Still Confused
| 1. Environment Is Stronger Than Willpower | 2. Lovely and Lousy United States |
| 3. Haunting and Unforgettable China | 4. What If China Become A Democratic Country |
(I) Environment Is Stronger Than Willpower
Life is only a few decades short, and I have already turned fifty without realizing it. The ancients said, "No confusion at forty, and understanding of destiny at fifty." The original meaning is that as you grow older and accumulate experience, you will no longer be confused about many things. But there is another reason. After middle age, people will gradually become lazy to think; and as long as you maintain an exploratory state of mind, confusion will inevitably occur.
Many people may have heard that the great scientist Newton studied theology in his later years. In fact, it is not difficult to understand why, simply because he has many professional problems that have nowhere to be solved. After all, nobody else is able to stand abreast with him in professional fields. Of course, God could not answer his questions on professional matters either. You see, genius over forty has a lot of confusion, let alone ordinary people like you and me.
Naturally, Chinese-American will more or less pay attention to China, the United States, and Sino-US relations. Due to the different ideologies and values between China and the United States, political factors will inevitably be involved, not to mention it comes at a bad time when Sino-US relations are becoming increasingly tense. Modern society is not a paradise, and no one can completely stay away from it. Recently, the U.S. State Department has reminded people not to go to China unless necessary. The implication is that if you plan to travel to China, a land of right and wrong, you'd better think twice before doing so. You see, politics is everywhere, and of course there’s no need to over-interpret it. This reminds me of an article I read that criticized China's rich people for being like ostriches. It said: You may try not to care about politics, but politics will turn around and care about you.
In fact, I can only have a rough understanding of philosophical terms such as ideology and values, and they seem very general and even vague. But it might be helpful to give two examples. In May 2020, the black man Floyd died after a police officer knelt on his neck. The entire United States was agitated, and smashing and looting were carried out legally. Some English articles raised him to such a high level and praised hime as a tragic hero. The Chinese bluntly stated that he was the victim of the tragedy but by no means a hero, and he had a long criminal record and was addicted to drugs. Looking at China's Xinjiang, Uighurs are being detained in re-education camps. Although many of them do have bad deeds, the West is angry and criticizes relentlessly. Chinese people tend to first define whether someone is a good person or a bad person, while Westerners generally emphasize the cherishing of life and freedom. This is roughly reflected in the fact that China may implicate innocent people in order to punish bad guys, and the general public think it’s acceptable; the United States may pardon criminal acts in order to avoid accidentally injuring innocent people, and the general public think it’s OK.
I like to read some current affairs news and related commentaries, but I am just interested in them, not politically passionate. Time is not forgiving, the previous passion has faded, and travel and sightseeing are no longer attractive. Then try writing some short articles, which can be regarded as exercising your brain and maintaining your rational thinking ability.
When it comes to Sino-US relations, it is impossible to avoid political terms such as democracy and freedom. I am not a democracy activist and certainly not an advocate for authoritarianism either. Like most people, I am more attracted to the impact of political factors such as democracy and freedom on personal life. It is easy to criticize autocracy, but no one can deny that the autocratic China has created an economic growth miracle that is unparalleled around the world. Meanwhile, the United States is faltering, homeless people abound, and the general public can feel the pain of inflation.
Of course, there are issues of perspective and length of time when looking at the development of things. Recently, China's economic growth has slowed down, and there are quite a few sarcastic articles on the Internet, and many people are gloating about this misfortune. Fortunately, there are also rational analyses: first, deceleration is bound to happen sooner or later, and other developed countries have the same path; second, even if economic growth slows down or even stagnates completely, China will still be a pivotal behemoth. In any case, China's rapid economic growth lasted for thirty or forty years; and the carnival time during the whole life when one is energetic, smart, able to explore and enjoy life to the fullest is only thirty or forty years.
In the stage of rapid economic growth in all countries, infrastructure construction plays an important role. The combination of land area and population fundamentally determines the infrastructure development potentiality. In terms of this combination, China is unique on the planet. High-speed rail is China's most dazzling infrastructure project, but the commercial value of the high-speed rail network in the United States is far less than that in China. Although the United States has a larger livable land area than China, except for the northeastern New England region, other regions are sparsely populated, and the population density is not great enough to support large-scale long-distance transportation on land in addition to air travel.
India's population density is greater than that of China, but its land area is only one-third of China's. Theoretically, if other conditions are equal, India's high-speed railway scale is destined to be less than half of China's. Another question is whether there is room for development is one thing, but whether the possibility can be turned into reality is another matter. Many people everywhere believe that it is basically impossible for India to develop as fast as China, and it is unclear whether it can sustain medium-speed growth.
Of course, export trade also adds to China's economic development, further increasing the growth rate. However, the innate advantages of export trade are not unique to China. India has greater innate advantages than China in international trade. The role of English in international trade is self-evident. When comparing various groups with the same level of education, India's overall English level is far better than that of China. In addition, India is a democratic country and shares the same ideology and values as the West. Infrastructure is undoubtedly led by the government, while export trade is mainly promoted by the private sector. So you see, both the officials and the people of authoritarian China have surpassed democratic India in promoting economic development. Speaking of international trade, it reminds me of a joke I heard two or three years ago: In the poor and weak early days following China's reform and opening up, it was the Taiwanese who were the first to promote China's processing trade and made the greatest contribution from beginning to end. As China grew economically stronger, the first target it wants to punch is Taiwan.
