FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

For the Sake of Peace, It’s Time for the West to Understand China on Its Own Terms

It’s axiomatic among Chinese intelligentsia that the West seriously and repeatedly misreads China. For upwards of a century, Western analysts’ predictions about the country, ranging from its collapse to its evolution into a liberal democracy, have persistently been dashed by reality. Undeterred, they continue to pronounce on China – with equally embarrassing results.

What accounts for this abysmal record? Different secondary factors crop up at different times. But a primary, underlying reason is simply that Westerners invariably seek to explain the Chinese experience through their own norms and values — and it’s just as bad on the left as it is on the right. By doing that, they inevitably set themselves up for mis-diagnosis.

Of course, most people consciously or otherwise use their own cultural and historical yardsticks to measure others. But this problem of navel-gazing is especially egregious among the Western commentariat. Having dominated world affairs at least two centuries, the West and its non-Western admirers reflexively and hubristically assess China according to concepts familiar to them: democracy, capitalism, Manichean zero-sum, imperialist domination, overseas aggression and expansion, class struggle, dictatorship of the proletariat, etc, ad infinitum.

None of these terms, as Westerners understand them, accurately or even adequately describe the complex, rapidly evolving realities of today’s China. Even when they use the same terms to describe themselves (largely due to the historical circumstance of Western domination), the Chinese usually do not mean the same things as the Westerners.

That’s one reason the Chinese Communist Party, during its epically successful era of reform, had to invent the designation “Socialism With Chinese Characteristics” to describe China’s transformed agenda and realities. After descending into the bottomless pit of the class-struggle-driven Cultural Revolution, the party and nation would thenceforth be guided by a hard-headed realism, not ideological fantasies.

The new ethos would be “seek truth from facts” and “black cat or white, whatever catches mice is a good cat.” In other words: Whatever works, do more of it; whatever doesn’t, junk it. Moreover, since Westerners do not know Confucianism, Buddhism or Daoism, they have no idea how these bedrock components of the Chinese national character are increasingly influencing the nation and its leaders.

Instead, Western authorities continue to insist on judging China by the extent to which it adapts their models and standards. A classic example is a recent commentary by a UK-based academic, which criticizes President Xi Jinping’s administration for rejecting liberal, Western values: “Xi sees no place for political experimentation or liberal values in China, and regards democratisation, civil society and universal human rights as anathema. Deepening reform means solidifying control over the party through his anti-corruption campaign, and over the population through means including the use of advanced technologies enabled by artificial intelligence. Such digital authoritarianism will, Xi hopes, prevent liberal or democratic ideas from taking root and spreading, even as China remains connected to the rest of the world. Chinese citizens may enjoy freedom as consumers and investors, but not as participants in civil society or civic discourse.”

Significantly, the author ignores the crucial issue of whether Western values are compatible at all with China’s own culture, mindset and specific conditions. He also avoids a highly inconvenient truth: Rather than expand and enrich Chinese, “liberal or democratic ideas” have increasingly become beachheads for Western-sponsored campaigns of destablization and regime change against governments that the West dislikes, including China’s. Insulating ordinary Chinese from them is thus an act of national self-defense and even protection of sovereignty. It is the West’s own subversive efforts that have been a prime culprit restricting the “free flow of ideas” to China’s people.

As China continues to evolve in the 21st century, the Chinese will no doubt develop new terms to depict their changing realities. After all, Confucius taught them for two millennia the importance of the Rectification of Names: If you discuss things without calling them by their right names, you’ll never get anything right. Also: True knowledge begins only after you know how much you don’t know. That is, dump hubris and adopt some modesty. That would be sound advice to Westerners seeking truly to understand China.

Whatever emerges from today’s China, one thing is certain. It will be unique — and uniquely Chinese. However, it will also contain a mix of best practices adapted from the world beyond, whatever the “ism” on their label.

It’s time the West started learning to understand China — on Chinese terms, not its own. In our era, it is no exaggeration to say that global peace may depend on it.

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
August 07, 2020
Friday - Sunday
John Davis
The COVID Interregnum
Louis Yako
20 Postcard Notes From Iraq: With Love in the Age of COVID-19
Patrick Cockburn
War and Pandemic Journalism: the Truth Can Disappear Fast
Eve Ottenberg
Fixing the COVID Numbers
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Every Which Way to Lose
Paul Street
Trump is Not Conceding: This is Happening Here
Robert Hunziker
The World on Fire
Rob Urie
Neoliberal Centrists and the American Left
John Laforge
USAF Vet Could Face ‘20 Days for 20 Bombs’ for Protest Against US H-Bombs Stationed in Germany
Andrew Levine
Clyburn’s Complaint
Kavaljit Singh
Revisiting the Idea of Pigou Wealth Tax in the Time of Covid-19
Paul Ryder
Here Come the 1968 Mistakes Again
T.J. Coles
Fighting Over Kashmir Could Blow Up the Planet
David Macaray
Haven’t We All Known Guys Who Were Exactly like Donald Trump?
Conn Hallinan
What’s Driving the Simmering Conflict Between India and China
Joseph Natoli
American Failures: August, 2020
Ramzy Baroud
Apartheid or One State: Has Jordan Broken a Political Taboo?
Bruce Hobson
The US Left Needs Humility to Understand Mexican Politics
David Rosen
Easy Targets: Trump’s Attacks on Transgendered People
Ben Debney
The Neoliberal Virus
Evelyn Leopold
Is Netanyahu Serious About Annexing Jordan Valley?
Nicky Reid
When the Chickens Came Home to Roost In Portlandistan
Irma A. Velásquez Nimatuj
The Power of the White Man and His Symbols is Being De-Mystified
Kathy Kelly
Reversal: Boeing’s Flow of Blood
Brian Kelly
Ireland and Slavery: Framing Irish Complicity in the Slave Trade
Ariela Ruiz Caro
South American Nations Adopt Different COVID-19 Stategies, With Different Results
Ron Jacobs
Exorcism at Boston’s Old West Church, All Hallows Eve 1971
J.P. Linstroth
Bolsonaro’s Continuous Follies
Thomas Klikauer – Nadine Campbell
Right-Wing Populism and the End of Democracy
Dean Baker
Trump’s Real Record on Unemployment in Two Graphs
Michael Welton
Listening, Conflict and Citizenship
Nick Pemberton
Donald Trump Is The Only One Who Should Be Going To School This Fall
John Feffer
America’s Multiple Infections
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Thinking Outside the Social Media Echo Chamber
Andrea Mazzarino
The Military is Sick
John Kendall Hawkins
How the Middle Half Lives
Graham Peebles
The Plight of Refugees and Migrant Workers under Covid
Robert P. Alvarez
The Next Coronavirus Bill Must Protect the 2020 Election
Greg Macdougall
Ottawa Bluesfest at Zibi: Development at Sacred Site Poses Questions of Responsibility
CounterPunch News Service
Tensions Escalate as Logging Work Commences Near Active Treesits in a Redwood Rainforest
Louis Proyect
The Low Magic of Charles Bukowski
Gloria Oladipo
Rural America Deserves a Real COVID-19 Response
Binoy Kampmark
Crossing the Creepy Line: Google, Deception and the ACCC
Marc Norton
Giants and Warriors Give Their Workers the Boot
David Yearsley
Celebration of Change
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail