Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The China Cultural Clash

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 379 posts

Re: The China Cultural Clash

#21

Post by dmix »

markus_zhang wrote: post #18
tpmx wrote: post #4

This article frames this as the US vs China, but it's really been the "Western world" vs China. And the western world has been incredibly naive and uncoordinated when it comes to dealing with China. We've all accepted the incredibly one-sided deal, in some kind of idealistic hope that the Chinese would latch on to "western" values of democracy etc just by trading with us. Edit: World -> Western world.

No it's Five eyes and part of EU (excluding UK), and even US has a lot differences with EU.

Sure they have differences but in this context it's very much the western democracy vs authoritarianism, where dissenting opinions are not only tolerated but they are actively protected by the state, usually via an independent judicial body - the most important thing every truly authoritarian country lacks.

China's not the first nation state to be at the butting end of this debate and they won't be the last.

Re: The China Cultural Clash

#22

Post by ajross »

tpmx wrote: post #4

This article frames this as the US vs China, but it's really been the "Western world" vs China. And the western world has been incredibly naive and uncoordinated when it comes to dealing with China. We've all accepted the incredibly one-sided deal, in some kind of idealistic hope that the Chinese would latch on to "western" values of democracy etc just by trading with us. Edit: World -> Western world.

> some kind of idealistic hope that the Chinese would latch on to "western" values of democracy etc just by trading with us

Is that really so idealistic though? Like most folks I'm sure, I've worked with a ton of chinese nationals and expatriots over my career. And not one of them was ignorant of this nonsense. They all know it happens. They agree in principle that it's bad, they just tolerate it as part of the cost of growth. And that's not even arguably a bad trade given China's history over the past century.

As the PRC's growth slows and it reaches parity with the rest of the world, we'll start to see more tension in this space (arguably that's exactly what's happening in Hong Kong right now). And there's danger there, obviously.

But the problem isn't one of "ideals", "values" or "free speech". The values are already there.

Re: The China Cultural Clash

#23

Post by jimclegg »

tpmx wrote: post #4

This article frames this as the US vs China, but it's really been the "Western world" vs China. And the western world has been incredibly naive and uncoordinated when it comes to dealing with China. We've all accepted the incredibly one-sided deal, in some kind of idealistic hope that the Chinese would latch on to "western" values of democracy etc just by trading with us. Edit: World -> Western world.

Not the world vs China, it has always been the West vs China, European leaders' "zero sum" mentality has made it an economic target for the better part of 2+ centuries.

Please don't include the majority of the world that is benefiting from a new benevolent economic actor on the block.

Re: The China Cultural Clash

#24

Post by pesmhey »

mc32 wrote: post #15
Analemma_ wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too many people bought into the Fukuyama "end of history" theory whereby free trade and free markets would automatically lead to democracy and liberal values spreading worldwide. It probably seemed like a reasonable hypothesis right after the Soviet Union fell, but at this point it's pretty clear the events of the last decade have debunked it completely. The silver lining is we're a little smarter now and will hopefu…

I guess. But it’s worth mentioning that Fukuyama is no longer a Fukuyamaist himself.

His latest thoughts are on corruption and the difference between the rule of law and patrimonialism. All this, well before the election of Donald Trump. Truly amazing and admirable how calibrated he came back after the massive fail that was the end of history.

Re: The China Cultural Clash

#25

Post by mfer »

tpmx wrote: post #4

This article frames this as the US vs China, but it's really been the "Western world" vs China. And the western world has been incredibly naive and uncoordinated when it comes to dealing with China. We've all accepted the incredibly one-sided deal, in some kind of idealistic hope that the Chinese would latch on to "western" values of democracy etc just by trading with us. Edit: World -> Western world.

The world vs China? The US, Canada, the EU, and Australia make up less than 20% of the worlds population. India, the many countries of Africa and South and Central America are places I've not heard from on this. And, there is a large population there.

Is it the world vs China or the parts of the world we typically listen to vs China?

Re: The China Cultural Clash

#26

Post by nostromo »

It's frustrating to see people say that we shouldn't fight Chinese economic imperialism, mercantilism, and protectionism because we should support free trade.