To a considerable extent, it is China’s globally unique infrastructure development potentiality that has supported the rapid economic growth for thirty to forty years. But no matter how large the potentiality is, it has boundaries. After decades of rapid development, have China's real estate construction and other infrastructure projects reached saturation point today? Relative to economic growth led by technological innovation, infrastructure construction projects are undoubtedly low-hanging fruits. All countries that have gone through this stage have to climb slowly and laboriously after picking off these fruits.
Let's turn back to the topic that attracts me more, the impact of the general environment in China and the United States on personal life, especially the real impact that Chinese people in the United States can feel. China's natural and social environments as a whole are not as good as those of the United States. Please note that this is an overall apples-to-apples comparison. If we focus on the symptoms of sick society such as smashing, looting, or drug-taking and shooting, the mainstream media in the United States can't help but wonder: Are we a developed country? Fortunately, the Chinese rarely get involved in those extreme situations, so in terms of the environment in which the Chinese live, the United States is generally better than China. Non-equivalent comparisons are meaningless.
Every society is divided into different levels, which can be roughly divided into rich class, middle class, and poor group. Of course, each class includes a large range of groups and can be further subdivided. For example, upper middle, middle, and lower middle are usually classified as middle class altogether. When comparing equal class groups, such as comparing Chinese doctors or teachers in their forties with American counterparts of similar age working for similar size employers, or comparing express delivery personnel in China and the United States, the United States is definitely better. But the United States is only better when compared to the same class. This is very different from 20 or 30 years ago, when China lagged behind even if it was one class above.
Therefore, possible class dislocation affects the decision of whether to come or not, to leave or to stay. Class dislocation sounds too absolute, and class itself is a broad group, so when it comes to individuals, it is the possible changes in their own living environment, including the fact that life in a foreign country will definitely be more lonely than in their hometown, and those changes are assigned different weights by different people. There is an endless stream of immigrants coming to the United States illegally, because for them, there is no worry about falling in class. Immigrants from the wealthy class tend to feel lost, since they are no longer treated as stars in the United States.
Young people from all over the world, including China, are flocking to study in the United States. This reminds me of a Taiwanese classmate who once quoted an ancient Chinese proverb to describe this scene in modern America: Peach and plum trees attract visitors without uttering a word. The contrast from using ancient Chinese words to explain modern America is still fresh in my memory. There is a saying that the meaning of life lies in exploration. You should experience more when you are young and think more when you are older. Although most international students may have to return home, when they are older and have fewer dreams and more memories, they will understand that the process of pursuing dreams, savoring life, experiencing success and failure, and feeling joys and sorrows is a valuable life experience.
Before the pandemic, I went back to China to live there for a few years. What really affected me was the noise from square dancing and website blocking. I specifically went to the police station where I lived to complain about the noise caused by square dancing. Later, the instructor from the police station and a police officer came to the community and summoned me to a meeting with the manager of the property management company. The property manager complained that I was the only resident to complain about the noise from square dancing, and pointed out that many residents closer to the dancing venue had no complaints. China blocks even neutral websites such as Google and Wikipedia, so I can only resort to circumvention software. Of course, the online experience is much worse. As mentioned above, everyone places different weights on differences such as these, so it is impossible to generalize.
The increasingly tense relations between China and the United States have little impact on the lives of Chinese people in the United States, because the United States is not a country shrouded in politics like China. As for the screams on the Internet, they are nothing more than amplifying individual cases to gain attention. Like native Americans, old immigrants can feel the recession in the United States in recent years, and inflation has led to a sharp plunge. What triggered this inflation was the surge in oil prices and housing prices. Later, although oil prices and housing prices fell, other living costs that had risen across the board did not fall again. Faced with soaring oil prices, Biden could only blame the oil oligarchs, "You are making too much profit."
Speaking of oil prices, it reminds me of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010, which resulted in the death of 11 workers and serious environmental disasters. Later, the oil company CEO resigned under pressure and received a golden parachute of $18 million. I still remember a reader saying in the comments of an English report: If this kind of thing happened in China, he would be executed, and the United States let him take away a large sum of security benefit. What impressed me was that the reader mentioned China. He must have some understanding of China, and what he said in his few words was a weak complaint. Executing him is inhumane, and entrepreneurship should also be protected, but where should the boundaries of tolerance be?
Recent online articles report, health insurance CEOs were earning over $100 million a year, while millions of Americans were struggling with medical debt. One of the articles asked: Is our system sick? Going too far is as bad as not going far enough, not to mention that insurance, finance and real estate are neither high-tech nor require profound professional knowledge or exquisite skills. At the same time, they are closely related to the lives of the general public and affect everyone more intuitively than high-precision industries.
The tense relations between China and the United States may have some impact on the lives of Chinese Americans in China. After all, there are always vague ideological problems when walking in China. Public power is everywhere, and of course it is not necessary to keep cautious all the times. China’s so-called counterintelligence law invisibly alerts people. Chinese-Americans won’t pay special attention to the travel warning issued by the United States against China; at least currently they will not give up traveling to visit relatives and friends because of this warning. However, Americans will no longer consider non-essential travel such as sightseeing in China as an option, and they do not make many essential trips to China. Whether you like it or not, the world will regret to see that China and the United States will drift apart in the future, and I don’t want that to be the case either.
Westerners' understanding of North Korea largely comes from the accounts of North Korean defectors, although rational people know that there must be an element of exaggeration in it because of the personal emotions involved. The difficulty is that there is no clear channel to verify what happened on earth. Will China become increasingly closed? Overseas Chinese can still explain China to local people, but if they have to alienate China in the future, or are constrained by objective conditions and can only see things covered by the fog, their explanations will become increasingly unreliable and incredible.
