: Taiwan - In the case of Russia/Ukraine the national pride aspect is somewhat countered by other somewhat compelling reasons such as the ports and agriculture. In the case of China/Taiwan it seems to primarily out of imperial angst, as the high tech industries that give Taiwan are fragile and would likely not survive kinetic action. If some democratic process occurs obviously it will be a bit different.
RE: The environment - While China does contribute to some renewables I challenge you to find a reputable source indicating Chinese is better for the environment than the West. This perception is not driven by mere propaganda effort.
I repeat, "the West" routinely does corrupt shit that people in China get executed for. Virtually the entire American MIC would get the lethal injection in China, it's just legal and accepted. Being forthright about your vices is kind of a virtue, but only so long as people are not deceived that vice is actually okay.
What about COVID? They had wrong priorities, but broadly competent execution and thus very low deaths for the entire period of the lockdowns until Omicron. Maybe some data had been fudged at the margins. The denial is, again, circular.
What about statistics? For example they are often accused of distorting their GDP growth; the Fed thinks it's about accurate, just smoothed for whatever internal accounting reasons. They have significantly more honest accounting of manufacturing productivity, and accordingly higher productivity, both in units per worker and output per dollar of cost, which is to be expected seeing as how they clobber everyone in the global market. Tons of «Western objective reliable processes» is Eagle Burger Freedom Institute for Democracy inventing a contrived composite index to rank countries or companies from best to worst, it's so far divorced from base layer of reality that I have no idea who needs that. I don't know what you mean by «information».
Regarding pretense: «China has stated its position on multiple occasions on Greenland. The international law underpinned by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter is the foundation of the current international order and must be upheld. We urge the U.S. to stop using the so-called “China threat” as a pretext for itself to seek selfish gains.» I have no idea what you mean, they «pretend» as much as anyone, and they also don't bomb random countries or kidnap their presidents (they totally could stage coups in Africa for their benefit at this point, they do not). Your morality and idea of good and evil are comically self-serving.
We've just had a Chinese person explain that this is wrong, the petty corruption is pretty much gone, why do you believe you have a better clue as to the state of their corruption or how «superficial» the competence is? I think Xi is a true believer in anti-corruption because he's a child of true believers, has been a true believer all his life, became Chairman on the anti-corruption agenda at the peak of Chinese corruption scandals, purges loyalists who've been growing corrupt, and by all visible indicators corruption is down. It's not anarcho-tyranical, there's no anarchy to speak of, at worst there's tyranny. You're just rehashing tropes 10-15 years old.
Other tropes about disappearances etc. are also unsubstantiated.
They do not "while contribute to some renewables". They are the only player in town., eg “in 2023 China produced 98% of solar wafers, 92% of cells and 85% of panels globally”. They carry the entire renewables revolution, pretty much single-handedly, for the last decade, they are the ones who kept investing in it and made it economical rather than a boutique graft opportunity for Europeans, and now they're exporting cleantech for higher value than the US exports fossils. This was a conscious choice, they could have just kept scaling coal consumption.. It's largely strategic but also ecologically minded.
Whether «the West» is broadly good or bad is uninteresting because the West is largely made up of two parts: deindustrializing decaying states like the UK and most of the EU, and major fossil producers like the US/Canada/Norway/Australia. Someone needs to have industry to produce all the goods our industrial civilizaiton relies on. This someone happens to China. In light of this fact they've done pretty well on developing towards a more ecologically friendly regime.
Basically, the question for me isn't whether they're good or bad in some absolute sense. The question is how responsibly have they acted in their particular circumstances, which is, starting (say, after the death of Mao – I won't get into the merits of Maoism now; his power was a product of his key role in the creation of the state itself and unfortunately he couldn't have been dislodged earlier) with a very large, very poor and very angry population, in possession of little resource endowment but massive military potential, and facing an ideologically hostile West committed to convert or destroy them in the long run. What did they prioritize, and how did they execute? The standard for such situations is very, very low. In this context, I say they've acted with nearly unprecedented prudence and restraint for a major power, and produced unexpectedly good results: reduction of poverty at home, exporting deflation abroad, bailing you guys out in 2008, maintaining the economic viability of dozens of small states now, and not going on a conquest spree, even as they've been the largest industrial power with the largest army for many years now.
Morally, it is comparable to the rise of the United States.
More options
Context Copy link
They did a bunch to get up to speed but now that relative parity has been achieved there's inherently less need to delve into such behaviors. If anybody but the Chinese was capable of manufacturing at scale, this would be a bigger issue, but alas the West has largely abandoned 'actually making things' and the South is the South.
They are absolutely still engaged in state sponsored industrial espionage, and in a way that is pretty much unmatched given the way the state and companies over lap.
They still engage in a lackadaisical approach to international copyright (not that I am that mad about it).
Still continue to basically ban foreign competitors of various tech things and then make their own version.
One of the biggest ethical problems of the country is also its strength - state power and totally unfair business practices.
Certain you can do that, and you can get away with it if you are China but it is deeply unethical.
I don't understand how this is bad. Had they not done this, there would just be Google China, Meta China and so on instead of locally grown Tencent and Alibaba. Imagine being a major power and wanting to decouple from America for whatever reason in the future and you basically can't because all government and corporate infra is ran on Microsoft Teams and AWS. You just can't let that happen. This is Europe's reality right now by the way
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link