Free trade is a two way street. If a trading partner is engaging in unfair practices then it's reasonable to support sanctions and tariffs and other means to get them to stop, even if you're a free trade supporter.

In fact this is the whole premise of the WTO, which supports free trade. If you don't engage in free trade, you get slapped with tariffs.

Re: The China Cultural Clash

#27

Post by scrumper »

> The internet is an amoral force that reduces friction, not an inevitable force for good.

This is well said and something everyone in tech should remember. Unintended consequence is a law with teeth.

Re: The China Cultural Clash

#28

Post by seanmcdirmid »

mfer wrote: post #25
tpmx wrote: post #4

This article frames this as the US vs China, but it's really been the "Western world" vs China. And the western world has been incredibly naive and uncoordinated when it comes to dealing with China. We've all accepted the incredibly one-sided deal, in some kind of idealistic hope that the Chinese would latch on to "western" values of democracy etc just by trading with us. Edit: World -> Western world.

The world vs China? The US, Canada, the EU, and Australia make up less than 20% of the worlds population. India, the many countries of Africa and South and Central America are places I've not heard from on this. And, there is a large population there. Is it the world vs China or the parts of the world we typically listen to vs China?

India has had its own problems with China. Not the same as the west’s for sure, but then again they have a direct border with each other and a large territory dispute.

Re: The China Cultural Clash

#29

Post by crimsonalucard »

tpmx wrote: post #4

This article frames this as the US vs China, but it's really been the "Western world" vs China. And the western world has been incredibly naive and uncoordinated when it comes to dealing with China. We've all accepted the incredibly one-sided deal, in some kind of idealistic hope that the Chinese would latch on to "western" values of democracy etc just by trading with us. Edit: World -> Western world.

Native Americans were the same way when they didn't want to latch on to Western ideals. It takes a lot to learn the right way to do things including forcefully taking land and slaughter.

What people don't understand is that Western democracy is the only and best way to run the world. I mean look at public transport infrastructure in the United States. Public transport in the United States is so fair and democratic that it's been over two decades and they still haven't been able to ring the Bart around the bay or build a high speed rail thanks to the government being fair and balanced.

I mean look at chinas lack of human rights. They throw a few people out their homes to build an entire high speed rail network across the entire country. More people may benefit from this but it is a serious violation of human rights to move a couple people to another place. Literally borderline evil. Lifting an entire population out of poverty isn't worth giving up a fair and balanced democracy where everyone can fairly debate about a policy for 20 years before anything gets done.

I'm not saying that the US is perfect. But china needs to take a good hard look at the US and realize that their way isn't the only way of doing things. I mean people in the United States aren't so biased as to insult china on every opportunity as an economic rival. People in the west are actually unbiased and have a fair and balanced outlook on the world just like the parent poster. Literally china is like a small child saying that it's the entire world against the United States. This is an immature way of solving a problem or working together.

Re: The China Cultural Clash

#30

Post by JumpCrisscross »

tpmx wrote: post #4

This article frames this as the US vs China, but it's really been the "Western world" vs China. And the western world has been incredibly naive and uncoordinated when it comes to dealing with China. We've all accepted the incredibly one-sided deal, in some kind of idealistic hope that the Chinese would latch on to "western" values of democracy etc just by trading with us. Edit: World -> Western world.

> We've all accepted the incredibly one-sided deal, in some kind of idealistic hope that the Chinese would latch on to "western" values of democracy etc just by trading with us

To expand on this, the history of economic and democratic development were thought to go hand in hand. Not only had it borne out in Western Europe, it also showed traction in post-war Japan and India. So the hypothesis, that a wealthier China would become more stable and democratic wasn't insane.

That hypothesis has been proven false. Part of this is the reduced number of people required to hold on to power in our age of digital surveillance. Part of it is the unique culture Mao's Cultural Revolution left behind.

The moment of reckoning came when Xi installed himself as dictator for life. Prior to that, China had been lurching towards mastering peaceful transitions of power under intraparty politics. There was legitimate hope it would think and plan for the long term. With a dictator, however, short-term political survival dominates all else. And so we get the absurdity of a billion peoples' productive power being channeled into stamping out Winnie the Pooh imagery.

Post reply on HN