The United States is stagnant and China is no longer shining, and they are the No. 1 and the No. 2 in the global village. If there are aliens who pay attention to the earth, most likely they will say: "You see, the people on earth are declining." They will not distinguish between Chinese and Americans, just like China does not distinguish between New Yorkers and Los Angeles people, and the United States does not distinguish between people in Beijing and in Shanghai.
(II) Lovely and Lousy United States
The Trump phenomenon in the United States is interesting. When he defeated his peers in the party and won the presidential nomination, as in every election process, the Internet was flooded with information about him. The presidential election in the United States attracts people's attention, and various languages around the world have written about it. It soon became apparent that he was very different from a traditional presidential candidate. This guy has a romantic streak. To put it bluntly, he is morally corrupt and leads a corrupt life. There was an audio clip of him bragging about being a pro at wooing women, using vulgar street slang.
Fortunately, Mr. Trump accepted the advice of his staff and showed the courage to admit his mistakes: I'm sorry everyone; that was many years ago, and Bill Clinton was more shameless than me. You see, bad things can be turned into good things, and American politicians need to be able to turn disadvantages into advantages more than you and I. Voters approved of his statement and let things go by the wayside, not to mention that people are not sages. I don’t know how to express in English "If you correct the mistake you made, that is the greatest thing."
Trump won with an anti-traditional image, and some people lamented that the world was declining and that good and evil were not distinguished. Putting aside emotional factors, that essentially reflects voters’ dissatisfaction with the status quo. The United States is continuously declining, and dissatisfied people want some changes. In fact, his predecessor, President Obama, also rose to prominence by shouting "change", but Obama was shouting slogan while Trump was showing off his rebellious style. Although change may not necessarily make things better, and may even make things worse, there is hope when there is change. As the saying goes, the only constant in the world is change. In this sense, this is the advantage of the democratic electoral system. Everyone has a window to express their opinions.
However, at the same time, the question of whether one can express rationally arises, because humans are social animals and will inevitably be coerced by the surrounding environment, so they may blindly follow the herd. In group activities, rational thinking is often no match for emotional appeal. Because China has a large population and complex relationships, it leaves less space and less time for individuals to be alone. When you are in a group, you can only listen or speak. Thinking requires being alone and quiet. The Bible also guides people in this way: when you want to repent and reflect, you go into your inner room, close the door, and face the Lord alone. Any confession in front of other people will inevitably contain an element of showmanship.
As mentioned above, when deciding whether to stay in the United States, everyone places different weights on those differences between China and the United States. The same situation applies when deciding which presidential candidate to vote for. The principle of decision-making is easy to understand: choose the greater of two benefits, and choose the lesser of two harms. However, in many cases in real life, everyone's perceived benefits and harms are different or even completely opposite. The benefits and harms associated with certain factors are not clearly defined. From the perspective of Chinese immigrants, candidates' attitudes toward mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong will be given relatively high weight, and there exists disagreement within each group.
Like other U.S. presidents, Trump’s tenure in the White House was filled with anecdotes. Knowing a person is nothing more than listening to his words and watching his actions. American media, large and small, are also keen on reporting anecdotes about the president. Like many others, I initially thought that no one is perfect and that Trump’s unconventionality could be a breath of fresh air into the ever-infighting American political arena. There were reports about some of his ridiculous words and deeds, and the first time or two made people feel strange. How could he be so ignorant? But after accumulating many times, people became relieved.
His mental age has not been able to develop at the same time as his physical age, so he lacks self-awareness and will speak unabashedly and act willfully. He can seriously ask others "whether the hurricanes that harmed the United States were caused by China", and probably no one else in the world will have such a thought; as for "injecting disinfectants to kill the corona virus", it can be barely treated as a joke. Of course, people around him have also experienced feeling strange, being annoyed by his ignorance, and then not taking it seriously.
Just like physical disabilities, a civilized society should not and does not allow discrimination when it comes to mental disabilities. However, caring for people with mental disabilities does not mean that people with mental disabilities can be allowed to govern the country. After all, governing a country is a hard work that requires a strong mind. Of course, there is an objective factor. Unlike physical disability, mental disability can not be detected intuitively. There are no objective quantitative indicators for mild mental disability. Without close contact with the person concerned, it can only be judged through fragmented information. This is also an inherent flaw of the democratic electoral system. It is impossible for voters to have an accurate and comprehensive understanding of the candidates. To some extent, they can only rely on intuition.
So voting for Trump the first time is understandable, but voting for Trump the second time is a bit arbitrary. This can also explain why most of Trump’s supporters are people with low education, and people with low education account for a very high proportion in the United States. In addition, the U.S. presidential election system will create a situation where those with both capability and political integrity fail to become candidates, and the final two candidates are just so-so.
You can say that this is the ugliness of the United States, but which country does not have ugliness and evil? China is just covering up its ugliness and evil. Fortunately, the social operating system in the United States has greatly restricted individual power, and the country has not made any big mistakes that caused it to fall. In fact, the economy was still recovering steadily during those years. If it were not for the sudden outbreak of the pandemic, there is a high probability that Trump would have won re-election. However, the United States has alienated almost all its allies and fallen into self-isolation because of Trump's intolerance.
There are also many articles in Chinese about Trump's anecdotes. A Chinese reader's message is quite interesting. The main idea is that this kind of thing can only happen in the United States. With Trump's IQ, he even became a rich man. If In China, he definitely could not make any money. Even if he made some money, he would be defrauded immediately. In my opinion, this Chinese reader expresses two meanings: first, Trump’s mental development is defective; second, deception is prevalent in Chinese society.
The Capitol Hill incident on January 6, 2021 shocked the world and to some extent reflected the risks of the democratic system. Some Chinese directly referred to those who stormed the Capitol as the American Boxers. Although it was just a joke, the two can also find a common background. If China's Boxer Rebellion had not been recognized by the Qing government, it would have been impossible to exist and expand, and thus would not have caused such great harm. Trump actually came out directly to encourage his supporters not to shrink back, but to move forward regardless of where the red lines are.
Later, the U.S. government launched an investigation into the incident, and on the Internet a university teacher jokingly prepared a defense for him: The old man had a mental defect and did not intentionally break the law. Several Chinese friends mentioned this matter while chatting, and everyone agreed that if such a thing happened in a country with an imperfect legal system, it would definitely trigger social unrest. Even if the person who lost power did not lose his head or die in a foreign country, he would definitely be put behind bars. From this perspective, although American politicians are constantly fighting among themselves, no party can fall below the bottom line.
There is a saying in English that you cannot satisfy everyone. There is a basic premise for the survival and continuation of the democratic electoral system: the minority must obey the majority. However, the real problem is that people with low levels of education often do not understand big issue. China is the big winner of globalization, while the blue-collar workers in the American Midwest are the lost group. Of course, a civilized society should protect and even favor vulnerable groups, but many things are easier said than done. Sometimes they are so simple and endearing, and sometimes they are so stubborn and annoying, and stubbornly believe in their bones: I am the authentic American.
The blue-collar group in the Midwest of the United States is still in a state of loss. This is a serious issue facing the development of American society, and there is still no appropriate solution. A Trump supporter said online: I know that I am not well educated. You can say that I have to blame myself. I am not equipped with high technology, but still need to make my own living. I have to try everything and voting for Trump is a kind of try. How economic development benefits all members of society, especially disadvantaged groups, is an issue not limited to the United States. Many countries are troubled by the widening gap between rich and poor, and China is not immune. From his/her short speech, readers can feel the anxiety of seeking way out. Fortunately, he/she is still trying, at least he/she has not given up completely.
Speaking purely about the election, it is a slight exaggeration to say that even if ordinary people like you and me become the president or governor in the United States, American society will still maintain orderly operation. In fact, many times the winner in an election will not be the man of destiny who is heroic and courageous and saves all sentient beings, but the eloquent person who talks vigorously and grandstands. The operation of Western society is based on rules and emphasizes playing the game by the rules, that is, acting in accordance with the law. Public power is greatly restricted, and society will not be subject to violent ups and downs due to the personal factors of elected person. However, at the same time, problems of low efficiency arise.
In the final analysis, the rules that limit public power are made by people. Not long ago, a mainstream media outlet in the United States mentioned that limiting presidential terms became law in the past century, and proposals to limit congressional terms have appeared several times, but they have all come to nothing. We can also see the weakness of human nature here. It is relatively easy for legislators to restrict others, but when it comes to promulgating legal provisions to restrict themselves, most people will tacitly walk around. On the other hand, the highlight is that at least among those hundreds of politicians, there are still some who can sound a discordant note that directly faces the frailties of human nature. Beyond paying attention to the presidential election, voters have no more energy and time to know about congressional candidates in depth. Therefore, the demented elderly people on Capitol Hill are comparable to those in the White House. In a sense, the lack of a mechanism to abdicate in favor of talents is tantamount to hindering social progress.
In the 1980s and 1990s of the last century, Chinese society once complained about governing by old people, and today's United States is even worse. Alas, the memories came back. At that time, I was still young. Like my peers, I yearned for the United States, being told that country was governed by elites. Of course, people's thoughts will change as they age. There is a saying: If you don't believe in communism before the age of thirty, you have no conscience; if you still believe in communism after the age of thirty, you have no brains.
When I first came to the United States when I was young, I was frustrated about not being able to have fun with my friends. Maybe really growing old already, now I feel that the life is as peaceful as I want. The noise caused by square dancing in China is deeply disgusting because you can't hide from it. It’s also disgusting that some residents play their audios unscrupulously. I asked several neighbors how they were coping, and they told me to close the windows and turn on the TV, which meant that they were forcing themselves to partially offset the impact of the environment. The police complained that they had no cure. I was thinking that if the police in the United States said they were unable to do anything, then in a distracted state, I might use a gun to solve the problem myself. Looking at it from another perspective, right because everyone has a gun, nobody dare to influence others unscrupulously.
Comparing the two, life in the United States can avoid some grievances. In fact, it is just a small wish of not being disturbed. As for the democratic election of the president, I am not particularly attracted to it, partly because the United States implements the Electoral College system, and California is not a swing state, so the urgency to vote is not strong. Regarding those comments on the Internet that curse square dancing, I can sympathize with the helplessness and resentment. The noise of square dancing comes from the private sector, and in order to deal with the official network blocking, I had to spend extra money to use VPN software. Chinese people may think it's making a mountain of a molehill. The fact is for people who ever lived overseas, Google is a necessity in life, while China's Baidu is totally unmatchable.
It can be said that the United States has not brought me any extra happiness and pleasure, but only allowed me to live quietly. In contrast, wanting a quiet life in China has become a demanding or even impossible luxury to some extent. It’s one point of human natures that people tend to forget appreciation. It is said that you will no longer smell the fragrance of orchid after you are surrounded by those flowers for a long time. After living in the United States for a long time, I have long thought that a quiet life is just a natural desire and a matter of course. Thinking about it this way, there is indeed reason to cherish the present moment and enjoy the joy of contentment first. Of course, one should not indulge in the comfort zone. Instead, one should then go to experience the pain of exploration. When suddenly coming back to current moment, I realized that time was passing by, and felt powerless. The happy and bitter years were hard to see again.
(III) Haunting and Unforgettable China
China is a country with a large population. Let’s talk about the population issue first. In fact, this is not just a problem for China and India, but a global problem, so the Western world is also paying close attention to it. There are numerous articles discussing this issue in English. Initially I planned to translate a few related articles, but somehow felt that they were not very convincing overall. Most authors start by occupying the moral high ground, similar to the Chinese people's emphasis on political correctness, pointing out that population growth should not be restricted because that approach is inhumane, and some of them incidentally criticize China's family planning policy implemented in the past few decades. When talking about environmental degradation and the unbearable nature of the earth, the countermeasures proposed are basically to save energy, such as taking public transportation as much as possible when traveling, setting the air conditioner to two degrees higher in summer, and so on.
There is an obvious paradox here. The original goal of economic development and social progress is to allow people to enjoy a comfortable life, but the excessive growth of population offsets the benefits of economic development. Public transportation is definitely not as comfortable as private cars, and the convenience is also much worse, because it is impossible to go directly to your doorstep. Setting the air conditioner to two degrees higher in summer should be within a tolerable range, but after all, the comfort will be compromised. In fact, advocating public transportation itself has a sense of last resort, and the implicit line is that there are too many people, and everyone has to make do with it. Sacrificing comfort not only makes the current people on the earth feel frustrated, but also is a kind of reminder to the little creatures who will come to this world: Welcome to the earth, but it is a bit crowded, so you will have to concede a little bit. From a high moral standpoint, if children are destined to be restricted in limited space before birth and unable to enjoy life to the fullest, then allowing them to be born is irresponsible and inhumane.
When Europeans and Americans talk about population issues, they will just talk vigorously without feeling the pain. After all, they lack long-term experience of putting themselves in such situation. To put it more seriously, a well-fed man does not know the hunger of a hungry man. There are some people in the West who may prefer this unearthly style of talking about human rights and accusing others of being inhumane without harming their own interests. Fortunately, there are only some people. Even on English websites, there are many people who are refuting such utopian remarks.
Due to visa limitations, I have to leave China every six months during my stay there, so I come back to the United States in the fall and go to Hong Kong in the spring. I really like Hong Kong. The city is well planned and there are many parks and public spaces in such a small place with such a high population density. The Pearl of the Orient is famous all over the world. The tourists I talked to include people from all five continents. One time while hiking, I even met two middle-aged people from Northern California. Of course tourists like the exciting moments. The purpose of traveling is to watch various excitements. Fortunately, traveling is only a short-term activity. What if you live there all year round? In Asia, Hong Kong is a developed region comparable to Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, but what about underdeveloped regions? Of course, humans are very resilient. We have survived sandstorms, floods, droughts, and pandemics.
There are a few articles that support the need to take measures to control population growth, but they do not provide a convincing reason. Because Western society emphasizes the supremacy of human rights, they may also feel that their views cannot stand on the moral high ground, so they lack confidence and cannot express themselves sonorously and forcefully, giving readers the impression that they are not very persuasive. However, the ending of one article is impressive. The author may understand that he is at a disadvantage, so he throws out a cruel conclusion: If we don't do something ourselves, then Mother Nature will do something.
When talking about the current problem of China's economic growth stalling, almost all articles in English and Chinese are conclusive that China's population decline will drag down economic growth. I don’t know if they are just parroting the theory. That population growth drives economic growth is the classical economics theory from two or three hundred years ago. In those days, people might encounter a tiger not far from the city gate. It should not be difficult to understand the principle that everything has its limits and that going too far is as bad as not going far enough. The new economic growth theory mentions that in order to create wealth, individual members of modern society must first invest a lot of time and energy in learning. At the same time, human beings' animal attributes determine their unconditional consumption of resources.
I saw an article many years ago that said that based on the coordination ratio between natural resources and population, the best situation for the United States is to maintain a population of 300 million. In fact, the population is now a little too many. In response, the California government recently had to relax building density requirements. China's livable land area is smaller than that of the United States, and theoretically the population should be controlled within 300 million. Fortunately, human beings are very adaptable. Since China can live with 1.4 billion people, and the Midwest of the United States has thousands of miles of fertile fields, theoretically there should be no problem to feed 1.5 billion people. Of course, no one will be happy to face such situation.
All kidding aside, the irrefutable fact is that if the population cannot be reduced, then no matter how the economy develops, Chinese people will not be able to live high quality life as Westerners. As for the Chinese government's encouragement of childbirth in recent years, that is simply because the population issue involves politics. China wants to maintain its status as a major country and it’s an authoritarian country. The authoritarian government gives priority to political considerations, and the quality of personal life is naturally given a back seat. In fact, even if China had only 400 million people as a century ago, it would still be a formidable behemoth. Even if we only look at the current situation, encouraging childbirth in a state of high unemployment is contrary to common sense.
Even if economic growth is affected by aging during a period of population decline, it is a correction stage that has to go through. The reckless dictatorial mistake of the previous emperor who died in the last century will take hundreds of millions of Chinese people hundreds of years to make up. An interesting phenomenon is that on various occasions in the lives of Chinese people, you can often hear unintentional remarks of "too many people". That is a true expression of true feelings which is not controlled by ideology.
China’s ideological control is everywhere and is getting more severe. In the early years, people could still see many attractive websites, such as NetEase, Southern Weekend, Financial Times Chinese website, and several other websites. From time to time, they would publish high-quality articles, some of which vividly described the joys and sorrows of the world; some profoundly analyze the good and evil of human nature, some rationally criticize China's current shortcomings, and some objectively explain Sino-US relations. However, China's space for speech has since been tightened, and several websites have been shut down. Those still in existence no longer publish powerful and insightful articles. After NetEase revised its version, even those good sections that did not involve politics were squeezed out, leaving some empty content shouting their approval.
There was a time when I really liked watching NetEase’s Discovery column videos. They were probably archived materials purchased by NetEase from China Central Television. I had seen some of them on TV. They were various short films shot by American mass media companies, covering natural scenery, all living things, science and technology, humanities and history, it is truly all-encompassing. I still remember that there was a video describing the Second World War. In the early stages of their invasion of China and the Pacific War, Japan succeeded many times. The camera switched to Japan. Whenever news of a victory in the war went back, people in that country sang, danced, and made noises with gongs and drums. At that time, I was a little confused. Didn't it mean that it was the military that started the war, and that the Japanese people were all innocent people who loved peace? Of course, later I realized that people under totalitarian control can easily be deceived into not knowing good from evil. Will this be the case in China in the future?
At present, if you want to browse relatively objective articles about Chinese affairs and Sino-US relations, you can only go to the New York Times Chinese website, BBC Chinese website, and Deutsche Welle Chinese website, which are Western websites. Does it feel a little awkward? After all, those are Western websites, and the content about China cannot be very rich. Although there are several other Chinese version Western websites, their objectivity and impartiality are relatively weak. Websites founded by Chinese are also mixed, and some of them deliberately go against China's official style. China's official media leans to the left, while they lean to the right. Regardless of leaning to the left or the right, they deviate from objectivity and rationality, so are not very readable.
This is very frustrating. To understand China, you have to rely on Western websites. Articles that can appear on Chinese websites must conform to the official taste. Not long ago, I saw an article analyzing Sino-US relations. The author was a university professor in China. After a few sentences from the beginning came "the United States is trying to suppress us". The tone is set in the first place, and of course there is no way to analyze why. Professors should be not young any more, and have an education level much higher than the average level of society. Logically speaking, experienced and well-educated people should be rational, open-minded and wise men.
Of course, there is no doubt that there are many rational and open-minded wise men in China, but they are unable to speak out in the current environment. This is also one of the reasons for the lack of Chinese information on the Internet. There are also several good websites founded by Chinese overseas, but they publish few articles and update slowly. It’s no wonder that explaining China’s affairs should mainly rely on Chinese people in the mainland, so the dilemma arises. As far as writing ability is concerned, there is no shortage of masters among Chinese people. After I watched the Oscar-winning movie "Nomadland" last year, I read some movie reviews from Chinese audiences. There are many film reviews that are quite well written, not just a few paragraphs, but long chapters. Readers who responded to the film reviews also left comments full of praise. One comment contained only a few words: The explanation is really good. You see, justice lies within the human heart.
Recently, some good articles have appeared sporadically on China's WeChat. Some of the authors are young people in their thirties. Their writing style is smooth, well-founded, and not impatient. This is very gratifying. In a depressive atmosphere like China, they can still maintain a stable mentality. They are neither following the crowd to the point of decadence, nor being cynical to the point of extreme. Their writing technique is quite clever, usually just to the point. Of course that could be out of reluctance. One of the short articles analyzing Sino-U.S. relations said: No matter how the United States treats us, China must always remain open. If closing off, it will be tantamount to going back to decades ago. If forming alliances with countries such as Russia, North Korea, and Iran, it’s going back even further. Our ancestors have long said that if you are close to vermilion, you will be red, and if you are close to ink, you will be black. If you cannot be close to vermilion, you can at least keep yourself clean.
The idiom "judging others based on one’s own mind" seems to have a derogatory connotation in Chinese, but in fact it is an instinctive reaction of normal people. Both China and the United States will naturally use their own way of thinking to estimate each other. Western societies have written rules for freedom of speech, so actions speak louder than words. To put it more simply, swearing is not illegal. The voice of Americans criticizing the government has never ceased to be heard. By extension, people all over the world have the freedom to criticize the U.S. government. Therefore, although China has been preaching in the country for decades that "the US imperialism will never die in destroying me" and has continued attacks and abuses, the United States has remained completely unmoved, and bilateral trade has flourished. On the other hand, after painting and denouncing the U.S. as an overlord, China has become that overlord itself, bullying the weak and making enemies on all sides.
Everything has two sides. We have all heard that technology is a double-edged sword. Autocracy and democracy also have their own advantages and disadvantages. China and the United States each have countless chronic diseases. There are two types of articles that can appear on Chinese websites, either praising the party-state or exposing American imperialism. There's nothing nice about carols, and flattery is offensive these days even in China. Many articles criticizing the United States and its democratic system are very thorough, deeply exposing the political opposition between the two parties, the economic oligopoly, and the fact that democracy has become a fig leaf for lazy government. If English were my native language, I would be happy to translate these sharp words into English to see if those shameless politicians and bloodthirsty oligarchs in the United States would be touched.
The Chinese who wrote these articles must have invested a lot of time and energy. It is no exaggeration to say that they care about the United States. If they put their analysis and writing skills to use and take the pulse of China, they should produce some impressive works. In fact, doing so can reflect that they really love and care about the development of their own country. The ancients said that "displeasing words will help the deeds". Of course, readers know that some of the articles simply imply the superiority of autocracy over democracy, but this conclusion cannot be written directly because there is no objective and comprehensive presentation of both sides. If one draws a conclusion directly without comparison, it will inevitably make people laugh.
(IV) What If China Become A Democratic Country
If China is a democratic country, there is a high probability that China will surpass the United States and become the leader of the earth, just like the United States surpassed the United Kingdom and became the leader more than a hundred years ago. As the one being surpassed, the United States will definitely be unhappy, but will not be fearful, just like Britain was surpassed by the United States more than a hundred years ago. Of course, this is just a placebo to relax under the clouds of the Russia-Ukraine war and Sino-US confrontation.
When it comes to democracy, people usually think of democratic elections first. In fact, elections are the most insignificant link in a democratic system. From the perspective of voters, two conditions must be met to select excellent candidates: a comprehensive and in-depth understanding of each candidate from the beginning of the primary election, and the ability to make rational decisions based on an objective and fair overall concept. In fact, these two items can only be good wishes in real life, so even the presidential election will inevitably become a national carnival, let alone parliamentary elections and local elections at all levels. Putin in Russia can legitimately be re-elected through elections, and Hitler also came to the forefront through elections during those past years in Germany.
So why are elections needed? Although democratic elections are far from perfect and even involve great risks, they are undoubtedly a fundamental improvement over hereditary power. Modern democratic societies not only have electoral activities, but also ensure the smooth operation of society through the separation of powers. Neither Russia today nor Germany during those past years has a genuine social operating system under separation of powers. After power is dispersed, there is no way to rule by men but only by law. From a large perspective, the law can restrict those in power from abusing their power; from a small perspective, the law can protect ordinary people from enjoying freedom.
When it comes to freedom, usually people’s first reaction is that I can do whatever I want; but the second reaction is that it should not be that way. If other people can also do whatever they want, then one’s own situation may be in danger. Therefore, Kant said, freedom is not about being able to do what you want, but being free from doing what you don’t want to do. In other words, external circumstances—including the government and others—may restrict you from doing something, but cannot force you to do something. In fact, that is right the role of the law: the law can only restrict you from doing bad things, but cannot force you to do good things. Only a totalitarian state like North Korea requires its people to actively participate in endless mass movements.
Democracy will not necessarily make a country strong, but it will avoid evil to a certain extent. The greatest damage to human society is war. Narrowed down to the individual level, democracy does not necessarily bring happiness and pleasure, but only avoids disturbance from government and other people to a certain extent. Democracy and the rule of law go hand in hand. As mentioned above, law does not inspire people to do good deeds, but only limits the evil of human nature through possible punishments. I like to read websites from all walks of life. An American law firm said in its self-introduction: Law is the floor, and morality is above the law; we must not only be law-abiding people, but also moral people. That sounds pretty good, isn't it? It is a pity that the world is declining, and there are some lawyers in the United States whose words sound better than songs.
China always says that American-style democracy is terrible, which is not entirely wrong; American-style democracy may not be very good, but democratic countries on the whole still stick to the bottom line: not to launch aggressive wars. Because of the differences in cultural origins between the East and the West, if China were a democratic country, it would be more likely to be similar to Japan than the United States. Easterners are reserved and value collective action; Westerners are extrovert and emphasize individualism. Each culture has its own characteristics, and there is no distinction between them as superior or inferior. There is a pro-gun argument in the United States that the less restricted individual rights are, the greater the potential for innovation will be. What do you think? It is impossible to ban guns in the United States, although gun cases occur frequently. To a certain extent, it is the tolerance of various social anomalies and the sharing of costs by all citizens that support innovation in American society. Therefore, innovation is costly and requires not only incentive mechanisms and capital investment, but also social and cultural soil.
Even among developed countries, Americans are more unconventional and American society is more turbulent. The two major ills plaguing American society are drug abuse and shootings, but these two are not problems in Eastern societies. Not only are the governments strict in management, but the people there deeply hate those things. Some scenes of drug use in Hollywood movies are interpreted as the fashion of avant-garde people, and some are interpreted as the elegance of the upper class. These inadvertent distortions are extremely harmful to young people who are inexperienced and weak in self-control. Democratic societies protect freedom of speech, and the government can only ban drugs. How it is shown in movies can only depend on the moral standards of Hollywood directors.
I once worked for a Japanese accounting firm. It was during the 2008 U.S. presidential election. Every presidential election severely tears American society. One day when we were having lunch, everyone was talking about the current electoral confrontation. I casually asked my Japanese colleagues: are your Japanese elections like this? The Japanese colleague responded casually: We also vote, but we vote in the same direction. Although there is an element of joking in it, it can also be seen that such a confrontation is not welcomed by him. Regarding the democracy itself, there are obvious differences between eastern and western democratic societies. The Eastern people's quality of bearing humiliation and heavy burdens seems to Westerners to be repressive of human nature and cannot be endured.
When I was young, I used to dream about living in the United States and Japan and experiencing these two countries in depth, because the United States is the most developed, and Japan has the closest origin relationship with China. During the decades of rapid economic development in China, Japan has almost stagnated. Although there are many articles mocking Japan on the Internet, there are also affirmative voices: Decades of economic stagnation have not led to social unrest and collapse, and it is the democratic system that is holding the bottom line. The truth is that democracy is not bound to be good, but it can avoid being bad. This reminds me of what I heard from Christians in my early years: there is no difference between being a Christian or not in normal times, but when you are in adversity and difficulties, faith will help you face life with a smile and go through the hardships.
If China were a democratic country, China and the United States would complement each other in terms of economic development. America's strength is innovation, and China's strength is application. China can purchase U.S. innovations and turn them into products, which can not only promote further U.S. innovation, but also bring profits to China and benefit the entire global village. Western countries originally thought that after economic development, there would naturally come demands for democracy — accordingly China was able to enjoy the dividends of decades of globalization. But now they find that things are backfired and there is even a risk of backlash, so they have to part ways.
Fortunately, so far, China has not supported Russia as vigorously as North Korea, nor has it actually launched a war against Taiwan. Therefore, Western countries have maintained exchanges with China and have not imposed comprehensive sanctions like on Russia. An article written by a British author said that in the first two world wars, although China was poor and weak, it always stood in the camp representing justice, but this time it was on the wrong side. Now it is standing on the edge of a cliff, and nobody knows if it will fall down into the abyss. If China is a democratic country, then it will definitely not associate with Russia. No any democratic country supports Russia. The worst thing a democratic country can do is not to take side like India.
It’s not clear whether China’s siding with the aggressor is based on the logic that the enemy of its enemy is a friend. Taking sides with Russia is not only against the United States, but against the entire democratic camp. Although there are constant squabbles between democratic countries, they share basic ideologies and values after all, and launching a war is an act that breaks the bottom line. If wolf warrior diplomacy is just disgusting, then siding with the invaders is tantamount to creating a cocoon. Overseas Chinese are naturally more concerned about China's diplomacy than its internal affairs. Logically speaking, diplomats should be familiar with the rules of the Western game, but they always make mistakes and behave like the so-called masses who do not know the truth.
It has only been two or three hundred years since the democratic system came into the world. Compared with the long history of mankind, it is still in its infancy and is still stumbling forward. Although the democratic camp continues to develop and grow, in fact, autocracy has never been dismantled by democracy, but has hit the southern wall on its own. The democratic system limits foreign conquests to a great extent, making it impossible to take the initiative to crusade against autocracy. While after an autocratic country grows stronger, the evil of human nature will naturally ferment and expand due to the lack of restraint. Before World War II, Germany and Japan were both highly developed authoritarian countries. They launched wars that harmed the world and eventually buried themselves. Those who defeated them on the battlefield were not only democracies such as the United States and the United Kingdom, but also authoritarian countries such as the former Soviet Union. After World War II, the autocratic regime of the former Soviet Union fought among itself and eventually fell apart. It was downgraded from one of the former superpowers to a third-rate country that was incompatible with modern civilization.
American think tanks that support decoupling from China are saying that since "change through trade" has been proven to be unworkable, continuing to trade with China is tantamount to helping the rival grow up and endangering ourselves. To put it more bluntly, China should be allowed or even encouraged to close itself off and let it fend for itself. A relatively mild-sounding statement is that the United States has as many problems as China, and the West has as many problems as the East, so let both sides develop in parallel and let the time write the answer. The basis they hold is that democracy has a correction function, and although autocracy is highly efficient, high efficiency itself is a double-edged sword. It can rise very quickly, and it can also fall quickly.
Simply looking at the quality of high efficiency, China has experienced both the pros and cons of autocracy. The previous emperor's promotion of class struggle brought Chinese society to the brink of collapse. Fortunately, people later learned from the painful experience and realized that they needed to shift their focus to economic construction. Coincided with the World Trade Organization's acceptance, and the right time, right place, and right people, now China is finally in line with the international community. Theoretically speaking, taking into account the respective advantages and disadvantages of autocracy and democracy, the ideal state is to adopt autocracy in the early stages of economic development to make a rapid jump, and to adopt democracy after rapid development to prevent a fall.
In fact, that is the overall development trajectory of human society. The Industrial Revolution finally allowed mankind to step out of the agricultural society and fundamentally improved productivity before democracy was born. The early democratic system was not democracy in the true sense, because democracy at that time did not belong to the masses, but was only the privilege of a small number of people; and the early democratic countries only practiced democracy internally, but promoted colonization and enslaved other countries externally. Even today, in the largest democratic country United States, democracy is not rock solid and is even in danger. There is a pessimistic statement that before the Russo-Ukrainian war, democracy lost to autocracy in terms of economic development. Now it is a competition to see which side falls slower and can survive to the end.
If China is a democratic country, then the Chinese can also contribute their wisdom to the difficult development of democracy. The Chinese people's wisdom in developing the economy has impressed the world. Today, all countries in the world are more or less dependent on China in the supply chain, either directly or indirectly. In the early years, I helped Chinese manufacturers participate in American exhibitions. In some industries, Chinese manufacturing once accounted for half of the market. The situation is similar not only in the United States, but also around the world. Although the quality of Chinese products varies, it has greatly enriched people's choices. If the Chinese people also develop democracy with heart, they will not only be able to overcome their own immediate difficulties, but can also fundamentally break out of the cycle of order and chaos, thereby benefiting future generations and the world.
If all countries in the world were democracies, would the planet be perfect or worriless? Not necessarily, frankly speaking, certainly not. In fact, the clues can be seen now. Before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war, inter-state institutions including the United Nations, the European Union, and NATO were basically inactive because they could not reach agreement on many matters. That’s why some politicians say that the Russia-Ukraine war resurrected NATO to some extent. There is also constant push-and-pull within democratic countries, and they have stagnated or even regressed in many aspects. Theoretically, the densely populated New England region in the northeastern United States is suitable for the construction of high-speed railways, but in reality it is impossible to build it. The reason is simple, as everyone knows, you can never satisfy everyone.
Fortunately, humans are evolving. Problems that cannot be solved at present can be left alone for the time being. People in the future world should be smarter. If China is a democratic country, then at least at this stage it will be a great progress for human civilization. Progress is always accumulated bit by bit. As for whether China after democratization will replace the United States as the world's leader, to be honest, that is a question of little importance. How to avoid war and achieve sustainable peace and development is the concern of people on earth.
October 2023 ⸙ Los Angeles